CO2 in the Subsurface - From EOR to Storage
Download as PPTX, PDF2 likes11,023 views
This document discusses the Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Program. It provides the following key details in 3 sentences: The SPE Distinguished Lecturer Program is funded primarily by the SPE Foundation through member donations and Offshore Europe. It allows industry professionals to serve as lecturers on topics like CO2 storage and CO2-EOR. Additional support is provided by AIME to further the program's educational mission.
CO2 in the Subsurface - From EOR to Storage
- 1. Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Program www.spe.org/dl 1
- 2. Primary funding is provided by The SPE Foundation through member donations and a contribution from Offshore Europe The Society is grateful to those companies that allow their professionals to serve as lecturers Additional support provided by AIME Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Program www.spe.org/dl
- 3. Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Program www.spe.org/dl 3 Gary Teletzke CO2 in the Subsurface – From EOR to Storage
- 4. Outline Background − CO2 in the subsurface − What is Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and why is it needed? − Current status of CCS CO2 Storage − Subsurface lessons learned − Impact of dynamic injectability factors on storage capacity estimates CO2-EOR − History and current status − Learnings for CO2 storage Summary
- 5. CO2 in the Subsurface 5 CO2 is a dense supercritical fluid at typical reservoir T and P • Miscibility with oil for enhanced oil recovery • Efficient storage of CO2 from atmospheric conditions • Buoyant and mobile compared to water • Soluble in water, reduces pH Source: “Strategic Analysis of the Global Status of Carbon Capture and Storage Report 1: Status of Carbon Capture and Storage Projects Globally,” Global CCS Institute, 2009
- 6. CCS – a Key GHG Mitigation Technology 6 Source: IEA, “Energy Technology Perspectives 2017,” Paris: OECD/IEA, 2017
- 7. What is CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS)? 7 Storage Store CO2 in a safe location for 100’s of years Capture Extract CO2 from flue gas Transport
- 8. Is CO2 Storage at Required Scale Feasible? • Global CO2 emissions 35 Gt/y, 13 Gt/y from large point sources • Need to sequester 120 Gt CO2 to achieve 450 ppm (2°C)* • Requires >4 Gt/y by 2050 (comparable to global HC liquid production) • 22 projects in operation/under construction; capture capacity 40 Mt/yr 8 *IEA estimate for 2015-2050 1 Gt = 1 billion tons 1 Mt = 1 million tons 1 ton CO2 ≈ 9 reservoir bbl
- 9. Large-Scale CCS Operational Milestones • 21 large-scale CCS projects in operation or under construction globally with CO2 capture capacity of 40 million MTA • Storage dominated by EOR: 16 projects and 32 MTA • Additional 6 large-scale projects are at Define stage, with capture capacity of around 8 MTA. A further 11 large-scale projects are at Evaluate and Identify stages with capture capacity of around 21 MTA (1/2 involve EOR) 9 Source: Global Status of CCS 2017 – Summary Report, Global CCS Institute Boundary Dam CCS Project Over two million tonnes of CO2 captured and used mainly for enhanced oil recovery Petrobras Santos Basin Pre-Salt Oil Field CCS Project Four million tonnes of CO2 injected into producing reservoirs Quest Over three million tonnes of CO2 captured and stored in a deep saline formation Sleipner CO2 Storage Project 20 years of successful operations, over 18 millions tonnes of CO2 stored Jilin Oil Field EOR Demonstration Project Over one million tonnes of CO2 injected Air Products Steam Methane Reformer EOR Project Four million tonnes of CO2 captured and used for enhanced recovery • Capture dominated by natural gas processing: 10 projects and 25 Mt/yr • Storage dominated by EOR: 16 projects and 32 Mt/yr
- 10. Large-Scale CCS Project Startups 10 Source: Global Status of CCS 2017 – Summary Report, GCCSI Illinois Industrial CCS Project Online 2Q 2017 Petra Nova Carbon Capture Project Online 4Q 2016 Gorgon Carbon Dioxide Injection Project Operations anticipated in 2018 Abu Dhabi CCS Project World’s first operational CCS project in the iron and steel sector; online 4Q 2016 Norway Full Chain CCS Project 2017 budget supports full-chain CCS project Tomakomai CCS Demonstration Project Japan’s first fully integrated CCS Project Yangchang Integrated CCS Demonstration Project 2020 startup ACTL Capturing CO2 from multiple industrial sources for EOR; 2019 startup • 22 projects in operation or under construction with capture capacity of 40 Mt/yr
- 11. CCS Challenges Cost is mostly in the CO2 capture step • CO2 sources are at low pressure and low concentration, while storage demands high pressure and high concentration Subsurface Challenges • Capacity • Injectivity • Containment 11 Industry Capture Cost, $/ton Nat. gas processing, hydrogen, ethanol 20 - 30 Power gen., iron and steel, cement 60 - 200 Source: Global Status of CCS 2016 – Summary Report, GCCSI
- 12. 0 5000 10000 15000 Estimated Storage Capacity, Gt CO2 Low 100s of Years Potential Storage Capacity? 12 Source: IPCC SRCCS, 2005 – other than the O&G Reservoirs, the numbers are very approximate ??
