Geology Reports⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70029962

CO2 storage capacity estimation: Issues and development of standards

J. Bradshaw·S. Bachu·D. Bonijoly·R. Burruss·S. Holloway·N.P. Christensen·O.M. Mathiassen
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Associated with the endeavours of geoscientists to pursue the promise that geological storage of CO2 has of potentially making deep cuts into greenhouse gas emissions, Governments around the world are dependent on reliable estimates of CO2 storage capacity and insightful indications of the viability of geological storage in their respective jurisdictions. Similarly, industry needs reliable estimates for business decisions regarding site selection and development. If such estimates are unreliable, and decisions are made based on poor advice, then valuable resources and time could be wasted. Policies that have been put in place to address CO2 emissions could be jeopardised. Estimates need to clearly state the limitations that existed (data, time, knowledge) at the time of making the assessment and indicate the purpose and future use to which the estimates should be applied. A set of guidelines for estimation of storage capacity will greatly assist future deliberations by government and industry on the appropriateness of geological storage of CO2 in different geological settings and political jurisdictions. This work has been initiated under the auspices of the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (www.cslforum.org), and it is intended that it will be an ongoing taskforce to further examine issues associated with storage capacity estimation. Crown Copyright ?? 2007.

Explore related subjects

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas ControlArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J. Bradshaw, S. Bachu, D. Bonijoly, R. Burruss, S. Holloway, N.P. Christensen, O.M. Mathiassen. 2007. CO2 storage capacity estimation: Issues and development of standards. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1750-5836(07)00027-8

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2020

Methodology for estimating the prospective CO2 storage resource of residual oil zones at the national and regional scale

Residual oil zones (ROZs) are increasingly gaining interest as potential reservoirs for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage. Here, we present a national- and regional-scale methodology for estimating prospective CO 2 storage resources in residual oil zones. This methodology uses a volumetric equation that accounts for CO 2 storage as a free phase in pore space and as a dissolved phase in oil and does not assume any oil production associated with CO 2 storage. Reservoir modeling and the CO 2 -SCREEN tool are used to demonstrate that CO 2 storage in residual oil zones will predominantly take place in the free phase (approximately 92–97%) with some storage as dissolution in oil (approximately 3–8 %). Based on this preliminary demonstration, the CO 2 storage efficiency for ROZs using this national- and regional-scale method ranges from 0.61 to 7.1 %. This range indicates ROZs have a similar efficiency potential for storing CO 2 as deep saline formations (0.51–5.4 %).

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control↗
USGS2020

Estimating the net costs of brine production and disposal to expand pressure-limited dynamic capacity for basin-scale CO2 storage in a saline formation

If carbon capture and storage (CCS) needs to be deployed at basin- or larger-scale, it is likely that multiple sites will be injecting carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) into the same geologic formation. This could lead to excessive pressure buildup, overlapping induced pressure fronts, and pressure interference with neighboring uses of the subsurface. Extracting the in situ brine from the storage formation could be necessary to relieve pressure constraints; control migration of the CO 2 plume, displaced brine, and the induced pressure front; and sequester more CO 2 while reducing potential risks. Such active pressure management could be very costly, and it could present a formidable economic constraint on the feasible scale of deployment of CCS. Alternatively, there may be high-injectivity zones (“storage sweet spots”) where a significant volume of CO 2 could be stored without producing brine. For simulated deployment of CO 2 storage sites across the Illinois Basin, the results of this study suggest that brine production could be required to sequester 20 % or more of the regional CO 2 emissions of major stationary sources in the Mount Simon Sandstone saline formation. In some cases, brine production could expand pressure-limited CO 2 storage capacity enough to more than compensate for the additional costs of pressure management, but only if produced brine could be cheaply reinjected onsite for disposal in an overlying geologic formation. With or without brine production, this study found that the lowest-cost deployment option was to inject CO 2 only into a potential storage sweet spot of the Mount Simon Sandstone.

Illinois, Indiana↗
USGS2019

Estimating the pressure-limited dynamic capacity and costs of basin-scale CO2 storage in a Saline Formation

Deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) could be necessary to be able to satisfy baseload electricity demand, maintain diversity in the energy mix, and achieve mitigation of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions at lowest cost ( IPCC, 2015 ; U.S. DOE, 2016 ). If basin-, regional- or national-scale deployment of CCS is needed, it may be possible to store only a small fraction of the captured CO 2 in oil and natural gas reservoirs. The vast majority would likely have to be stored in saline formations. Pressure buildup as a result of injecting CO 2 into such reservoirs is expected to be an important source of risk associated with CO 2 storage, and could constrain dynamic storage capacities (maximum injection rates) to be far below estimates based on access to theoretical storage resources. Estimates of CO 2 storage costs based on an assumption of practical availability of the theoretical storage resource could lead to underestimation of the costs of CO 2 storage. In this study, simulation results suggest that the pressure-limited dynamic CO 2 storage capacity of the Mount Simon Sandstone could be less than 4% of the theoretical storage resource in this saline formation, and storage costs could be an order of magnitude higher than recent estimates. However, consideration of the geologic heterogeneity in this deep saline formation allowed definition of a high injectivity zone, and estimated costs of CO 2 storage in this “sweet spot” of the reservoir approached recent estimates that did not include costs for pressure management.

Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky↗