UKERC EDC: Publications

This resource links to a document we hold in our system

Abstract:

This document is a supporting document to deliverable MS6.1 UK Storage Appraisal Final Report.

The aim of this work was to build a 3D geocellular model of the reservoir and sealing formations for a closure in the Bunter Sandstone Formation which could be used to model CO₂ injection. A region in storage unit 139.000 (zone 4 Bunter Sandstone Formation) of 44.0 km by 25.2 km was chosen for detailed modelling. The target daughter storage unit 139.016 (Bunter closure 36) was chosen for modelling as:

No faulting was visible on the seismic over the closure
The storage capacity was estimated to be large enough to store a sizable amount of CO₂
The area included three additional closures that could be used to study the impact of CO₂ injection on adjacent storage units
Data coverage was good over the chosen area

The static geocellular model was constructed by BGS in PETREL^TM using PGS seismic surfaces, IHS well tops (from the EDIN database), well logs (for 12 wells) and core data for one well.

Some important findings arose from this study:-

The storage capacity may be controlled by either the pressure (when the pressure increases above the maximum limit, the rate must be reduced), or the migration rate (if a high injection rate is maintained, CO₂ will reach the spill point more rapidly).
The pore volume utilisation and total capacity are quite sensitive to the assumed value for the fracture pressure gradient. A change in this gradient may switch the storage control from pressure-controlled to rate-controlled.
The storage capacity for an open model may be less than that for a closed system, if heterogeneity encourages a low pore volume utilisation.
It is import to monitor the pressure at the crest of a dome. Even when the injection rate is pressure controlled at the depth of the well completions, the pressure may rise above a safe limit in the crest.
It may be possible to increase storage capacity by controlling the injection rate. A lower rate will allow CO₂ more time to rise buoyantly and to dissolve in brine, before reaching the spill point.

Publication Year:

2011

Publisher:

ETI

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5286/UKERC.EDC.000933

Author(s):

Bentham, M., Williams, J., Harris, S., Jin, M. and Pickup, G.

Energy Category

Class Name:

Subclass Name:

Category Name:

Fossil Fuels: Oil Gas and Coal

CO2 Capture and Storage

Language:

English

File Type:

application/pdf

File Size:

7281632 B

Rights:

Energy Technologies Institute Open Licence for Materials

Rights Overview:

The Energy Technologies Institute is making this document available to use under the Energy Technologies Institute Open Licence for Materials. Please refer to the Energy Technologies Institute website for the terms and conditions of this licence. The Information is licensed "as is" and the Energy Technologies Institute excludes all representations, warranties, obligations and liabilities in relation to the Information to the maximum extent permitted by law. The Energy Technologies Institute is not liable for any errors or omissions in the Information and shall not be liable for any loss, injury or damage of any kind caused by its use. This exclusion of liability includes, but is not limited to, any direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential, punitive, or exemplary damages in each case such as loss of revenue, data, anticipated profits, and lost business. The Energy Technologies Institute does not guarantee the continued supply of the Information. Notwithstanding any statement to the contrary contained on the face of this document, the Energy Technologies Institute confirms that it has the right to publish this document.

Further information:

N/A

Region:

United Kingdom

Publication Type:

Technical Report

Subject:

Energy Storage Plants

Theme(s):

Carbon Capture and Storage

Related Dataset(s):

CO2 Stored Database