- 13. Pioneering Large-Scale Projects Saline Formations 13 Source: Eiken et al., “Lessons Learned from 14 years of CCS Operations: Sleipner, In Salah and Snøhvit,” Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 5541–5548 Sleipner (North Sea) Snøhvit (Barents Sea) In Salah (Algeria) Thick, laterally continuous, high NTG sand (> 1 D) Thin, fractured sands (10 mD matrix) Thinner, laterally discontinuous, lower NTG sands (100s mD)
- 14. Sleipner Subsurface Lessons Learned 14 Source: Ringrose, et al., “Leveraging Infrastructure, Storage and EOR to Get Significant CCS Scale-Up,: Norway Case,” SCCS Workshop, May 26, 2017 Time-Lapse Seismic • More that 18 Mt injected since 1996 • Good injectivity, CO2 plume movement dominated by gravity
- 15. In Salah Subsurface Lessons Learned 15 Source: Eiken et al., “Lessons Learned from 14 years of CCS Operations: Sleipner, In Salah and Snøhvit,” Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 5541–5548 • 3.8 Mt injected 2004-2011 • Low injectivity, evidence of fracture activation and surface uplift InSAR Surface Elevation Map Thin, fractured sands (10 mD matrix)
- 16. Snøhvit Subsurface Lessons Learned 16 Source: Ringrose, et al., “Leveraging Infrastructure, Storage and EOR to Get Significant CCS Scale-Up,: Norway Case,” SCCS Workshop, May 26, 2017 • Rapid build-up of pressure during CO2 injection into Tubåen Formation – Attributed to injection into confined fluvial-deltaic channel system • Injection then diverted into Stø Formation (shoreface depositional environment) • More than 4 Mt injected since 2008 (1.1 Mt into Tubåen)
- 17. N. American Storage Capacity Estimates • Largest potential storage volume in saline aquifers • Wide variations in estimates • “Static” estimates – dynamic injectability factors not considered • Potential storage in oil and gas reservoirs < 10% of total 17 0 500 Low Mean High GtofCO2Storage CO2 Storage Capacity in O&G DOE O&G USGS O&G 0 50000 Low Mean High GtofCO2Storage Total CO2 Storage Capacity DOE Total USGS Total Sources: DOE 2015 Carbon Storage Atlas, USGS 2013 National Assessment of Geological CO2 Storage Resources
- 18. Impact of Dynamic Injectibility Factors Lower estimate – correlation of reservoir simulation estimates with formation volume – 6X lower than upper estimate 18 Source: Kearns et al., “Developing a consistent database for regional geologic CO2 storage capacity worldwide,” GHGT-13, 2016 Upper Estimate Lower Estimate Upper estimate – correlation of USGS static capacity estimates with formation volume
- 19. Global Storage Prospectivity 19 Source: Kearns et al., “Developing a consistent database for regional geologic CO2 storage capacity worldwide,” GHGT-13, 2016
- 20. Adequate Capacity in Most Regions 20 Source: Kearns et al., “Developing a consistent database for regional geologic CO2 storage capacity worldwide,” GHGT-13, 2016 Lower Estimate of Storage Capacity Supply Compared with Potential Demand for CCS, Gt
- 21. Cost of CO2 Transportation and Storage • Wide range of cost estimates: $10 – 30/ton • Cost components are site-specific and have large range of uncertainty: – Site Characterization – Wells – Pipelines and Facilities – Opex – Monitoring – Land Use – Legacy Well Remediation – Post-Injection Site Care
- 22. CO2-EOR History and Status • Began in Permian Basin in 1970s • Majority of projects in North America • Active pilot programs in Middle East, China, and elsewhere • Over 1 billion bbl oil produced to date • Over 1 Gt of CO2 injected, > 90% from natural sources • Estimated 480 billion bbl oil recovery potential with 139 Gt of storage with “best practice” CO2-EOR* 22 * IEAGHG, “CO2 Storage in Depleted Oilfields: Global Application Criteria for CO2 EOR,” IEA/CON/08/155, 2009
