Mississippi River Natchez Mississippi. Illustration by Tip Meckel

Transcription

1 Update on Results of SECARB Early Test of Monitoring Large Volume Injection at Cranfield Mississippi River Natchez Mississippi Illustration by Tip Meckel 1

2 Gulf Coast Carbon Center (GCCC) Collaborators IA sponsors BEG Team Susan Hovorka Tip Meckel J. P. Nicot Rebecca Smyth Ramon Trevino Katherine Romanak Changbing Yang Dave Carr Sigrid Clift Jiemin Lu Seyyed Hosseini Jong Won Choi Carey King students Scott Tinker Ian Duncan BEG- CEE LBNL LLNL ORNL USGS New Mexico Tech Mississippi i i i State t U U of Mississippi BP ARI SECARB SWP UT-PGE UT- CCEP UT- DoGS Univ Edinburgh NETL: Bruce Brown SSEB Jerry Hill New 2011 GE BG group

3 Confining System Regionally significant sequestration target: Gulf Coast wedge Repetitive depositional units Results transferable to: older and younger units other parts of region Confining i System

4 Cranfield Courtesy of Denbury Resources, Inc

5 W Stacked Reservoirs at Cranfield E Phase II Middle Tuscal oosa confin ing System Cross section from 3-D seismic survey Oil-water contact Phase III 3,000 m depth Gas cap, oil ring, downdip water leg Shut in since 1965 Strong water drive Returned to near initial pressure Tip Meckel

6 RCSP program goal: Predict storage capacities within +/- 30% Capacity and injectivity well known at project start. Advance understanding of efficiency of pore-volume occupancy (E factor) Measure saturation during multiphase plume evolution (completed) Increase predictive capabilities (underwaythru modeling) 6

7 RCSP program goal: Evaluate protocols to demonstrate that 99% of CO 2 is retained Permanence of geologic system well understood prior to test. Assess methods for documenting well performance Measure changes above the injection zone along well, above zone monitoring interval (AZMI), and at surface (P site) over long times (underway) Plume confined by 4-way closure. Uncertainty amount of radial flow (down dip/out of pattern) Measure down dip extent of plume via VSP and 4-D (completed) Use Early Test to advance risk assessment techniques and share information. Completed certification framework assessment of leakage risk. Confirmed well performance as highest uncertainty and focus of monitoring research 7

8 Contribute technical expertise and lessons learned for development of Best Practices Manuals Participated in developing BPMs for MVA, characterization, risk and reservoir modeling On-site outreach handled d by Landmen. SSEB and Early Team focus on O&E in public and technical arenas. Hosted site visits, responses to local and trade media, Fact Sheets, website postings of project information. Permits obtained by site operator. Project team focus is on development of regulatory framework for GHG. Provided experience with monitoring instruments and well performance to decision makers 8

9 Early Test Organization Chart SSEB Denbury Resources Field owner and injection system design, management, 4 D survey, HS&E Gulf Coast Carbon Center Bureau of Economic Geology Jackson School of Geosciences The University of Texas at Austin Vendors e.g. local landman Sandia Technologies Monitoring Systems Design, Installation, HS&E 50 Vendors e.g. Schlumberger MSU Umiss Hydro & hydrochem Core Lab UT DoG Anchor QEA Federal collaborators Vis FWP LBNL Well based geophysics, U tube and lab design and fabrication LLNL ERT USGS Geochemistry Vendors e.g. equipment Separately funded ORNL PFT, Stable isotopes Environmental Information Volumes Wld Walden Consulting NRAP VSP NETL Rock water interaction Stanford, Princeton, U Edinburgh, UT PGE & ICES (CFSES), U. Tennessee, USGS RITE, BP 9

10 Cranfield Progress $34M DOE, $23M cost share selection Pha ase II Site First cored well, brine samples Char racterizati ion baseline seismic il gas baseline So Phase II Site develo opment NEPA Phase III Drill Phase III 3 DAS wells Monitoring Phase III injection Phase II injection ECARB Early End S Phase II 5/1/2009 million tones injected Phase II + III 1 million tons Phase III injection Phase 10/2010 III 12/20/2009 Achieve 1 million tones/year rate Repeat geophysical monitoring 10/2010

11 Scientific and Technical Activities Commercial Deployment Toward co mmercial ization Contingency plan Parsimonious public assurance monitoring Subsurface perturbation predicted pothesi tested Hy s Field experime ents CO 2 retained in-zonedocument no leakage to air-no damage to water Surface monitoring: approach verification Groundwater program Gas variation over time Above-zone acoustic monitoring (CASSM) & pressure monitoring CO 2 saturation correctly predicted by flow modeling CO 2 saturation measured through time acoustic impedance + resistivity Tomography and change through time, gravity 3- D time lapse surface/ VSP seismic Dissolution and saturation measured via tracer breakthrough and chromatography Pressure (flow plus deformation) correctly predicted by model Microseismic test, RITE pressure mapping Acoustic response to pressure change over time Theory and lab Sensitivity of tools; saturated-vadose modeling of flux and tracers Lab-based b core response to EM and acoustic under various saturations, tracer behavior Advanced simulation of reservoir pressure field 11

12 Project workflow Reservoir characterization; 3-D, Production history Existing cores and logs Existing aquifer data GEM and TOUGH2 models for experiment design GEM, TOUGH2 Geochemist workbench models for assessment Time-lapse Cross well, VSP, repeat 3-D Groundwater Surveillance P-site measurements Well drilling Cross well seismic Multi-well hydro tests Logging, coring, Petrography, petrophysics GEM, TOUGH2 Soil gas recon, Geochemist Groundwater workbench models surveillance GEM, TOUGH2 Geochemist workbench models for assessment for Operations BHP BHT DTS ERT, RST, U-tube geochemistry Measurement Groundwater Surveillance P-site measurements 12

