CCS Projects Integration Workshop - London 3Nov11 - Schlumberger - The Timing of Storage Site Characterization
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

CCS Projects Integration Workshop - London 3Nov11 - Schlumberger - The Timing of Storage Site Characterization

on

  • 1,179 views

This presentation was given at the Global CCS Institute/CSLF meeting on CCS Project Integration that was held in London on 3 November 2011. The aim of the meeting was to share experiences on CCS ...

This presentation was given at the Global CCS Institute/CSLF meeting on CCS Project Integration that was held in London on 3 November 2011. The aim of the meeting was to share experiences on CCS project integration; and to identify priority integration topics that need further attention to facilitate CCS project development and deployment.
You can view more presentations from the event at http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/community/blogs/authors/klaasvanalphen/2011/11/25/presentations-global-ccs-institutecslf-meeting-ccs

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,179
Views on SlideShare
786
Embed Views
393

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0

7 Embeds 393

http://www.globalccsinstitute.com 385
http://decarboni.se 2
http://ccsinst.gccsidev.com 2
http://dpub200.local 1
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 1
http://gccsidev.com 1
http://www.gccsidev.com 1
More...

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

CCS Projects Integration Workshop - London 3Nov11 - Schlumberger - The Timing of Storage Site Characterization CCS Projects Integration Workshop - London 3Nov11 - Schlumberger - The Timing of Storage Site Characterization Presentation Transcript

