Engineering topics
Hovorka, Susan
Publications and source records attributed to Hovorka, Susan.
Roads to Removal: Options for Carbon Dioxide Removal in the United States
Our analysis shows it is feasible for the United States to remove a staggering amount of CO 2 from the air—this will be critical to becoming carbon neutral by 2050. Our comprehensive, first-of-its-kind, county-resolution analysis indicates that our country can accomplish this goal by relying on demonstrated technology, natural resources, and workforces we already have. Additionally, ongoing technology development can lower costs, shorten timelines, and deliver new solutions. Our analysis evaluated how we can use forests, cropland soils, and waste biomass, along with purpose-built machines, to get us to net-zero. Further, we considered community impacts and identified locations where certain solutions could be uniquely beneficial or potentially counterproductive. Our findings enable decisionmakers to weigh both opportunities and constraints and to decide what roads to use to meet our national climate goal for net-zero CO 2 emissions.
Results of Storage Complex Readiness Evaluation
In this report, the results from Task 4.2.1 and 2.1.b are used to evaluate storage complex readiness. In this subtask we compare the results of the traditional formation-by-formation storage assessment to a new method designed to consider all the potential storage resource. This work has been in part coordinated with a study funded as part of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory led “Road to Removal” study. This overview is a at national scale and places the SECARB region in that context.
Evaluation of Improvements in Storage Efficiencies, Containment, Assurance, CO 2 Plume Movement, and Verification of Storage Technologies
This report summarizes some of the evolving improvements in key technical skills that are developing to support a large-scale commercial application of CCS as well as support rapidly increasing interest in carbon negative technologies. It does not attempt to review relatively well-known processes and procedures that are familiar to many CCS experts; rather focuses on novel concepts that have the potential to provide breakthroughs and add high benefit as projects evolve. Some elements described are in development or not yet proven ideas for which we provide an expression of status of confidence at the time of writing. Topics covered are evaluation of improvements in storage efficiency estimation, containment assurance methods, CO 2 plume movement and pressure prediction, and monitoring and verification of storage methods.
Southeast Regional CO 2 Utilization and Storage Acceleration Partnership (SECARB-USA): Needs Assessment Framework for Storage Complexes Contributed to EDX (Work Product 2.1.c)
On September 30, 2021, a Needs Assessment Framework for Storage Complexes was completed for the SECARB-USA region by the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) and The University of Texas at Austin Bureau of Economic Geology (UT-BEG). The Needs Assessment Framework for Storage Complexes documented a region-wide assessment to identify data needed to advance storage projects at sites of relevance to industrial, academic, and government stakeholders. The region-wide assessment addresses the needs of CO2 source, storage, and utilization stakeholders, finance and insurance institutions, state and local government agencies, local stakeholders at prospective storage complexes, environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and others as identified by the Partners. This assessment was tested against various potential storage sites and modified to include site-specific issues, such as surface or pore space rights. The framework was provided to stakeholders for review and then used in other tasks, such as the ML initiative (Subtask 3.4) and storage complex readiness evaluation (Subtask 4.2). In accordance with the SOPO, this assessment satisfied completion of Work Product 2.1.b. The OSTI ID is 3015803, and the DOI link is https://doi.org/10.2172/3015803. On February 28, 2022, SSEB uploaded Work Product 2.1.b to NETL’s Energy Data eXchange (EDX). As such, Work Product 2.1.c is completed as documented below.