- 23. North American CO2-EOR 23 Source: “A Review of the CO2 Pipeline Infrastructure in the U.S.,” DOE/NETL-2014/1681, 2015
- 24. • Phased development initiated in 1984 • CO2 miscibly displaces trapped oil • Closed-loop – injection balances production • Goal: Minimize CO2 injected/bbl oil produced Means CO2 EOR Project 24
- 25. EOR project improves recovery and stores CO2 • Incremental EOR recovery of 12+% OOIP at 80% HCPV CO2 injected • All of purchased CO2 (18 million tons) retained in reservoir CO2 Injection Means CO2 Injection Results 25 Means Tertiary Oil Recovery 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% HCPVi CO2 %OOIPfromCO2 Means (San Andres) Other West Texas CO2 Floods 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% HCPVI CO2 %OOIPfromCO2 Means Other PB CO2 Floods Oil Recovery Recycle
- 26. Implications of CO2-EOR for CO2 Storage • Four decades of CO2-EOR experience provides confidence in feasibility of safe and secure CO2 storage – > 1 Gt injected with no measurable leakage to surface • CO2 replaces oil that has been trapped over geologic time • Closed-loop process maintains steady pressure • Well-established industry practices for well construction, operation, and abandonment – Pipeline networks provide model for linking CO2 sources and sinks – Adaptive reservoir management provides model for dealing with subsurface uncertainties • Similarity in relevant skills/technology required 26
- 27. Transitioning from CO2-EOR to Storage • CO2-EOR can be an important stepping stone to large-scale CO2 storage: − Majority of existing and planned CCS projects involve EOR − Envision transitioning to anthropogenic sources − Oil sales provide revenue source to offset cost of capture • Challenges: − EOR projects aim to minimize the amount and cost of CO2 purchased and left in the reservoir − Storage projects aim to maximize the amount of CO2 left in the reservoir − Aligning CO2 supply and demand 27
- 28. Summary • Dynamic injectability factors reduce CO2 storage capacity estimates − Hundreds of years of CO2 storage capacity is potentially available, even after accounting for dynamic limitations − Areal distribution of potential storage capacity is widely varied • Industry has a long history with CO2-EOR that provides a strong experience base for CO2 storage − CO2-EOR alone likely will be insufficient to meet emission reduction targets • Geologic and reservoir engineering studies are essential for identifying storage sites having adequate capacity, containment, and injectivity − Similarity in relevant skills and technology to O&G development 28
- 29. For More Information • Howard J. Herzog, “Carbon Capture,” MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series (2018) • F. M. Orr, Jr. “Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: An Update,” SPE Journal invited paper SPE 194190-PA (December 2018) • Global CCS Institute, “Global Status of CCS: 2018,” https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/
- 30. Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Program www.spe.org/dl 30 Your Feedback is Important Enter your section in the DL Evaluation Contest by completing the evaluation form for this presentation Visit SPE.org/dl #SPEDL
Editor's Notes
- #5: Recognize that CCS is a topic that can elicit strong opinions. Among SPE members, I’ve heard a full range of opinions from we should be doing more of it and faster to it’s a waste of time. Regardless of your opinion, I believe that SPE has a important role to play in ensuring that the discussion is informed by the best quality technical information and analyses. My goal today is to get you thinking about how you as an SPE member might contribute to the discussion.
