Rock Deformation Caused by Different Fluid Injection for CO2 Sequestration Technique

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Jun 1, 2017
Keywords:
Rock Deformation CO2 Injection Geomechanical Simulation Pore Pressure

Main Article Content

Avirut Puttiwongrak
The Interdisciplinary Graduate School of Earth System Science and Andaman Natural Disaster Management, Prince of Songkla University Phuket Campus, Phuket

Abstract

The increase of CO2 emission in the atmosphere has a consequence on the global warming. CCS (Carbon dioxide Capture and Storage) is an effective tool to mitigate CO2 emission, but surface uplifting due to reservoir expansion is a problem caused by CSS project that needs to be concerned. This research aims to study and show a significant property of the fluids that are injected into suitable reservoirs in order to mitigate global warming problems. The laboratory tests and the geomechanical model are simulated rock deformations caused by CO2 injection for CCS projects. The results show that the different fluid properties produce the different rock deformations. The fluids with high mobility and penetration resulted in better rock deformation. Consequently, the pore pressure is not a single related factor for the calculation of the rock deformations. The property of injected fluid also plays an important role for the rock deformation and should be paid more attention.

Article Details

Issue
Vol. 27 No. 3 (2017): July-September, 2017
Section
บทความวิจัย

The articles published are the opinion of the author only. The author is responsible for any legal consequences. That may arise from that article.

References

[1] J. Gale, “Geological storage of CO2: what do we know, where are the gaps, and what more needs to be done?,” Energy, vol. 29, no. 9–10, pp. 1329–1338, 2004.

[2] R. P. Hepple and S. M. Benson, “Geologic storage of carbon dioxide as a climate change mitigation strategy: Performance requirements and the implications of surface seepage,” Environmental Geology, vol. 47, pp. 576–585, 2005.

[3] S. Holloway, “An overview of the joule II project: The underground disposal of carbon dioxide,” Energy Convers Manages, vol. 37, no. 6–8, pp. 1149–1154, 1996.

[4] E. S. Rubin, IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 429.

[5] B. H. Russell and T. Smith, “The relationship between dry rock bulk modulus and porosity-An empirical study,” CREWES Research Report, vol. 19, 2007.

[6] F. Gassmann, “Elastic waves through a packing of spheres,” Geophysics, vol. 16, pp. 673–685, 1951.

[7] G. Mavko, T. Mulerji, and J. Dvorkin, The Rock Physics Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

[8] B. Culshaw, “Measuring strain using optical fibres,” Strain, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 105–113, 2000.

[9] C. M. Lawrence, D. V. Nelson, E. Udd, and T. Bennett, “A fiber optic sensor for transverse strain measurement,” Experiment Mechanics, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 202–209, 1999.

[10] J. Q. Shi, Z. Xue, and S. Durucan, “Supercritical CO2 core flooding and imbibition in Tako sandstone – Influence of sub-core scale heterogeneity,” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, pp. 1–13, 2010.

[11] M. M. Alam, I. L. Fabricius, K. Hedegaard, B. Rogen, Z. Hossain, and A. S. Krogsboll, “Biot’s coefficient as an indicator of strength and porosity reduction - Calcereous sediments from Kerguelen Plateau,” Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, vol. 70, pp. 282–297, 2010.

[12] G. Mavko and T. Mukerji, “Seismic pore space compressibility and Gassman’s relation,” Geophysics, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 1743–1749, 1995.

[13] M. H. Chowdhury and D. R. Schmitt, “Seismic behavior of CO2 saturated Fontainebleau sandstone under in situ conditions,” in Proceedings Second International Workshop on Rock Physics, 2012, pp. 1–6.