Assessing Impacts on Pressure Stabilization and Leasing Acreage for CO 2 Storage Utilizing Oil Migration Concepts
Favorable geological storage for CO 2 has long been pictured as large anticlines with thick sandstones, similar to oil reservoirs in the petroleum system. Unlike oil, however, stored CO 2 does not need to be recoverable, which raises the possibility of using dissolution and residual trapping to augment the capacity of buoyant traps and tap more of the bulk rock volume. The work presented builds on that idea, asking the following question: If we inject CO 2 down to a syncline – analogous to the carrier bed in the petroleum system – how would this injection mechanism impact storage capacity and plume shape, migration, and stabilization? To address this question, we built a reservoir model, based on seismic interpretation of Middle Miocene strata, offshore Galveston, Texas. 3-D seismic and well logs were used to characterize key intervals. Reservoirs chosen for modeling are progradational-aggradational sands with mud intercalation. They have a higher degree of heterogeneity than the more conventional reservoirs commonly targeted for CO 2 storage. Modeling investigated how far the CO 2 plume would migrate under two scenarios: (1) injecting CO 2 at the base of the salt withdrawal basin (syncline scenario) and (2) injecting CO 2 at the base of the structural closure, similar to a common injection well location for EOR purposes (base scenario). For each scenario, we separately simulated injection of 30 MT of CO 2 and 60 MT of CO 2 continuously for 30 years and observe the plume and pressure evolution for 100 years after the injection stops. The simulation shows that injecting the CO 2 into a syncline limits the vertical migration of CO 2 , thus making synclinal injection more secure. In the syncline scenario, the geological layer around the injection point is more heterogeneous than the layer in the base scenario; thus, the CO 2 tends to migrate laterally. Additionally, in the syncline scenario, the plume does not even reach the upper part of the anticline, allowing us to safely store an additional amount of CO 2 into the reservoir. Furthermore, the simulation also shows that in the syncline scenario, the times needed for the reservoir to reach its stabilized pressure after the end of injections are faster. To summarize, CO 2 injection at the base of a syncline could provide additional storage, increase the safety of the project from the limited vertical plume migration, and expedite plume stabilization, which could result in the decrease of monitoring frequency as the project runs, thus lowering the operating cost of the project in the long run.
SECARB-USA: Needs Assessment Framework for Storage Complexes (Task 2.1.b)
A team of SECARB storage experts examined 63 formations at 39 sites that were selected to represent the range of diversity of newly assessed, as well as well-advanced, storage prospects in the SECARB region. We inventoried the data needs triggered by the requirements to obtain a Class VI UIC storage permit, the data needs that results from the requirement to create geocellular fluid flow models to support that permit, and by pragmatic and best practice inputs such as public acceptance, regulatory readiness, and pore space leasing. We anchored both the needs inventory and the processes for and cost of meeting the needs with data from 9 sites in in the SECARB area that have advanced far in characterization. Results show that the total cost of characterization prior to obtaining a permit is convergent, because the permit and modeling requirements drive projects to obtain the same types of data for all cases. The high cost data that control cost are 1) drilling, coring, core-testing, logging, sampling and testing a characterization well and 2) collection of a 3-D seismic survey to map reservoir and confining system properties over the area of the plume or the area of elevated pressure. In 5 of our case study sites we determined that one or both of these costs could be avoided because the needs are met by available data.
Southeast Regional CO 2 Utilization and Storage Acceleration Partnership (SECARB-USA): Needs Assessment Framework for Storage Complexes
A team of SECARB storage experts examined 63 formations at 39 sites that were selected to represent the range of diversity of newly assessed, as well as well-advanced, storage prospects in the SECARB region. We inventoried the data needs triggered by the requirements to obtain a Class VI UIC storage permit, the data needs that results from the requirement to create geocellular fluid flow models to support that permit, and by pragmatic and best practice inputs such as public acceptance, regulatory readiness, and pore space leasing. We anchored both the needs inventory and the processes for and cost of meeting the needs with data from 9 sites in in the SECARB area that have advanced far in characterization.
Geologic Risk Assessment Activities at SECARB Cranfield, MS Site
Risk Assessment (RA) of RCSP Phase 3 sites is a DOE requirement and valuable to DOE’s program because this process encourage careful consideration of elements that could damage an individual project, or if severe ,damage credibility and public commercial acceptance of the sequestration process. Poor outcomes even from small projects can have negative consequences larger than the cost to the individual project. In addition, practice in risk assessment compared to project evolution is needed as part of the confidence-building toward future large scale, long term industrial activities.
SECARB Post Injection Assessment Report
The Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) managed the overall Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB) Phase III project and The Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG), at the University of Texas at Austin, managed all activities associated with the Early Test field site near Cranfield, Mississippi (the Early Test or Cranfield Project). The SECARB project at Cranfield was focused downdip of the oil rim and on demonstrating the stacked nature of the storage potential at this location: enhanced oil recovery (EOR) up-dip and saline downdip. Because the injection for EOR continued after the SECARB project ended, no actual post-injection period occurred. However, information collected during the SECARB-monitored injection period, including pressure and CO2 plume position, was utilized in an EOR carbon lifecycle assessment. The carbon lifecycle assessment provided insight on tracking injection fronts and production efficiencies across the field. To complete the post injection assessment, taking into account the continuing EOR period after closeout of SECARB field activities, this report provides data and analysis done under another DOE-funded project. The follow up project focused on the carbon lifecycle of EOR and included an assessment of EOR at as-operated and under possible future scenarios. This work was published by Hossieni et al. (2018) and Hosseininoosheri (2019).