- #6: At depths below about 800 m CO2 is more than 300 times as dense as at atmospheric conditions.
- #7: COP 21 agreement reached at the end of 2015 in Paris set an aspiration of no more than 2 deg C atmospheric temperature rise, corresponding to atmospheric CO2 concentration no more than 450 ppm. Actual pledges envision leveling at 40 GTA by 2045. The chart illustrates IEA’s forecast of the contribution of various GHG mitigation technologies in achieving this goal. Top of the curve is business as usual without any mitigation technologies. Bottom is reduction that would be required to achieve 2 deg C Efficiency and renewables are forecast biggest contributors, fuel switching and nuclear smaller CCS is forecast to contribute about 13% of the total emission reductions. 2 deg C aspiration cannot be achieved w/o CCS
- #10: CO2 that would otherwise be emitted to atmosphere is captured and injected into subsurface
- #12: Is there adequate subsurface capacity? Can it be injected at required rates without excessive pressure build up? Keeping buoyant and mobile fluid contained in subsurface
- #13: Chart summarizes widely publicized estimates of geologic CO2 storage capacity published in the IPCC SRCCS in 2005. What’s the basis? Do we believe the estimates? I’ll be coming back to the estimation of storage capacity later in my talk. Estimates suggest >100 years of potential storage capacity Wide variations in estimates Dynamic injectability factors not considered Largest potential storage volume in saline aquifers Significant potential storage in oil and gas reservoirs
- #14: Saline formations have largest potential capacity What have we learned from projects done to date with regard to the three big uncertainties, capacity, injectivity, and containment Large-scale projects injecting CO2 into saline formations.
- #15: Fundamental difference between EOR and storage is storage projects have potential for increasing reservoir pressure. No leakage observed from these or any other projects, containment has not been an issue
- #16: Fundamental difference between EOR and storage is storage projects have potential for increasing reservoir pressure. No leakage observed from these or any other projects, containment has not been an issue
- #17: Fundamental difference between EOR and storage is storage projects have potential for increasing reservoir pressure. No leakage observed from these or any other projects, containment has not been an issue
- #18: Over the next several slides we’ll turn our attention to storage capacity estimates and how learnings from these pioneering projects might be applied to come up with more refined estimates of worldwide storage capacity. USGS and DOE volumetric storage efficiency assessment assumes infinite time, full displacement of water, and no pressure constraint Estimates basically assume all reservoirs look like Sleipner Experience from operating CCS projects shows that some projects are limited by pressure/compartmentalization (Snøhvit & In Salah)
- #19: Work that ExxonMobil did in collaboration with MIT student Left side – all reservoirs look like Sleipner Right side – reservoirs look more like In Salah or Snovit
- #22: Next step is to go from the kind of screening-level capacity and cost estimates to assessment and design of actual projects. This is where SPE members can have an impact. We have the knowledge and skills to ensure the technical integrity of the work that is done.
- #23: Since majority of projects to date have involved EOR, what can we learn from these projects 1.75 bbl CO2 stored/bbl oil recovered Not always located in proximity to sources
- #24: Started with CO2 supplied from gas plants in Permian in 1970s. In 1980s and 90s major supply hubs were established around natural sources of nearly pure CO2 in southern CO, and MS and around La Barge gas processing plant in WY. Other projects tied to anthropogenic sources. Started with large anchor projects in best quality resources closest to pipeline hubs, expanding with time to poorer quality or more remote locations Existing infrastructure could be basis for getting CCS industry started and is model for how it might be implemented elsewhere
- #25: 24
- #26: 25