Advertisement

Gas Bubble Nucleation and Migration in Soils—Pore-Network Model Simulation

Conference paper
  • 287 Downloads
Part of the Sustainable Civil Infrastructures book series (SUCI)

Abstract

Sediment can be de-saturated by introducing gas bubbles, which is found in various applications such as methane gas generation in landfill, microbial-induced gas bubble formation, air sparing method for soil remediation, heavy oil depressurization for carbon recovery, and gas production from hydrate bearing sediment. The gas introduction method (e.g., nucleation and injection) and migration and trapping of gas bubbles affect the hydraulic conductivity, residual gas saturation, and the stability of these gassy sediments. In this study, the pore-network model is used to investigate gas bubble migration in porous media. Gas bubbles are introduced by mimicking either nucleation or injection. Based on the known gas bubble behavior available in the literature, numerical algorithms are developed to simulate the migration and trapping of gas bubbles in pore-network model. The effect of gas bubble size distribution and pore size distribution on residual saturation is investigated. The results show that gas bubble size distribution becomes wider as gas bubbles coalesce to each other during migration. And the residual gas saturation increase with increasing bubble size and permeability reduction becomes apparent as the gas bubble size and the number of generated gas bubble increase.

Keywords

Pore Network Model Bubble Migration Bubble Size Distribution Hydraulic Conductivity Total Migration Time 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the research fund of Hanyang University (HY-201700000002411).

