Presentation given by Auli Niemi of Uppsala University on "Quantification of Saline Aquifers for Geological Storage of CO2 – Experiences from MUSTANG Project" at the EC FP7 Projects: Leading the way in CCS implementation event, London, 14-15 April 2014

1. Quantification of Saline Aquifers for
Geological Storage of CO2 –
Experiences from
MUSTANG Project
Auli Niemi
Uppsala University, Sweden
and MUSTANG partners
Leading the way in CCS implementation Workshop
in London on 14-15 April 2014
Test
sites

2. Test
sites
MUSTANG is a large-scale integrating EU FP7 R&D
project (2009-2014), with 19 partners and 25 affiliated
organizatons (coordinated by Uppsala University)
Objective: to develop methodology and
understanding for the quantification of saline aquifers
for CO2 geological storage
7 field sites including
one deep injection experiment
and one shallow injection experiment
of CO2, as well as strong
laboratory experiment, process understanding and
modeling components
MUSTANG project

3. www.co2mustang.eu
Partners
____________________________________________________
Scientific Industial and Regulatory Advisory Board

4. Outline
• Project structure and some examples results
from different work packages
• Focus on the two CO2 injection experiments
• Link to the continuation EU FP7 projects that have
started (PANACEA, TRUST and CO2QUEST)
• Main summarizing reports coming summer 2014
• For detailed results, see the project webb-site
(www.co2mustang.eu)

7. Mustang Field Sites
Contributing: UU, SGU, UNOTT, CSIC, LIAG, UGÖTT,GII, IIT, EWRE, UB, CNRS, UEDIN
• Gain understanding
of possible site
characteristics and
their implications for
modeling
• Collect and analyze
site-specific data,
interpret it as input
parameters for
simulation models
• Simulations of CO2
injection and storage

8. South Scania Horstberg Valcele Hontomín Heletz
Character Multilayered
sequence of
heterogeneous as well
as uniform aquifers
Deep, low
permeable
aquifers
High temperature
Oil and gas field
Complex structural
setting
Large data set
Exploration site
Pre-investigation
phase
Abandoned oil field
Well known geology
Field test site
Structure Subhorisontal Inversion
structure
Multitrap folds Closed dome Anticline fold
No. wells 16 (21 ) 2 712 (2413) 4 40
Site model, km2 Regional c. 1000
Local: c. 10
c. 50 c. 5 c. 15 c. 20
Depth range, of
potential storage
layers
1100–1950 m 3700–4000 m 1100–2200 m 1400–1600 m 1380–1560 m
Age E. Cretaceous-Jurassic Early Triassic Neogene Jurassic Cretaceous
Thicknesses of
potential storage
layers
4–55 m 13–40 m 20–30 m 140 0.6–21
Main rock type Sandstone Sandstone Sandstone Limestone/dolomite Sandstone
Main seal rock type Claystone
Argillaceous
limestone
Claystone Marlstone
Clay
Marl Limestone
Shale, marl
Porosity, % 20–29 5–10 20–28 12-17 16–20
Permeability, mD 10–4000 <10 15–500 n.d. 100–250
1 In the local scale, 2in the 3D parameter model, 3 Total wells with data
Field Sites – Overview of properties

9. South Scania
Site, Sweden
M.Erlström, SGU

10. South Scania –
example simulations

11. Mustang Test Sites – major field activity
Contributing: UU, SGU, UNOTT, CSIC, LIAG, UGÖTT,GII, IIT, EWRE, UB, CNRS, UEDIN

13. Improving the field testing methods
Geophysical methodsCO2 Injection-
monitoring – sampling
system
Contributing: UU, UGÖTT,GII, EWRE, CNRS, Imageau, Vibrometric, CSIC,
Class VI Solutions, SageRider, Trimeric
Tracer techniques – e.g.
interface-specific tracers

15. Reservoir rock samples
Caprock samples
Reservoir properties
Fractured caprock
alteration
Initial state
Claystone
20µm
1mm
Laboratory Experiments - Synopsis
Percolation bench
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
980
990
1000
1010
1020
60°C
50°C
40°C
30°C
20°C
12°C
Density/kgm
-3
Pressure / MPa
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
980
990
1000
1010
1020
60°C
50°C
40°C
30°C
20°C
12°C
Density/kgm
-3
Pressure / MPa
Brine-CO2 mixture
properties
Contributing: CNRS, UGÖTT,
KIT, UEDIN, UU