SECARB-USA: A Sub-Basin Framework for Future CO 2 Infrastructure Development
Task 4 of the SECARB-USA Project is designed to evaluate the regional needs and challenges for the development of a safe and environmentally sound CO 2 transport infrastructure. This infrastructure would transport CO 2 capture from power generating plants and/or industrial sources and distribute it to oil fields for associated storage in EOR operations, saline storage, and/or other suitable storage sites. The objective of this report on Sub-Basin Prospective Areas (Deliverable 4.1.a), is to provide the framework for understanding how regional infrastructure development could occur. The sub-basin prospective areas, in conjunction with the locations of CO 2 sources and pipeline infrastructure (for source-sink matching networks), form the basis for the analysis that will be performed in the Techno-Economic Analysis of Infrastructure Buildout Scenarios (Deliverable 4.1.b).
Southeast Regional CO 2 Utilization and Storage Acceleration Partnership (SECARB-USA): A Sub-Basin Framework for Future CO 2 Infrastructure Development (Task 4.1.a)
The “Southeast Regional CO 2 Utilization and Storage Acceleration Partnership” (SECARB-USA) project supports the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy's (FE) mission to help the United States meet its need for secure, affordable, and environmentally sound fossil energy supplies by utilizing the advancements made since 2003 by the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (RCSP) Initiative to continue to identify and address knowledge gaps. The SECARB-USA regional initiative encompasses the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and portions of Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia as noted in Figure 1.1. The primary objective of the project is to identify and address regional onshore storage and transport challenges facing commercial deployment of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technologies.
Southeast Regional CO 2 Utilization and Storage Acceleration Partnership (SECARB-USA): Needs Assessment Framework
The goal of this task is to develop an assessment to identify data needed to advance geologic storage projects, with a focus on the SECARB region. The GCCC team considers the needs of CO 2 source, storage, and utilization operators and stakeholders, finance and insurance institutions, state and local government relators and agencies, property owners, local stakeholders at prospective storage complexes, and environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Many of these needs are spelled out in the requirements of the Class VI permit. However, at the initial stages of project development, the workflow will not start with permit writing. A number of other factors must be evaluated prior to this major investment. The team’s goal in this report is to inventory the range of typical needs of for a wide variety of projects. For subsequent tasks, the team will consider how these needs vary among projects and through the stages of investment, so that project developers can plan the early stages of capitalization.
SECARB-USA: Needs Assessment Framework for Storage Complexes
The goal of this task is to develop an assessment to identify data needed to advance geologic storage projects, with a focus on the SECARB region. The GCCC team considers the needs of CO2 source, storage, and utilization operators and stakeholders, finance and insurance institutions, state and local government relators and agencies, property owners, local stakeholders at prospective storage complexes, and environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Many of these needs are spelled out in the requirements of the Class VI permit. However, at the initial stages of project development, the workflow will not start with permit writing. A number of other factors must be evaluated prior to this major investment. The team’s goal in this report is to inventory the range of typical needs for a wide variety of projects. For subsequent tasks, the team will consider how these needs vary among projects and through the stages of investment, so that project developers can plan the early stages of capitalization.
SECARB-USA: Data Quality Methodology
SECARB-USA Deliverable 4.2.1 utilizes the outputs from the Needs Assessment (Subtask 2.1) to develop a data quality methodology. Many types of data are needed to evaluate a site for technical and financial viability. Several inventories of data types have been produced (for example NETL, 2010). The objective here is to organize the data types so that the needs met are specified. From this cross index (Table 1 in the Appendix), it will be possible in future tasks to (1) determine, on a site-specific basis, how much of each data type is required at each stage of a project to meet the need, and conversely (2) to further specify and define the data collection methods applied such that the data are tailored to fit that need. Derivative tables can then be developed to semi-quantitively evaluate the extent to which need is critical for early go/no-go decision points, or if it is more important than average, requiring faster or larger capitalization and spend to meet the need. In an additional step, the current availability of data for a site can be semi-quantitively assessed. From the table of data criticality and the table of data availability, site-specific cost for meeting the data needs can be determined, and allow a pre-permit spend estimated for a portfolio of projects.
