Geologic Capture and Sequestration of Carbon Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Geologic Capture and Sequestration of Carbon: Proceedings of a Workshop - in Brief
Geologic Capture and Sequestration of Carbon: Proceedings of a Workshop - in Brief
Pages 1-12
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
The committee convened a webinar on November 15 and a workshop on N ovember 28, 2017, in Palo Alto, California, to discuss carbon mineralization and subsurface storage approaches. Included in these discussions were presentations by speakers on the state of science and deployment, research and monitoring needs, potential risks, and costs of geologic capture and storage.
|
From page 2... ...
Sally Benson from Stanford University, a member of the committee, categorized potential storage approaches in sedimentary rock into four options: (1) injection into depleted oil and gas reservoirs, (2)
|
From page 3... ...
REACTION KINETICS AND MECHANICS OF CARBON MINERALIZATION Greeshma Gadikota from the University of Wisconsin -- Madison described laboratory studies undertaken to understand the chemical, morphological, and mechanical processes influencing carbon mineralization reaction kinetics. She explained that understanding CO2 storage under various conditions could clarify storage potential as well as inform o ptimal conditions for engineering reactions at faster rates and larger scales.
|
From page 4... ...
He suggested that future research directions could include integration of full reactive cracking models, exploring feedbacks between cracking and material properties, expansion into dissolution/precipitation reactions, and experimental validation on brittle systems. Ultimately, comprehensive understanding will help determine the practicality of reactive cracking mechanisms for permanent carbon storage.
|
From page 5... ...
LABORATORY AND FIELD DEMONSTRATION OF CARBON MINERALIZATION IN BASALT The capability for storing carbon in basaltic formations has been demonstrated in field experiments. Todd Schaef from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory described laboratory and field demonstrations of the capability for effective carbon mineralization and sequestration in basalts.
|
From page 6... ...
The current injection flow path is estimated to have a storage capacity of about 5 Mt CO2. Estimates of the storage potential for the whole field vary, with a median value of 697 Mt CO2.
|
From page 7... ...
Because laboratory studies have shown that there is large variability in both reaction rates and injectivity into the basalt, Goldberg noted that site-specific sampling and experiments are being pursued at this location. MECHANISMS OF CO2 INJECTION AND STORAGE IN SEDIMENTARY FORMATIONS Lynn Orr from Stanford University described the possibility of sequestering CO2 in sedimentary subsurface reservoirs (see Figure 4)
|
From page 8... ...
pressure, seismicity rates and damage to caprock could be reduced. DEMONSTRATION OF CARBON STORAGE IN DEEP SEDIMENTARY FORMATIONS Phil Ringrose from Statoil15 and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology provided an overview of ongoing injection projects in Norway, as well as plans for future projects and storage capacity.
|
From page 9... ...
In the second stage, 150 t CO2 was injected in a saline aquifer to test for the occurrence of residual saturation and dissolution. The second stage of monitoring revealed that temperature, noble trace gas composition, pulsed neutron logging, and especially pressure tests provide useful information on the residual trapping of gas in saline formations, although each method has limitations.
|
From page 10... ...
Rather, the main limiting factor is whether the pore space is suitable to use based on its pressure limitations. The Maximum Allowable Surface Injection Pressure is conventionally used for determining injection pressure limits, and she suggested that the calculation could be improved by incorporating the geomechanics of the storage area under consideration.
|
From page 11... ...
However, conductivity is a better measure at higher saturations, and may be better for monitoring the injection plume.18 Daley concluded with thoughts on the potential for reducing monitoring costs while maintaining continuous monitoring programs, including the identification of the optimal number and placement of monitoring wells and the development of new monitoring technology such as fiber optic sensing. Jerome Neufeld from the University of Cambridge described the monitoring programs employed at conventional CO2 storage sites, with the example of monitoring the offshore Sleipner site.
|
From page 12... ...
, University of Michigan; Erica Belmont, University of Wyoming; Sally Benson, Stanford University; Richard Birdsey, Woods Hole Research Center; Dane Boysen, Cyclotron Road; Riley Duren, Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Charles Hopkinson, University of Georgia; Christopher Jones, Georgia Institute of Technology; Peter Kelemen (NAS) , Columbia University; Annie Levasseur, International Reference Centre for the Life Cycle of Products, Processes and Services (CIRAIG)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.