On seismic monitoring of the scope of CO<sub>2</sub> storage in the seabed saline aquifers: Taking the Sleipner CCS project as an example

PENG Wenrui; XING Lei; LI Qianqian; WANG Xu

doi:10.16562/j.cnki.0256-1492.2024040401

Article Contents

Article navigation > Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology > > Accepted Manuscript

Next Article Previous Article

PENG Wenrui, XING Lei, LI Qianqian, WANG Xu. On seismic monitoring of the scope of CO2 storage in the seabed saline aquifers: Taking the Sleipner CCS project as an example[J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology. doi: 10.16562/j.cnki.0256-1492.2024040401

Citation:

PENG Wenrui, XING Lei, LI Qianqian, WANG Xu. On seismic monitoring of the scope of CO₂ storage in the seabed saline aquifers: Taking the Sleipner CCS project as an example[J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology. doi: 10.16562/j.cnki.0256-1492.2024040401

On seismic monitoring of the scope of CO₂ storage in the seabed saline aquifers: Taking the Sleipner CCS project as an example

1.
Key Lab of Submarine Geosciences and Prospecting Techniques, College of Marine Geoscience, Ocean University of China, Qingdao 266100, China
2.
Key Laboratory of Marine Geophysical Prospecting Technology of Qingdao, Qingdao 266100, China
3.
National Engineering Research Center of Offshore Oil and Gas Exploration, Beijing 100028, China

More Information

Corresponding author: LI Qianqian, lqqbqt@163.com

Received Date: 04 April 2024

Revised Date: 08 May 2024

Accepted Date: 08 May 2024

Available Online: 17 January 2025

Abstract

Abstract

CO₂ saline aquifer sequestration accounts for 98% of the total sequestration potential. In the past, most of the studies on 4D seismic monitoring of the CO₂ seabed saline aquifer spread range were qualitatively analyzed by the variability of time-delayed seismic data, which lacked the constraints of well-logging data. Therefore, seismic monitoring methods for the spread range of CO₂ seabed saline aquifer storage based on the logging and 4D seismic data collected by the Sleipner Saline Aquifer CO₂ Sequestration Project in Norway were investigated. Based on the logging and 4D seismic data collected in the project, the anisotropic response characteristics caused by the change of the CO₂-saline two-phase medium in the process of CO₂ injection were studied by rock physics modelling, the technique of well control seismic attribute analysis was applied, the seismic attributes that are sensitive to the change of the saturation degree of CO₂ were selected, and the seismic forward and inverse analysis were combined to better understand the time-shifted CO₂ saline aquifer spread range. Results show that the bulk modulus, bulk density, primary wave velocity, and shear wave velocity of the saturated rocks decreased with the increase of CO₂ saturation, the overall amplitude increased in the forward simulation results, the amplitude changes decreased with the increase of CO₂ injection, and the root-mean-square (RMS) amplitude attribute was the most sensitive to the change of CO₂ saturation. During the injection period, CO₂ was mainly transported along the SSW-NNE and accumulates in the higher part of the tectonic structure. Vertically, CO₂ was transported from the injection point to the upper layer, and the lower layer reached the maximum spread range earlier than the upper layer. Combined with the nature of the reservoir and the structural interpretation results, the spreading range of CO₂ in the reservoir was controlled by mainly the anisotropic permeability and the structural high or low levels.
- CO₂ saline aquifer storage /
- earthquake monitoring /
- forward modelling /
- attribute analysis

FullText(HTML)

