Adsorption Isotherm Measurements of Gas Shales for Subsurface Temperature and Pressure Conditions

Transcription

1 Adsorption Isotherm Measurements of Gas Shales for Subsurface Temperature and Pressure Conditions Beibei Wang, Reza Haghapanah, Jennifer Wilcox Department of Energy Resources Engineering, Stanford University

2 Motivation- CO 2 Emissions (US) and CCS CO 2 emissions must be reduced by 30 85% by 2050 to be on track for stabilizing atmospheric CO 2 between 350 and 440 parts per million by volume by sector by energy resource Reducing energy consumption and increasing the efficiency of energy generation Switch to zero-co 2 emission technologies such as renewable energies and nuclear energy CO 2 capture and sequestration (CCS) Ref: IEA Highlights,

3 Advantages and Goals- Storage in Shale Advantages: CO 2 injection into depleted shale gas reservoir may enhances shale gas recovery, similar to Enhanced Coal Bed Methane recovery Goals: To investigate adsorption mechanism of CO 2 /CH 4 on gas shale To study gas adsorption behavior on various components of shale, including kerogen and clay, by characterizing their structure, pore size and gas capacity Ref: White C M, Smith D H, Jones K L, et al. Sequestration of carbon dioxide in coal with enhanced coalbed methane recovery a review[j]. Energy & Fuels, 2005, 19(3):

4 Methodology Shale / Carbonbased Sorbents Micro- and Mesopores Simplified Slit Pores with Structural and Chemical Heterogeneity 4

5 Outline Shale Characterization Adsorption Isotherm Measurements Adsorption Simulations Grand Canonical Monte Carlo Future Work 5

6 Shale Deposits in US Shale deposit in US and corresponding temperature and pressure conditions Barnett Eagle Ford Source: Energy Information Administration: International Energy Agency Shale Barnett Haynesville Fayetteville Marcellus Eagle Ford Depth [m] T [ C] P [MPa]

7 Shale Mineralogy XRD Compositional Data( wt%) Component Formula Barnett Eagle Ford Quartz SiO 2 38% 21.2% Feldspar KAlSi 3 O 8 NaAlSi 3 O 8 CaAl 2 Si 2 O 8 3.8% 0% Calcite CaCO 3 0.9% 54.2% Pyrite FeS 2 1.8% 3.6% Clay Illite 39% 15.8% TOC 16% 4.97% 7

8 SEM Analysis and Pore Size Distribution Shale(Barnett) Kerogen Clay 200 nm 200 nm 200 nm cc/g cc/g cc/g Probe gas: N 2 Method: Non-Localized Density Functional Theory 8

9 Outline Shale Characterization Adsorption Isotherm Measurements Adsorption Simulations Grand Canonical Monte Carlo Future Work 9

10 Rubotherm MSB F EXP What we want to know Advantage: Hard to measure High T/P mg Accuracy 10

11 Absolute Adsorption vs Excess Adsorption 3D snapshots of slices through adsorbed and bulk phases at 298K in a 2-nm pore; red = surface carbon atoms and blue = methane molecules Ref: K. Mosher, J. He, Y. Liu, E. Rupp, J. Wilcox, Molecular simulation of methane adsorption in micro- and mesoporous carbons with applications to coal and gas shale systems, Int. J. Coal. Geol , (2013) 11

12 CO 2 Adsorption on Gas Shale from Eagle Ford Isotherms of Particle vs. Powder at 125 C Isotherms on Powder at 50 C Sample: Eagle Ford formation Chip and powdered forms studied. Powder form gives higher gas capacity than chip form probably due to reduced macro-pore mass transfer resistance and more pore space introduced to powder sample. The decreasing of excess adsorption under high pressure indicate that bulk density is approaching the pore density. At 125 C, the inflection point is not reached, as the density of CO 2 at a specific pressure is greater at the lower temperature. 12

13 CO 2 Adsorption on Gas Shale and Kerogen Isotherms of shale vs. isolated kerogen at 80 C Sample: Barnett formation Shale and isolated kerogen are studied. Kerogen shows higher gas capacity than shale sample probably because kerogen has higher pore volume and stronger interaction with gas molecule. Shale Kerogen Clay 200 nm 200 nm 200 nm cc/g cc/g cc/g 13

14 Outline Shale Characterization Adsorption Isotherm Measurements Adsorption Simulations Grand Canonical Monte Carlo Future Work 14

15 Methodology - GCMC Grand Canonical Monte Carlo (GCMC) - the bridge to connect micro- and macroscopic properties Fixed: Chemical potential (pressure) Pore volume Temperature To obtain Equilibrium properties to estimate maximum capacity of CO 2 adsorption System volume: V 0 V 0 V M N Total particle number: M V, N Movement for Gas Displace V V Remove V V Insert V V 15

16 Pore Size Distribution for Modeling Three layered slit pores Original PSD of AC sample Assumption: the real porous system is a linear combination of slit pores with varying widths PSD truncated at 20 nm Assume the total isotherm consists of a number of individual single pore isotherms multiplied by their relative distribution over a range of pore sizes. 16

17 Model and Parameter Tuning The 1C-LJ intermolecular model was proposed by Ravikovitch et al.. The collision diameter and the reduced welldepth of the interaction energy are tuned to be 3.750Å and K, respectively, by comparing with NIST density data (experimental data). σ [Å] ε [K] CO 2 CO Carbon_pore Carbon_pore CO 2 Carbon_pore

18 Interaction Between CO 2 and Graphite (a) (b) (a) Comparative side views of adsorbed CO 2 in graphite slit pores with varying pore width at 333K and 10 bar; (b) Comparative side views of adsorbed CO 2 in graphite slit pores with pore width of 50Å at 333K and varying pressure. 18

19 Adsorption Isotherm Prediction Based on PSD Predicted excess adsorption isotherms of CO 2 using GCMC and with the experimental measurement at 333K Consistent in the lowpressure region, under predict in high-pressure region. Possible Explanation: Structural and heterogeneity that enhance CO 2 adsorption Swelling effect of sample Micro-pore size under prediction 19

20 Adsorption Isotherm on Functionalized Model Ref: Y. Liu, J. Wilcox / International Journal of Coal Geology 104 (2012) Comparison of experimental measurement with simulated isotherm on perfect and hydroxyl functionalized graphite. Functionalized model enhances adsorption in low pressure range, but still underestimate adsorption in high pressure range. 20

21 Conclusion Investigated gas adsorption mechanism and storage capacity on gas shale/kerogen by measuring CO 2 adsorption isotherms at subsurface pressure and temperature condition Characterized the structure, pore size and chemistry of shale/kerogen/clay Simulate the gas adsorption behavior of carbon based material using GCMC 21

22 Future Work Investigate the adsorption behavior for CH 4 on gas shale and its correlation to CO 2 adsorption capacity. Study the relative roles that kerogen and clay systems play on the overall shale adsorption mechanism and capacity estimates. Study the mechanism that caused the inconsistency between molecular simulation and experimental results 22

23 Acknowledgements This work is supported under Stanford Graduate fellowship. SEM experiments performed in Nanocharacterization Laboratory at Stanford University The computations were carried out on the Center for Computational Earth & Environmental Science (CEES) cluster at Stanford University. 23

24 Q&A Q & A