16. Difficult to core we realized crushed samples
Example: Helez sandstone evolution when in contcact
with CO2 rich brine

17. CO2 rich-brine flow-through experiments at
Heletz storage conditions
Experimental conditions:
Q
(ml/min) t (h)
CO2
(mol/L)
PCO2
(Mpa)
M initial
(g)
Porosity initial
(%)
M final
(g)
Porosity final
(%) Brine
H1 0.05 93.05 0.11 1.80 5.16 22.80 5.12 24.12 Heletz Brine
H2 0.05 91.45 0.11 1.80 5.85 26.30 5.82 27.80 Heletz Brine
H3 0.30 28.62 0.11 1.80 5.48 15.10 5.46 16.70 Heletz Brine
H4 0.30 44.81 0.11 1.80 5.27 24.20 5.12 38.98
Heletz Brine eq,
Gypsum
H5 0.05 42.96 0.11 1.80 5.24 18.80 5.19 20.42
Heletz Brine eq,
Gypsum

18. CO2 rich-brine flow-through experiments at
Heletz storage conditions
Q
(ml/min) Brine
H1 0.05 Heletz Brine
H2 0.05 Heletz Brine
H3 0.30 Heletz Brine
H4 0.30
Heletz Brine eq,
Gypsum
H5 0.05
Heletz Brine eq,
Gypsum

19. • Supercritical CO2 will NOT pass
through caprock fractures but
• CO2 in its gas phase WILL diffuse
through caprock fractures under
reservoir conditions
• The mineralogy and petrology of the
caprock is unaltered by contact with
scCO2
CO2 flow through caprock
Fractured caprock sample
(38mm diameter, 49.6mm length)
Edlman et al

20. CO2-enriched brine flow-through experiment in fractured cement plugs
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
-0,00006
0,00000
0,00006
0,00012
0,00018
portlandite dissolution rate
mineralconcentration(mol/L)andrate(mol/L/hour)
distance from inlet (µm)
CALCITE
PORTLANDITE
carbonation rate
Numerical simulation
Calcite redissolution rate
Transition
(diss.>carbonation)
Gouze at al

22. Processes - Modeling
Develop a framework of process and simulation models
describing CO2 spreading and trapping
• Formulation of process models (Bear et al.)
• Relative significance of various processes for Key
Questions in geosequestration (Tsang C-F et al)
• Improvement of existing numerical simulators
- coupled Thermo-Hydro-Mechanical & Chemical
(THMC) system (Carrera et al.)
- treatment of scales (Dentz et al)
- Uncertainty due to heterogeneity (Cliffe et al)
- Rigorous analysis of some sub-processes
(Power et al)
Contributing: IIT, UU, CSIC, UCAM, EWRE, UEDIN

23. Example - Adding reactive chemistry to Code-Bright
– Saturation
– Porosity after calcite dissolution
CaCO3(s) + H+ = Ca2+ + HCO3
−
CO2(aq) = CO2(g)
H+ + HCO3
− = H2O + CO2(aq)
NaCl(s) = Na+ + Cl−
HCO3
− = H+ + CO3
2-
H2O = H+ + OH−
Saaltnik et al, 2012

24. Example: two-phase flow and transport with time dependent
tracer reaction/partitioning between the phases
X (m)
Z(m)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
-10
-5
0
15.5
16
X (m)
Z(m)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
-10
-5
0
0
0.2
0.4
Spatial distribution of simulated CO2 pressure at 16 days (unit: MPa)
Spatial distribution of simulated degree of CO2 saturation at 16 daysg
X (m)
Z(m)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
-10
-5
0
0.2
0.4
X (m)
Z(m)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
-10
-5
0
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
Spatial distribution of simulated tracer concentration in CO2 at 16 days
Spatial distribution of simulated tracer concentration in water at 16 days
Tong et al, TiPM, 2013

25. Upscaling
• For two-phase flow, transport, mechanics and chemistry
• Analytical approaches (Denz et al)
• Numerical approaches (effective parameters, dual/multi-porosity
approaches) (Yang et al.)