References

[1]	IPCC. 2023: Summary for policymakers[C]//Core Writing Team, Lee H, Romero J. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC, 2023:1-34. Google Scholar
[2]	Herzog H, Eliasson B, Kaarstad O. Capturing greenhouse gases[J]. Scientific American, 2000, 282(2):72-79. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0200-72 CrossRef Google Scholar
[3]	Bachu S. CO₂ storage in geological media: Role, means, status and barriers to deployment[J]. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2008, 34(2):254-273. doi: 10.1016/j.pecs.2007.10.001 CrossRef Google Scholar
[4]	赵改善. 二氧化碳地质封存地球物理监测: 现状、挑战与未来发展[J]. 石油物探, 2023, 62(2):194-211 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1441.2023.02.002 CrossRef Google Scholar ZHAO Gaishan. Geophysical monitoring for geological carbon sequestration: present status, challenges, and future developments[J]. Geophysical Prospecting for Petroleum, 2023, 62(2):194-211.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1441.2023.02.002 CrossRef Google Scholar
[5]	张国良, 战明君. 板块俯冲和岩浆过程中碳循环及深部碳储库[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2019, 39(5):36-45 Google Scholar ZHANG Guoliang, ZHAN Mingjun. Carbon cycle and deep carbon storage during subduction and magamatic processes[J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2019, 39(5):36-45.] Google Scholar
[6]	李海燕, 彭仕宓, 许明阳, 等. CO₂在深部咸水层中的埋存机制研究进展[J]. 科技导报, 2013, 31(2):72-79 doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2013.02.010 CrossRef Google Scholar LI Haiyan, PENG Shimi, XU Mingyang, et al. CO₂ storage mechanism in deep saline aquifers[J]. Science and Technology Review, 2013, 31(2):72-79.] doi: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2013.02.010 CrossRef Google Scholar
[7]	Falcon-Suarez I, Papageorgiou G, Chadwick A, et al. CO₂-brine flow-through on an Utsira Sand core sample: experimental and modelling. Implications for the Sleipner storage field[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2018, 68:236-246. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.11.019 CrossRef Google Scholar
[8]	Williams G A, Chadwick R A. Influence of reservoir-scale heterogeneities on the growth, evolution and migration of a CO₂ plume at the Sleipner Field, Norwegian North Sea[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2021, 106:103260. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103260 CrossRef Google Scholar
[9]	李福来, 刘立, 曲希玉, 等. CO₂注入砂岩后的典型自生矿物组合[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2009, 29(6):103-109 Google Scholar LI Fulai, LIU Li, QU Xiyu, et al. Typical authigenic mineral assemblages after CO₂ injected into sandstone[J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2009, 29(6):103-109.] Google Scholar
[10]	Zhao M X, Liu H S, Wang W Q, et al. Numerical study on mechanical properties and instability characteristics of sandy reservoir containing hydrate interlayer[J]. Ocean Engineering, 2023, 286:115694. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.115694 CrossRef Google Scholar
[11]	Liu H W, Liu H S, Li Q Q, et al. A first-arrival wave recognition method based on the optimal dominant energy spectrum[J]. Geophysical Prospecting, 2024, 72(4):1322-1334. doi: 10.1111/1365-2478.13297 CrossRef Google Scholar
[12]	Lin H R, Xu J, Xing L, et al. Random noise attenuation of ocean bottom seismometers based on a substep deep denoising autoencoder[J]. Geophysical Prospecting, 2024, 72(4):1428-1441. doi: 10.1111/1365-2478.13302 CrossRef Google Scholar
[13]	Xing L, Li Y, Li Q Q, et al. Prediction of shale gas pressure based on multi‐channel seismic inversion in Fuling[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica‐English Edition, 2022, 96(4):1237-1245. doi: 10.1111/1755-6724.14778 CrossRef Google Scholar
[14]	Sambo C, Iferobia C C, Babasafari A A, et al. The role of time lapse (4D) seismic technology as reservoir monitoring and surveillance tool: A comprehensive review[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2020, 80:103312. doi: 10.1016/j.jngse.2020.103312 CrossRef Google Scholar
[15]	Huang F, Bergmann P, Juhlin C, et al. The first post‐injection seismic monitor survey at the Ketzin pilot CO₂ storage site: results from time‐lapse analysis[J]. Geophysical Prospecting, 2018, 66(1):62-84. doi: 10.1111/1365-2478.12497 CrossRef Google Scholar
[16]	Chadwick R A, Noy D J. History-matching flow simulations and time-lapse seismic data from the Sleipner CO₂ plume[M]//Vining B A, Pickering S C. Petroleum Geology: From Mature Basins to New Frontiers – Proceedings of the 7th Petroleum Geology Conference. London: The Geological Society, 2010:1171-1182. Google Scholar
[17]	Roach L A N, White D J. Evolution of a deep CO₂ plume from time-lapse seismic imaging at the Aquistore storage site, Saskatchewan, Canada[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2018, 74:79-86. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2018.04.025 CrossRef Google Scholar
[18]	Fawad M, Mondol N H. Monitoring geological storage of CO₂: A new approach[J]. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11(1):5942. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-85346-8 CrossRef Google Scholar
[19]	Cavanagh A J, Haszeldine R S. The Sleipner storage site: Capillary flow modeling of a layered CO₂ plume requires fractured shale barriers within the Utsira Formation[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2014, 21:101-112. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.11.017 CrossRef Google Scholar
[20]	Wierzchowska M, Alnes H, Oukili J, et al. Broadband processing improves 4D repeatability and resolution at the Sleipner CO₂ storage project, North Sea[C]//82nd EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition. Amsterdam: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, 2021:1-5. Google Scholar
[21]	Arts R, Brevik I, Eiken O, et al. Geophysical methods for monitoring marine aquifer CO₂ storage–Sleipner experiences[C]//5th Int Conf. on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. Australia: Cairns, 2000. Google Scholar
[22]	Chadwick R A, Arts R, Eiken O. 4D seismic quantification of a growing CO₂ plume at Sleipner, North Sea[M]//Doré A G, Vining B A. Petroleum Geology: North-West Europe and Global Perspectives—Proceedings of the 6th Petroleum Geology Conference. London: The Geological Society, 2005:1385-1399. Google Scholar
[23]	Pelemo-Daniels D, Nwafor B O, Stewart R R. CO₂ Injection monitoring: enhancing time-lapse seismic inversion for injected volume estimation in the Utsira Formation, Sleipner Field, North Sea[J]. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2023, 11(12):2275. doi: 10.3390/jmse11122275 CrossRef Google Scholar
[24]	Pelemo-Daniels D, Stewart R R. Petrophysical property prediction from seismic inversion attributes using rock physics and machine learning: Volve Field, North Sea[J]. Applied Sciences, 2024, 14(4):1345. doi: 10.3390/app14041345 CrossRef Google Scholar
[25]	Baklid A, Korbol R, Owren G. Sleipner vest CO₂ disposal, CO₂ injection into a shallow underground aquifer[C]//SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Colorado: SPE, 1996. Google Scholar
[26]	Chadwick R A, Holloway S, Kirby G A, et al. The Utsira Sand, Central North Sea–an assessment of its potential for regional CO₂ disposal[C]//Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-5). Collingwood: CSIRO Publishing, 2000: 349-354. Google Scholar
[27]	Zweigel P, Arts R, Lothe A E, et al. Reservoir geology of the Utsira Formation at the first industrial-scale underground CO₂ storage site (Sleipner area, North Sea)[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2004, 233:165-180. doi: 10.1144/GSL.SP.2004.233.01.11 CrossRef Google Scholar
[28]	Boait F C, White N J, Bickle M J, et al. Spatial and temporal evolution of injected CO₂ at the Sleipner Field, North Sea[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 2012, 117(B3):B03309. Google Scholar
[29]	Mavko G, Mukerji T, Dvorkin J. The Rock Physics Handbook[M]. California: Cambridge University Press, 2020. Google Scholar
[30]	Furre A K, Eiken O. Dual sensor streamer technology used in Sleipner CO₂ injection monitoring[J]. Geophysical Prospecting, 2014, 62(5):1075-1088. doi: 10.1111/1365-2478.12120 CrossRef Google Scholar
[31]	Lindeberg E. Calculation of thermodynamic properties of CO₂, CH₄, H₂O and their mixtures also including salt with the Excel macro “CO₂ Thermodynamics”[J]. SINTEF Report, 2013. Google Scholar
[32]	Ghaderi A, Landrø M. Estimation of thickness and velocity changes of injected carbon dioxide layers from prestack time-lapse seismic data[J]. Geophysics, 2009, 74(2):O17-O28. doi: 10.1190/1.3054659 CrossRef Google Scholar
[33]	Williams G A, Chadwick R A. An improved history-match for layer spreading within the Sleipner plume including thermal propagation effects[J]. Energy Procedia, 2017, 114:2856-2870. doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1406 CrossRef Google Scholar
[34]	Chadwick R A, Holloway S, Brook M S, et al. The case for underground CO₂ sequestration in northern Europe[J]. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 2004, 233(1):17-28. doi: 10.1144/GSL.SP.2004.233.01.03 CrossRef Google Scholar
[35]	Xing L, Liu X Q, Liu H S, et al. Research on the construction of a petrophysical model of a heterogeneous reservoir in the hydrate test area in the Shenhu area of the South China Sea (SCS)[J]. Geofluids, 2021, 2021(1):5586118. Google Scholar
[36]	Xu S Y, White R E. A new velocity model for clay‐sand mixtures[J]. Geophysical Prospecting, 1995, 43(1):91-118. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2478.1995.tb00126.x CrossRef Google Scholar
[37]	Kuster G T, Toksöz M N. Velocity and attenuation of seismic waves in two-phase media: Part I. Theoretical formulations[J]. Geophysics, 1974, 39(5):587-606. doi: 10.1190/1.1440450 CrossRef Google Scholar
[38]	Voigt W. Lehrbuch der Kristallphysik: (Mit Ausschluss der Kristalloptik)[M]. London: B. G. Teubner, 1910:253-253. Google Scholar
[39]	Hill R. The elastic behaviour of a crystalline aggregate[J]. Proceedings of the Physical Society. Section A, 1952, 65(5):349-354. doi: 10.1088/0370-1298/65/5/307 CrossRef Google Scholar
[40]	Brie A, Pampuri F, Marsala A F, et al. Shear sonic interpretation in gas-bearing sands[C]//SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Texas: SPE, 1995. Google Scholar
[41]	沙志彬, 梁金强, 郑涛, 等. 地震属性在天然气水合物预测中的应用[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2013, 33(5):185-192 Google Scholar SHA Zhibin, LIANG Jinqiang, ZHENG Tao, et al. The application of seismic attributes to the prediction of gas hydrates[J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2013, 33(5):185-192.] Google Scholar
[42]	靳佳澎, 王秀娟, 陈端新, 等. 基于测井与地震多属性分析神狐海域天然气水合物分布特征[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2017, 37(5):122-130 Google Scholar JIN Jiapeng, WANG Xiujuan, CHEN Duanxin, et al. Distribution of gas hydrate in Shenhu area: identified with well log and seismic multi-attributes[J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2017, 37(5):122-130.] Google Scholar
[43]	李旭彤, 吴志强, 张训华. 地震属性分析在南黄海盆地北部坳陷白垩系油气地质特征研究中的应用[J]. 海洋地质与第四纪地质, 2015, 35(6):119-126 Google Scholar LI Xutong, WU Zhiqiang, ZHANG Xunhua. Petroleum Geology of the Cretaceous in the northern Depression of South Yellow Sea Basin: evidence from seismic attribute analysis[J]. Marine Geology & Quaternary Geology, 2015, 35(6):119-126.] Google Scholar