13 MVA Design Area tested Whole plume Focus study Atmosphere Not tested Not tested Soil gas Groundwater Shallow production AZMI Geo Mechanical testt Injection zone Time-lapse surveys at active and P&A well pads Monitoring well at each injector Not tested Not tested Not tested Geochemistry breakthrough P site methodology assessment EGL-7 UM cored test well. Push-pull test Not tested DAS pressure and EGL 7 pressure + fluids GMT-failed DAS multi-well multi tool array

14 5km Sci. techn. Merit Clear Milesto ne. Gov t Resource es EGL-7 Phase II High Volume Injection Test (HiVIT) Psite Five Study Areas Plannin ng Approa ch pleent Im me Pipeline head& Separation facility GMT Detail Area Study DAS Injector Producer (monitoring point) Risk Mitg. Observation Well Techno-y.Transfer r GIS base Tip Meckel ublccept Pu Ac 14

15 E-W Stratigraphic Section ove-zone Pressue Monitoring powerful tool for leakage detection AZMI Middle Tuscaloosa Confining System Tuscaloosa DE injection zone CO2 Injection Zone Fifteen Months of pressure data Tip Meckel

16 High quality but complex injection zone Channel erosion Channel erosion Channel erosion Channel erosion Point bar Point bar Stratal slicing of 3-D volume Galloway ay 1983 Hongliu Zeng Meander fluvial model

17 DAS Monitoring Injector CFU 31F1 Obs CFU 31 F2 Obs CFU 31 F3 Closely spaced well array to examine flow in complex reservoir F1 F2 F3 Above-zone monitoring Above Zone Monitoring 10,500 feet BSL Petrel model Tip Meckel Injection Zone 68m 112 m 17

18 Measuring distribution of CO 2 in the reservoir Well-based methods Wireline logs in time lapse -RST Temperature Gravity (BP) Cross well methods Time- lapse ERT Time lapse acoustic (seismic) i Arial methods Azimuthal and walk away VSP Time-lapse 3-D seismic from surface 18

19 Probabilistic realization of bili permeability FI F2 F3 Jong-won Choi and JP Nicot BEG 19

20 Modeled breakthrough time at well F2 for each of the 10 permeability bl fields Observed breakthrough Jong-won Choi and JP Nicot BEG 20

21

22 F 3 F 2 Prelim. Cross-well Seismic F1 (Injection) Baseline Sep Change Nov Inter-well Distance 367 Ajo-Franklin and Daley LBNL (ft)

23 Modeling Underway SIMSEQ interpartnership model development test GEM models DAS and HiVIT LBNL TOUGH2 DOE BES EFRC program - CFSES NRAP GEM modeled CO 2 plume evolution HiVIT Nicot and Choi BEG TOUGH2 DAS Doughty LBNL Dec 2009 March

24 High frequency fluid sampling via U-tube yields data on flow processes CONCENTRATION 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% Originally brine methane saturated CH4 CO2 Breakthrough of of CO 2 Double Additional flow injection paths more rate methane extracted 20% 10% 0% 11/29/09 0:00 12/4/09 0:00 12/9/09 0:00 12/14/09 0:00 12/19/09 0:00 12/24/09 0:00 12/29/09 0:00 1/3/10 0:00 SAMPLING TIME Small diameter sampler with N 2 drive brings fluids quickly to surface with tracers intact CO 2 dissolution into brine liberates dissolved CH 4 BEG, LBNL, USGS, ORNL, UTDoG, data compiled by Changbing Yang BEG 24

25 Risk Assessment Certification Framework Nicot, (BEG) Oldenburg (LBNL) and others,

26 P site Tests Effects of Vadose Zone Carbon Cycling on Leaked Gasses Vd Vadose-zone Carbon Cycling Produce CO 2 Concentrate CO 2 Mimic signal Leak Consume CO 2 Disperse CO 2 Dampen signal Leak Leak Romanak and Yang, BEG

27 SECARB Early Knowledge Sharing U.S. and International Programs Sci. techn. Merit Examples Univ. Oslo (Norway) RITE IPAC CO2 Microsesmic Florida Florida Scottish USGS Polk Co Center CCS NRG CCPI AP/Leuca dia/hasti ngs BIG CCS (Norway) Clear Milesto ne. Sharing results with future SIM SEQ rial Gov t Resources Commercial integration projects Exchange with sister projects CFSES Power plant site Decatur SECARB Anthro Test Planning Approach Monitoring approaches Indust NRAP SECARB Early Test Mountaineer Resistivity Risk Mitg. ual gas ERT Power plant site Ketzin Techno-y.Transfer Otway In Salah Building from past Nagaoka Plant Daniel experiences GEO SEQ Frio Test 1&2 More commercial Implement Publ- Accept Monitoring approaches Field experience Resid InSAR 27

28 Education and Outreach GCCC Outreach: press, conferences, publications, testimony ARRA Funded Projects STORE: sequestration training outreach research and education SECARB-Ed (led by SSEB) 28

29 Interim Conclusions of Study at Cranfield 1 million metric ton/year rate achieved Dec 20, 2009, 2.6 Million metric tons monitored since July 2008 Injection maintained >30 months Monitored with standard and novel approaches History match pressure response Above-Zone Monitoring Interval (AZMI) Fluid flow measured/monitored with multiple tools in complex flow field Quantification of dissolution Knowledge sharing, outreach, risk assessment Export to commercial EOR/sequestration projects Future: Extensive modeling Continue monitoring downhole, P&T, AZMI, P site, groundwater. 29