26. www.co2mustang.eu

27. MUSTANG CO2 injection experiments
Deep injection of supercritical
CO2 Heletz, Israel
- extensive monitoring and
modeling
- major financial component of
the project
Shallow injection of gaseous CO2
Maguelone, France
- cross-validation of certain
geophysical methods, especially
geoelectric, co-financing by CNRS
Pezard, CNRS

28. Maguelone shallow injection experiment
Pezard et al. 2011

29. Maguelone shallow experiment
• Injection of CO2 into a shallow
reservoir (13-16 m deep)
• Monitoring both from surface and
downhole, including high
frequency seismic and electrical
resistivity, pressure recording and
fluid sampling
• Three N2 injections during 2012
for tuning the field monitoring
strategy
• CO2 injection took place in
January 2013
• Project leader CNRS/ P. Pezard

30. Example of time-lapse electrical monitoring
Pressure and fluid sampling during CO2 injection
experiment, Jan 2013
• Analysis of the results underway, including modeling with TOUGH2 codes
Expected improvement of the ’knowledge gaps’
- Cross-validation of a suite of monitoring methods (electric, seismic and fluid
sampling/pressure monitoring)
- Model validation for CO2 gas transport in the shallow subsurface
Maguelone shallow injection experiment

31. Heletz deep injection
experiment
Scientifically motivated CO2 injection experiment of
scCO2 injection to a reservoir layer at 1600 m
depth, with sophisticated monitoring and
sampling

32. Objectives
• To gain understanding and
Develop methods to determine the
two key trapping mechanisms
of CO2 (residual trapping and
dissolution trapping) at field scale,
impact of heterogeneity
• Validation of predictive models,
measurement and monitoring
techniques
Site: a well-investigated
depleted oil reservoir
with saline water on the
edges (Heletz, Israel)
wells for field
experiments
Heletz CO2 injection experiment

33. Experiment scenarios
injection-withdrawal
of scCO2 and brine
zone of residual trapped scCO2
1. 2.
 Determine in-situ trapping parameters: residual & dissolution trapping
 Reduced influence of formation
heterogeneity
scCO2, brine
& tracers
sc CO2
push-pull dipole
 Heterogeneity affects migration and trapping
 Hydraulic tests
 Thermal tests
 Tracer tests
residual trapping
residual trapping
residual & dissolution trapping,
(& interfacial area)

34. Experiment scenarios
injection-withdrawal
of scCO2 and brine
zone of residual trapped scCO2
1. 2.
 Determine in-situ trapping parameters: residual & dissolution trapping
 Reduced influence of formation
heterogeneity
scCO2, brine
& tracers
sc CO2
push-pull dipole
 Heterogeneity affects migration and trapping
 Hydraulic tests
 Thermal tests
 Tracer tests
residual trapping
residual trapping
residual & dissolution trapping,
(& interfacial area)

35. Simulated response in (1) temperature , (2) pressure in the bottom
of well and (c) tracer BTC for different values of Sgr
Option 1:
Residual
zone
created
by
injecting
CO2
saturated
water
Option 2:
Residual
zone
created
by CO2
injection
followed by
fluid
withdrawal
Rasmusson et al, (2013) manuscript in review IJGHGC

36. Experiment scenarios
injection-withdrawal
of scCO2 and brine
zone of residual trapped scCO2
1. 2.
 Determine in-situ trapping parameters: residual & dissolution trapping
 Reduced influence of formation
heterogeneity
scCO2, brine
& tracers
sc CO2
push-pull dipole
 Heterogeneity affects migration and trapping
 Hydraulic tests
 Thermal tests
 Tracer tests
residual trapping
residual trapping
residual & dissolution trapping,
(& interfacial area)

37. Clear correlation between tracer enrichment in
CO2 and dissolution of mobile CO2
Example of dipole CO2 injection - simulation

38. • Field activities underway since
Jan 2011
• Well opening attempts
(Jan 2011-July 2011) in two existing wells
failed > re-evaluation of the plan +
additional fund raising (especially Lapidoth
company contributions)
• drilling of two new wells
during 2012
Progress of field work

39. Progress of field work
• Drilling activities;
Well 1: drilling Feb-May 2012, cementing and casing May
2012, perforating Sep 2012
Well 2: drilling July-Sept 2012, cementing and casing
completed Feb 2013
• Core samples for testing September 2012
• Geophysical baseline Dec 2012
• Pre-injection hydraulic and tracer testing started in May 2013,
well clogging/stimulation autumn 2013, hydraulic tests
continued Dec 2013-2014
• Well instumentation and injection
kit; Jan-April 2014
• CO2 injection spring-summer 2014

