An Integrated Characterization, Modeling, Risk Assessment, and Monitoring Plan for the Fort Nelson CCS Project

Transcription

1 An Integrated Characterization, Modeling, Risk Assessment, and Monitoring Plan for the Fort Nelson CCS Project IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme 2011 Modelling Network Meeting Perth, Australia April 27 29, 2011 Charles D. Gorecki Senior Research Manager 2011 University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center

2 The PCOR Partnership Region Fort Nelson Project Bell Creek Project 2

3 A Growing Partnership

4 PCOR Partnership Objectives and Approach Risk-based approach to define monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA) strategy. Cost-effective MVA plan. Monitoring, Verification, and Accounting Site Characterization Design Modification Modeling and Simulation Minimal disruption of the operations at the project sites and for the partners. Risk Assessment 4

5 Test Well Fort Nelson CCS Design: Inject volume = 120 MMcf/d Composition = 95% CO2, 4% H2S, and 1% CH4 Sequestration reservoir needs to be massive and exhibit good injection characteristics to handle this.

6 Presqu ile Barrier Reef Cross Section Map modified from structurally controlled hydrothermal dolomite reservoir facies (G.R. Davies and L.B. Smith Jr.) Source: Stable and radiogenic isotopic signatures of mineralized Devonian carbonate rocks of the northern Rocky Mountains and the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (S. Paradis, W.A. Turner, M. Coniglio, N. Wilson, and J.L. Nelson) General Location Fort Nelson CCS Feasibility Project

7 Regional Cross Section, Petrel Robertson NORTHWEST Fort Nelson CCS Feasibility Project Area SOUTH Saline Reservoirs: Slave Point, Sulphur Point & Keg River Aquitards: Muskwa/Fort Simpson Shales + Horn River Shale + tight limestone lagoon 7

8 Barrier Reef Modern Day Analog Great Barrier Reef of Australia: WIND-WAVE DIRECTION 10 km 8

9 Fort Nelson Stratigraphy The primary injection horizon is the Sulphur Point Formation (Fm), with the Slave Point and Keg River Fms as secondary targets. Injection horizon is 2200 m deep. The Fort Simpson and Muskwa Shales will provide the primary seals. Ranges from 450 to 615 m thick. The Watt Mountain is a weak seal between Sulphur Point and Slave Point. DW Seals Sinks 9

10 Modeling and Simulation

11 Parameter Sensitivity Analysis Key parameters for gas production: Permeability k v /k h ratio Production BHP Gas/liquid relative permeability Key parameters for water disposal: Water disposal BHP Permeability k v /k h ratio Production BHP

12 History Matching History matching criteria: Gas Production (individual and full field) Water production Water disposal Regional pressure profile

13 Source of History Match 93 wells in study area, most only penetrate top of the Slave Point. Includes 85 production wells: 42 active producers 21 abandoned wells 13 suspended wells 9 undefined wells 7 water disposal wells Test Well C-61-E Only the test well and three water injectors are in the vicinity of the proposed injection site.

14 Initial Simulations Around Test Well Initial 25 years 50 years 100 years

15 Initial Simulations Around Test Well cont. Initial 25 years 50 years 100 years

16 Risk Management Fort Nelson First-round risk assessment, based on simulation runs around the test well, indicated areas that could adversely effect the project. They fall into four general categories as follows: 1. Sour CO 2 contamination away from the two currently producing gas pools. 2. Pressure changes could adversely affect nearby natural gas production and water disposal operations. 3. Loss of injectivity. 4. Insufficient storage volume. Most of these risks are due to geological uncertainty, due to limited data. The results of the first-round risk assessment were used to adjust the injection location to reduce project risks. 16

17 Risk Management in Action Initial 25 years 50 years 100 years

18 Risk Management in Action (continued) Initial 25 years 50 years 100 years

19 Application of Risk Management 25 years 100 years Initial injection location around test well 25 years 100 years Proposed injection location west of test well

20 Fort Nelson Status and Next Steps Status Drilled test well winter Cored and logged test well Reentered test well winter Acquired existing 2-D and 3-D seismic data Completed two rounds of modeling Completed first round of risk assessment Large water injection test Next Steps Finalize second-round risk assessment Develop initial MVA plan Drill a second test well winter Shoot 3-D seismic survey Update geologic model based on additional data Rerun predictive simulations Conduct a third round of risk assessment Adjust MVA plan 20

21 Conclusions An integrated approach to site characterization, modeling, and risk assessment can: lead to an effective site specific monitoring program. Identify data gaps in site characterization. Increase the likelihood of project success by identifying and mitigating potential project risks. The Fort Nelson Site has excellent potential, but still requires more characterization data to ensure project success.

22 Contact Information Energy & Environmental Research Center University of North Dakota 15 North 23rd Street, Stop 9018 Grand Forks, North Dakota World Wide Web: Telephone No. (701) Fax No. (701) Charles D. Gorecki Senior Research Manager PCOR Partnership Program Manager