Southeast Regional CO 2 Utilization and Storage Acceleration Partnership (SECARB-USA): Data Quality Methodology (4.2.1)
SECARB-USA Deliverable 4.2.1 utilizes the outputs from the Needs Assessment (Subtask 2.1) to develop a data quality methodology. Many types of data are needed to evaluate a site for technical and financial viability. Several inventories of data types have been produced (for example NETL, 2010). The objective here is to organize the data types so that the needs met are specified. From this cross index (Table 1 in the Appendix), it will be possible in future tasks to (1) determine, on a site-specific basis, how much of each data type is required at each stage of a project to meet the need, and conversely (2) to further specify and define the data collection methods applied such that the data are tailored to fit that need. Derivative tables can then be developed to semi-quantitively evaluate the extent to which need is critical for early go/no decision points, or if it is more important than average, requiring faster or larger capitalization and spend to meet the need. In an additional step, the current availability of data for a site can be semi-quantitively assessed. From the table of data criticality and the table of data availability, site-specific cost for meeting the data needs can be determined, and allow a pre-permit spend estimated for a portfolio of projects. All of the data needs to evaluate a site are somewhat interconnected. We used criterion (2) above to determine if the data collection design would have to be modified to meet the need; if this was commonly true a linkage was shown. The application of this cross index to sites in the subsequent tasks will demonstrate that the demand for data types varies site-to-site and project-to-project. Examples of factors to be considered are the complexity of the geology, the injection goals such as rate and duration of the injection, and the types of risk and risk tolerance of key stakeholders. In future tasks the team will compare the demand for data with existing data availability. This will, in turn, determine when data needs to be acquired to support project development. For example, in a project area with complex structure, 3-D seismic data may be needed earlier and more urgently than in an area with simple rock body geometries. In some locations, a 3-D seismic survey has already been collected and can be purchased. In other locations the project developer will need to collect these data. For another example, a project near an urban area or near to a park may generate earlier and more substantive public concern than a site that is developed in mined lands. A calculation using the derivative from table 1 will show the different investment needs. Project cost will vary corresponding to data criticality and data availability.
SECARB Semi-Annual Field Review Reports - Early Test
The Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) managed the overall Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB) Phase III project and The Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG), at the University of Texas at Austin, managed all activities associated with the Early Test field site near Cranfield, Mississippi (the Early Test or Cranfield Project). BEG was assisted in the management of site activities by Sandia Technologies (Sandia). BEG and Sandia implemented reporting procedures that included monthly and quarterly technical progress reports, as well as periodic reporting on key field activities. Subsequent sections of this report catalog the field activities and are organized in a semiannual chronology. The Cranfield Project was located approximately 12 miles east of Natchez, Mississippi. Denbury Onshore, LLC, began operating a commercial CO 2 flood of the field (using the subsurface injection of CO 2 for EOR) in June 2008. Carbon dioxide from the Jackson Dome, a natural source near Jackson, Mississippi, was delivered to the Cranfield oilfield via pipeline. Beginning in October 2008, the SECARB Early Test team characterized the surface and subsurface of the Cranfield site. During the field test CO 2 was injected into the lower Tuscaloosa Formation, a regionally extensive saline formation with the potential to hold millions of tons of CO 2 emissions. By January 2015, the team injected more than 11 million metric tons of CO 2 and monitored a total stored CO 2 mass of 5,326,975 metric tons. SECARB’s study operations occurred in four integrated research program areas within Cranfield field: (1) the High Volume Injection Test area (HiVIT); (2) the Detailed Area of Study (DAS); (3) the Geomechanical area; and (4) the near-surface observatory, also called the “P-site.” Carbon dioxide injection activities were conducted at the HiVIT and the DAS. Figure 1.1-1 provides a depiction of the DAS.
SECARB Offshore GoM & GoMCarb Joint Partnership Meeting Presentation Packet
SOUTHEAST REGIONAL CARBON STORAGE PARTNERSHIP: OFFSHORE GULF OF MEXICO: Presentations from 2020 Joint Partnership Meeting with GoMCarb Project