40. Heletz site – Caprock and Target layers
Shtivelman et al, GII, 2012
Heletz 18A (Pezard, 2012)
Heletz 18B (Pezard, 2012)

41. Heletz site – Caprock and Target layers
Shtivelman et al, GII, 2012
Heletz 18A (Pezard, 2012)
Heletz 18B (Pezard, 2012)

43. Example XRD results from Heletz H-18
Typical Heletz Well H-18 sandstone core
Typical Heletz Well H-18 caprock core
Edlmann et al, Edinburgh Univ

44. Laboratory testing of the rock samples
• petrophysical properties, permeability, relative
permeability, capillary pressure, mineral
composition, rock mechanical properties
• behavior of rock (and fractures) when in contact
with CO2 and/or CO2/brine mixtures
Laboratories: CNRS, Univ. of Edinburgh, University of
Göttingen, Stanford University, Luleå University of
Technlogy, Uppsala University

45. Examples of porosity and permeability estimates
Sample
name
Porosity (%) Bulk volume
(cc)
Grain volume
(cc)
Heletz
caprock A
7.78 81.03 74.72
Heletz
caprock B
10.82 47.94 42.76
Heletz
caprock C
8.36 75.24 68.95
Heletz
caprock D
Sample damaged
Heletz
caprock E
8.81 71.81 65.48
Heletz
caprock F
5.75 77.38 72.93
Heletz
sandstone
27.94 35.67 25.71
Porosity, bulk volume and grain volume Porosity based on MICP curves
Results (Helium porosity) Univ Stanford (S. Benson et al.)
Univ Edinburgh (Edlmann et at)
Permeability so far tested by four groups (Stanford, LIAG, CNRS, Univ
Edinburg) and values vary between 100 to 400 mD

46. Two-phase characteristic functions
Benson et al, 2013 (Stanford Univ)

47. Heletz sandstone flow experiment
• Sandstone cores disintegrated during
35,000ppm brine vacuum saturation
• Due to ease of disintegration careful
management of injection and
production rates, sand production
screen over injection and production
wells or other sand management
techniques
• Caprock does not react negatively
when in contact with CO2

48. Pre-injection tests
• Hydraulic and thermal tests started in May 2013
• Well clogging > well stimulation during autumn 2013
• Hydraulic testing Dec 2013 show very good permeability;
700 mD horizontal, >100 mD vertical (core samples show
values between 100 mD and 400 mD

49. Injection well instrumentation – Jan 2014
• Fluid injection and withdrawal, fluid
sampling, pressure, temperature
monitoring (instrumentation Class VI
Solutions, SageRider, Trimeric)

50. CO2 injection experiment in the coming months

51. • Heletz experimental CO2 injection site is being
developed within EU FP7 project MUSTANG and will
be continued in subsequent EU FP7 projects
• Panacea – project focusing on long term effects
of CO2 geological storage, is a modeling project
(2012-2014) (led by EWRE, Israel
• TRUST – project continuing and expanding the
field experiment of MUSTANG (sizeable injection,
testing different modes of injection etc.) (Nov. 2012-
Nov 2017)(led by EWRE, Israel)
• CO2QUEST – project focusing on effect of
impurities of CO2 stream (March 2013- Feb 2016)
(led by UCL, England)
Continuation projects

52. Acknowledgements:
- all Heletz/MUSTANG partners but especially providing material here
- J. Bensabat (EWRE); P. Pezard (CNRS)
- F. Fagerlund (UU)
- K. Rasmusson (UU)
- M. Rasmusson (UU)
- K. Edlmann (Univ Edinburgh)
- T. Lange (Univ Göttingen)
- P. Gouze (CNRS), L.Luquot (CNRS,CSIC)
- V. Shtivelman (GII)
- S. Benson, F. Hingerl, R. Pini (Stanford)
- B. Freifeld (Class VI Solutions)

53. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !
Contact: auli.niemi@geo.uu.se
Webb-page: www.co2mustang.eu
Acknowledgement: EU FP7 framework program project no: 227286