References

  1. Abrams, M.A.: Significance of hydrocarbon seepage relative to petroleum generation and entrapment. Mar. Pet. Geol. 22, 457–477 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2004.08.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amos, R.T., Mayer, K.U.: Investigating ebullition in a sand column using dissolved gas analysis and reactive transport modeling. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40, 5361–5367 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amos, R.T., Mayer, K.U., Bekins, B.A., Delin, G.N., Williams, R.L.: Use of dissolved and vapor-phase gases to investigate methanogenic degradation of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in the subsurface. Water Resour. Res. 41(W02001), 02001–02015 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ASTM.: D7928-16 Standard test method for particle-size distribution (gradation) of fine-grained soils using the sedimentation (hydrometer) analysis, edited (2016)Google Scholar
  5. Bora, R., Maini, B.B., Chakma, A.: Flow visualization studies of solution gas drive process in heavy oil reservoirs with a glass micromodel. SPE Reservoir. Eval. Eng. 3(3), 224–229 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dong, H., Blunt, M.: Pore-network extraction from micro-computerized-tomography images. Phys. Rev. E 80(3), 0001 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.80.036307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Enouy, R., Li, M., Ioannidis, M.A., Unger, A.J.A.: Gas exsolution and flow during supersaturated water injection in porous media: II Column experiments and continuum modeling. Adv. Water Res. 34, 15–25 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2010.09.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eseller-Bayat, E., Yegian, M.K., Alshawabkeh, A., Gokyer, S.: Liquefaction Response of Partially Saturated Sands. I: Experimental Results. J. Geotechn. Geoenviron. Eng. 139(6), 863–871 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0000815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grozic, J.L., Robertson, P.K., Morgenstern, N.R.: The behavior of loose gassy sand. Can. Geotech. J. 36, 482–492 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. He, J., Chu, J.: Undrained Responses of Microbially Desaturated Sand under Monotonic Loading. J. Geotechn. Geoenviron. Eng. 140(5), 04014003 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0001082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jang, J., Santamarina, J.C.: Recoverable gas from hydrate-bearing sediments: Pore network model simulation and macroscale analyses. J. Geophys. Res. 116(B8), 0001 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1029/2010jb007841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jang, J., Santamarina, J.C.: Evolution of gas saturation and relative permeability during gas production from hydrate-bearing sediments: Gas invasion vs. gas nucleation. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 119(1), 116–126 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013jb010480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jang, J., Santamarina, J.C.: Hydrate bearing clayey sediments: formation and gas production concepts. Mar. Pet. Geol. 77, 235–246 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.06.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jang, J., Narsilio, G.A., Santamarina, J.C.: Hydraulic conductivity in spatially varying media-a pore-scale investigation. Geophys. J. Int. 184(3), 1167–1179 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2010.04893.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Krol, M.M., Mumford, K.G., Johnson, R.L., Sleep, B.E.: Modeling discrete gas bubble formation and mobilization during subsurface heating of contaminated zones. Adv. Water Resour. 34, 537–549 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2011.01.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leifer, I., Patro, R.K.: The bubble mechanism for methane transport from the shallow sea bed to the surface: A review and sensitivity study. Cont. Shelf Res. 22, 2409–2428 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mahabadi, N., Jang, J.: Relative water and gas permeability for gas production from hydrate-bearing sediments. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 15, 2346–2353 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GC005331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mahabadi, N., Zheng, X., Jang, J.: The effect of hydrate saturation on water retention curves in hydrate-bearing sediments. Geophys. Res. Lett. 43(9), 4279–4287 (2016a).  https://doi.org/10.1002/2016gl068656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mahabadi, N., Dai, S., Seol, Y., Yun, T.S., Jang, J.: The water retention curve and relative permeability for gas production from hydrate-bearing sediments: pore-network model simulation. Geochem. Geophys. Geosyst. 17, 3099–3110 (2016b).  https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GC006372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McCray, J.E., Falta, R.W.: Numerical simulation of air sparging for remdiation of NAPL contamination. Ground Water 35(1), 99–110 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moskvitch, K.: Mysterious Siberian crater attributed to methane. Nature (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2014.15649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Plampin, M., Illangasekare, T., Sakaki, T., Pawar, R.: Experimental study of gas evolution in heterogeneous shallow subsurface formations during leakage of stored CO2. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 22, 47–62 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.12.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ramirez, J.A., Baird, A.J., Coulthard, T.J., Waddington, J.M.: Testing a simple model of gas bubble dynamics in porous media. Water Resour. Res. 51(2), 1036–1049 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1002/2014wr015898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rebata-Landa, V., Santamarina, J.C.: Mechanical Effects of Biogenic Nitrogen Gas Bubbles in Soils. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 138(2), 128–137 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0000571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ronen, D., Berkowitz, B., Magaritz, M.: The development and influence of gas bubbles in phreatic aquifers under natural flow conditions. Transp. Porous Media 4, 295–306 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Roosevelt, S.E., Corapcioglu, M.Y.: Air bubble migration in a granular porous medium: Experimental studies. Water Resour. Res. 34(5), 1131–1142 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1029/98wr00371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ryan, M.C., MacQuarrie, K.T.B., Harman, J., McLellan, J.: Field and modeling evidence for a “stagnant flow” zone in the upper meter of sandy phreatic aquifers. J. Hydrol. 233, 223–240 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sills, G.C., Wheeler, S.J., Thomas, S.D., Gardner, T.N.: Behaviour of offshore soils containing gas bubbles. Geotechnique 41(2), 227–241 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stewart, C.R., Hunt Jr., E.B., Schneider, F.N., Geffen, T.M., Berry Jr., V.J.: The role of bubble formation in oil recovery by solution gas drives in limestones. J. Petrol. Technol. 5(12), 21–28 (1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. van Breukelen, B.M., Roling, W.F.M., Groen, J., Griffioen, J., van Verseveld, H.W.: Biogeochemistry and isotope geochemistry of a landfill leachate plume. J. Contam. Hydrol. 65, 245–268 (2003).  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7722(03)00003-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Walter, K.M., Zimov, S.A., Chanton, J.P., Verbyla, D., Chapin 3rd, F.S.: Methane bubbling from Siberian thaw lakes as a positive feedback to climate warming. Nature 443(7107), 71–75 (2006).  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Whalen, S.C.: Biogeochemistry of methane exchange between natural wetlands and the atmosphere. Environ. Eng. Sci. 22(1), 73–94 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zheng, X., Jang, J.: Hydraulic Properties of Porous Media Saturated with Nanoparticle-Stabilized Air-Water Foam. Sustainability 8(12), 1317 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.3390/su8121317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zheng, X., Mahabadi, N., Yun, T.S., Jang, J.: Effect of capillary and viscous force on CO2 saturation and invasion pattern in the microfluidic chip. J. Geophys. Res. 122, 1634–1647 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JB013908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zuo, L., Krevor, S., Falta, R.W., Benson, S.M.: An Experimental Study of CO2 Exsolution and Relative Permeability Measurements During CO2 Saturated Water Depressurization. Transp. Porous Media 91(2), 459–478 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-011-9854-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zuo, L., Zhang, C., Falta, R.W., Benson, S.M.: Micromodel investigations of CO2 exsolution from carbonated water in sedimentary rocks. Adv. Water Resour. 53, 188–197 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Municipal Testing LaboratoryNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Yonsei UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.Hanyang UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations