| Institute of Hydrogeology and Environmental Geology, Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences | Host |
| Groundwater Science and Engineering Limited | Publish |
| Citation: |
Ma Xin, Wen Dong-guang, Yang Guo-dong, Li Xu-feng, Diao Yu-jie, Dong Hai-hai, Cao Wei, Yin Shu-guo, Zhang Yan-mei. 2021. Potential assessment of CO2 geological storage based on injection scenario simulation: A case study in eastern Junggar Basin. Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 9(4): 279-291. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2021.04.002
|
Potential assessment of CO2 geological storage based on injection scenario simulation: A case study in eastern Junggar Basin
-
Abstract
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is one of the effective means to deal with global warming, and saline aquifer storage is considered to be the most promising storage method. Junggar Basin, located in the northern part of Xinjiang and with a large distribution area of saline aquifer, is an effective carbon storage site. Based on well logging data and 2D seismic data, a 3D heterogeneous geological model of the Cretaceous Donggou Formation reservoir near D7 well was constructed, and dynamic simulations under two scenarios of single-well injection and multi-well injection were carried out to explore the storage potential and CO2 storage mechanism of deep saline aquifer with real geological conditions in this study. The results show that within 100 km2 of the saline aquifer of Donggou Formation in the vicinity of D7 well, the theoretical static CO2 storage is 71.967 × 106 tons (P50)①, and the maximum dynamic CO2 storage is 145.295 × 106 tons (Case2). The heterogeneity of saline aquifer has a great influence on the spatial distribution of CO2 in the reservoir. The multi-well injection scenario is conducive to the efficient utilization of reservoir space and safer for storage. Based on the results from theoretical static calculation and the dynamic simulation, the effective coefficient of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifer in the eastern part of Xinjiang is recommended to be 4.9%. This study can be applied to the engineering practice of CO2 sequestration in the deep saline aquifer in Xinjiang.
-
-
References
[1] Bachu S. 2015. Review of CO2 storage efficiency in deep saline aquifers. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 40: 188-202. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.01.007 [2] Bachu S, Adams JJ. 2003. Sequestration of CO2 in geological media in response to climate change: Capacity of deep saline aquifers to sequester CO2 in solution. Energy Conversion and Management, 44(20): 3151-3175. doi: 10.1016/S0196-8904(03)00101-8 [3] Bachu S, Bonijoly D, Bradshaw J, et al. 2007. CO2 storage capacity estimation: Methodology and gaps. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 1(4): 430-443. doi: 10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00086-2 [4] CSLF(Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum). 2005. “Phase I Final report from the task force for review and identification of standards for CO2 storage capacity measurement, prepared by the task force on CO2 storage capacity estimation for the technical group of the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Form August”. Technology Report: edition 22. [5] CSLF(Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum), 2007. “Estimation of CO2 storage capacity in geological media (Phase), Prepared by the task force on CO2 storage capacity estimation for the technical group of the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Form 15 June ”. Technology Report: edition 24. [6] CSLF (Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum), 2010. Task Force for Review and Identification of Standards for CO2 Storage Capacity Estimation. [7] De Silva PNK, Ranjith PG. 2012. A study of methodologies for CO2 storage capacity estimation of saline aquifers. Fuel, 93: 13-27. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2011.07.004 [8] Diao YJ, Zhu GW, Cao H, et al. 2017. Mesoscale assessment of CO2 storage potential and geological suitability for target area selection in the Sichuan Basin. Geofluids, 2017(1): 1-17. doi: 10.1155/2017/9587872 [9] DOE-NETL. 2006. Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United States and Canada. [10] DOE-NETL. 2008. Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United States and Canada, 2nd edition. [11] DOE-NETL. 2010. Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United State and Canada, 3rd edition. [12] Flett M, Gurton R, Weir G. 2007. Heterogeneous saline formations for carbon dioxide disposal: Impact of varying heterogeneity on containment and trapping. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 57(1-2): 106-118. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2006.08.016 [13] GCCSI. THE GLOBAL STATUS OF CCS. 2016. Available on https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/ resources/publications-reports-research/the-global-status-of-ccs-2016-summary-report/. [14] Goodman A, Hakala A, Bromhal G, et al. 2011. US DOE methodology for the development of geologic storage potential for carbon dioxide at the national and regional scale. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 5(4): 952-965. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.03.010 [15] Guo JQ, Wen DG, Zhang SQ, et al. 2015. Potential and suitability evaluation of CO2 geological storage in major sedimentary basins of China. Acta Geological Sinica (English Edition), 89(4): 1319-1332. doi: 10.1111/1755-6724.12531 [16] He K, Zhu YS, Wang Z, et al. 2002. The Reservoir -Forming Conditions and Analyses of CretaceousExploration Prospect in the East of Junggar Basin. Journal of Xinjiang Petroleum Institute, 14(2): 6-9, 80. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-2677.2002.02.002 [17] IPCC. 2005. Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. [18] Jin C, Liu LT, Li YM, et al. Capacity assessment of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers by mineral trapping and the implications for Songliao Basin, Northeast China. Energy Science & Engineering, 2017, 5(2): 81-89. [19] Lee H, Seo J, Lee Y, et al. 2016. Regional CO2 solubility trapping potential of a deep saline aquifer in Pohang basin, Korea. Geosciences Journal, 20(4): 561-568. doi: 10.1007/s12303-015-0068-4 [20] Li PC, Zhou D, Zhang CM, et al. 2015. Assessment of the effective CO2, storage capacity in the Beibuwan Basin, offshore of southwestern PR China. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 37: 325-339. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.03.033 [21] Li Q, Chen ZA, Zhang JT, et al. 2016. Positioning and revision of CCUS technology development in China. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 46: 282-293. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.02.024 [22] Li Q, Wei YN, Liu G, et al. 2015. CO2-EWR: A cleaner solution for coal chemical industry in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103: 330-337. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.073 [23] Li Q, Wei YN, Liu GZ, et al. 2014. Combination of CO2 geological storage with deep saline water recovery in western China: Insights from numerical analyses. Applied Energy, 116: 101-110. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.11.050 [24] Li XC, Liu YF, Bai BF, et al. 2006. Ranking and screening of CO2 saline aquifer storage zones in China. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 25(5): 963-968. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-6915.2006.05.015 [25] Liu DQ, Li YL, Song SY, et al. 2016. Simulation and analysis of lithology heterogeneity on CO2 geological sequestration in deep saline aquifer: A case study of the Ordos Basin. Environmental Earth Sciences, 75(11): 1-13. doi: 10.1007/s12665-016-5754-7 [26] Ma X, Li XF, Yang GD, et al. 2018. Study on Field-scale of CO2 Geological Storage Combined with Saline Water Recovery: A Case Study of East Junggar Basin of Xinjiang. Energy Procedia, 154: 36-41. doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2018.11.007 [27] Mi ZX, Wang FG, Yang YZ, et al. 2018. Evaluation of the potentiality and suitability for CO2 geological storage in the Junggar Basin, northwestern China. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. 78: 62-72. [28] Oh J, Kim K Y, Han WS, et al. 2013. Experimental and numerical study on supercritical CO2/brine transport in a fractured rock: Implications of mass transfer, capillary pressure and storage capacity. Advances in Water Resources, 62(12): 442-453. doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2013.03.007 [29] Thomas MW, Stewart M, Trotz M, et al. 2012. Geochemical modeling of CO2, sequestration in deep, saline, dolomitic-limestone aquifers: Critical evaluation of thermodynamic sub-models. Chemical Geology, 306-307: 29-39. doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2012.02.019 [30] Wang Y, Guo CH, Zhuang SR , et al. 2021. Major contribution to carbon neutrality by China’s geosciences and geological technologies. China Geology, 4: 329-352. doi: 10.31035/cg2021037 [31] Wen DG, Ma X, Wang LQ, et al. 2019. Combined study of static and dynamic reservoir modelling for the CO2 storage project in deep saline aquifer in Zhundong, Xinjiang, China. In 14th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference Melbourne 21-26 October 2018 (GHGT-14). Melbourne. Social Science Electronic Publishing. [32] Wen DG, Guo JQ, Jia XF, et al. 2013. The progress of carbon dioxide geological storage research and pilot project in China. Acta Geologica Sinica, 87: 971. (in Chinese) [33] Xu TF, Kharaka YK, Doughty C, et al. 2010. Reactive transport modeling to study changes in water chemistry induced by CO2 injection at the Frio-I Brine Pilot. Chemical Geology, 271: 153-164. doi: 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2010.01.006 [34] Yang ZJ, Xu TF, Wang FG, et al. 2019. A study on the CO2-Enhanced water recovery efficiency and reservoir pressure control strategies. Geofluids: 1-17. doi: 10.1155/2019/6053756 -
Access History
Figures(15)
Tables(4)
Export File
Citation
Ma Xin, Wen Dong-guang, Yang Guo-dong, Li Xu-feng, Diao Yu-jie, Dong Hai-hai, Cao Wei, Yin Shu-guo, Zhang Yan-mei. 2021. Potential assessment of CO2 geological storage based on injection scenario simulation: A case study in eastern Junggar Basin. Journal of Groundwater Science and Engineering, 9(4): 279-291. doi: 10.19637/j.cnki.2305-7068.2021.04.002
Format
Content
DownLoad:
-
Figure 1.
Location map of the study area and the distribution of the 2D seismic profile (Mi et al. 2018)
-
Figure 2.
Stratigraphic histogram of Cretaceous Donggou Formation (Modified from Yang (2019))
-
Figure 3.
Relative permeability model for numerical simulation
-
Figure 4.
Spatial distribution of 2D seismic data and mesh data fitting of borehole
-
Figure 5.
Geological models of the study area (the left is porosity model, and the right is permeability model) (Modified after Wen et al. 2019)
-
Figure 6.
3D geological model and well location distribution (Case 1 on the left, Case 2 on the right)
-
Figure 7.
Variation of CO2 in the reservoir over time (Case 1 on the left, Case 2 on the right)
-
Figure 8.
The reservoir pressure and well bottom-hole pressures over time (Case1 on the left, Case2 on the right)
-
Figure 9.
The 3D distribution of gaseous CO2 at 300 years (Case1 on the left and Case2 on the right)
-
Figure 10.
The 3D distribution of gaseous CO2 at 300 years (Case1 on the left and Case2 on the right)
-
Figure 11.
The distribution of CO2 in dissolved phase in 300 years (Case1 on the left and Case2 on the right)
-
Figure 12.
The distribution of CO2 in dissolved phase at 300 years (3D) (Case1 on the left and Case2 on the right)
-
Figure 13.
The distribution of residual trapping CO2 at 300 years (Case1 on the left and Case2 on the right)
-
Figure 14.
Water density distribution in the reservoir at 300 years (Case1 on the left and Case2 on the right)
-
Figure 15.
Pressure distribution in the reservoir at 300 years (Case 1 on the left side and Case 2 on the right)