  • The Timing of Storage Site Characterisation AK (Tony) Booer Nov 3, 2011 Global CCS Institute / CSLF Meeting on Project Integrationwww.slb.com/carbonservices
  • The Global Status of CCS: 2011From the Executive Summary...“Information from project proponents indicates that storage assessment and characterisation requires considerable investment and can have long lead Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public times of five to 10 years or more for a greenfield storage site, depending on the existing available geologic information about the site.”“Policymakers need to factor these lead times into their assessment of a project’s progress. Projects that have not yet commenced active storage assessment may have a challenge to achieve operation before 2020.”
  • The Timing of Storage Site CharacterisationA Key Question:● What is the storage for ? Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public ― “Demo” project ? ― Large-scale storage site characterisation ?? ― Enhanced Oil Recovery ???Another one:● Where is the CO2 coming from ?
  • Timing of Storage Site CharacterizationInternational / National / Regional / Project levelUS DOE Carbon Sequestration European NER-300 funding: Program Goals: [by 2015]Deliver technologies & best practices Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public 8 CCS projects, of which: [by 2020] that provide Carbon Capture and Safe Storage (CCSS) ● Min 1, Max 3 in the following with: categories: pre-combustion, post- combustion, oxy-fuel and industrial● 90% CO2 capture at source applications● 99% storage permanence ● Min 3 with saline aquifers &● < 10% (pre), < 35% (oxy, post) Min 3 with depleted increase in COE hydrocarbon reservoirs ● Min size threshold: 250 MW. Min capture efficiency: 85%.
  • 5
  • Illinois Basin – Decatur ProjectA collaboration of● the MGSC,● the Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public ― CO2 source + site location● Schlumberger Carbon Services ― Storage and monitoring● Trimeric, ― Compression & dehydration● and other subcontractors to inject 1 million metric tons of anthropogenic CO2 at a depth of ~7,000 ft (~2,000 m) to test geological carbon sequestration in a saline formation at a site in Decatur, Illinois 6
  • CO2 Storage in the North Sea– Industry Potential 7
  • Industry Best Practices “While the analysis in Site Screening and Site Selection relies primarily on existing data, Initial Characterization involves the acquisition of new, site-specific data by employing investigative tools and techniques. Initial Characterization tools include both data collection (e.g., seismic and well logging, core analysis, injectivity tests) and development of three-dimensional (3D) mathematical Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public models of the selected injection and confining zone(s). The successful characterization of a site is the most important step in ensuring the safe and economic operation of a CO2 GS site. “Source: US DOE NETL – Best Practices for: Site Screening, Site Selection,and Initial Characterization for Storage of CO2 in Deep Geologic Formations
  • CarbonWorkFlowprocess for long-term CO2 storage CO2 Injection Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Development Closure Appraisal / Characterization Post closure Performance Management & Risk Control Pre Selection Post liability transfer Pre-injection Injection Post-injectionCarbonWorkFlow* mark 9
  • CarbonWorkFlow Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public CarbonWorkFlow* process for long-term CO2 storage enabling assessment and management of risk in every phase of a project. *Mark of Schlumberger
  • Oil & Gas business approach to front-end risk... Studies, models, risk assessment & campaign drilling The exploration & Production Business Explore Learned to Diversify Front End Risks - Find & Develop a combination Explore Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public of specific sub-surface conditions Explore Explore Explore Appraise Develop Produce Explore Explore Volume • Seismic • LogsDiversify Risks Across • Pressures• Plays & Prospects Rate• Joint Ventures • Logs• Technology / Costs Thanks to A J Garnett • Samples• Scale • Tests • Extended Well Tests
  • ...but what’s happening in the CO2 world ? Studies, models, site selection & one “best shot” - less drilling, - more & more complex modelling, - no Extended Well Testing equiv. Explore too early narrowing - more reliance on lab-tests Explore down to single options - no long term field calibration (yet) (but natural analogues) Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Explore Explore Explore & Appraise Develop Inject Explore Containment ? Complex modellingDiversify • “Sealing” Models Reactive flow No. of “prospect tests” required for 90%Risks ? • Lab studies Coupled processes confidence in at least one getting to FID ? Rate • flow, • Logs • E&P Prospects 6–8 • mechanical, • Models • chemical • CO2 sites 2 – 4 ?? • Samples & lab Capacity Extensive modelling • Seismic Full-earth • Logs Emissions (source terms)
  • Commercialization timeline, costs and uncertainty Possible site Probable site Approved site Construction Injection Equalization Closure Cumulative Cost Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Uncertainty 0 5 yrs 30 yrs 35 yrs 100+ Risk Control & Performance Assessment * Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume)
  • 1-Study existing data and start risk methodology Possible site Probable site Approved site Construction Injection Equalization Closure Cumulative Cost Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Desktop Studies (pennies per ton) Uncertainty 0 5 yrs 30 yrs 35 yrs 100+ Risk Control & Performance Assessment * Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume)
  • 2-Collect and analyze new data Possible site Probable site Approved site Construction Injection Equalization Closure Cumulative Cost models Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Desktop Studies (pennies per ton) wells and seismic Collect Data Build Models Uncertainty ( ~50 cents / ton ) 0 5 yrs 30 yrs 35 yrs 100+ Risk Control & Performance Assessment * Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume)
  • 3-Design, permit and build Possible site Probable site Approved site Construction Injection Equalization Closure Cumulative Cost models Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Desktop Studies (pennies per ton) wells and seismic Collect Data Design and Build Models Permit Build Uncertainty (~50 cents / ton) (<10 cents / ton) (~$1 / ton) 0 5 yrs 30 yrs 35 yrs 100+ Risk Control & Performance Assessment * Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume)
  • 4-Operations Possible site Probable site Approved site Construction Injection Equalization Closure monitor Cumulative Cost models Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Desktop Studies (pennies per ton) update wells and seismic gather models data Operate Site 3 Mton/yr ( dollars / ton ) Collect Data Design and Build Models Permit Build Uncertainty (~50 cents / ton) (<10 cents / ton) (~$1 / ton) 0 5 yrs 30 yrs 35 yrs 100+ Risk Control & Performance Assessment * Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume)
  • 5-Closure and post closure Possible site Probable site Approved site Construction Injection Equalization Closure monitor Cumulative Cost models Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Desktop Studies (pennies per ton) update wells and seismic gather models data Operate Site Environmental 3 Mton/yr Monitoring ( dollars / ton ) ( pennies / ton ) Collect Data Design and Build Models Permit Build Uncertainty (~50 cents / ton) (<10 cents / ton) (~$1 / ton) 0 5 yrs 30 yrs 35 yrs 100+ Risk Control & Performance Assessment * Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume)
  • Variables – which control Timing Scale? Learning Curve? Possible site Probable site Approved site Construction Injection Equalization Closure $500M – $1B Property Rights? -Capex? / Opex? monitor Cumulative Cost Public Acceptance? Market Forces? Exploration Cost ? ( success rate ?) models FID Confidence ? Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public Desktop Studies (~pennies per ton) Regulatory Req’s $150M Quality Std, update wells and seismic gather models Liability ? data $50M Operate Site Environmental 3 Mton/yr Monitoring ( dollars / ton ) ( ~pennies / ton ) Collect Data Design and Build Models Permit Build Uncertainty $1M (~50 cents / ton) (<10 cents / ton) (~$1 / ton) 0 Discount Rate? 5 yrs 30 yrs 35 yrs 100+ Risk Control & Performance Assessment * Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume)
  • CO2 Storage in the North Sea– Industry Potential 20
  • Illinois Basin – Decatur ProjectPhase III Awarded December 2007Major Project Elements:● Underground Injection Control (UIC) permitting: January 2008-October 2011 ― application, hearing, minor modification, major modification, completion reports… Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public● Injection well drilled: February 14 - May 4, 2009● Geophone well drilled: November 2009● Baseline 3D seismic survey completed: January 2010● Compression / dehydration / pipeline facility ― design, procurement, construction, testing, February 2009-October 2011● Monitoring well drilled, cased: Sept-Nov 2010● Monitoring well completion: May-June 2011● Completion Report to Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): August 2011● Permission to Inject: early November 2011● Initiate injection: Next Week ?… (ramp quickly up to 1000 tonnes per day) 21
  • Timing of Storage Site Characterization● At a National, and individual project level, storage is generally on the critical path now.● To move to the next level of certainty, special efforts to collect, Schlumberger Public Schlumberger Public evaluate, and integrate new data in order to qualify large-scale storage sites are needed.● Each site is different (as usual!)● What is the storage for ?● Where is the CO2 coming from ?