Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Kelley, Mark

Publications and source records attributed to Kelley, Mark.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

MRCI - Final Technical Report

The objective of the Midwest Regional Carbon Initiative (MRCI) project was to implement a collaborative Regional Initiative to accelerate the deployment of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) in the Midwest-Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic areas of the United States. This area encompasses a 20-state region with much of the country’s carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The MRCI project is co-led by Battelle Memorial Institute (Battelle) in Columbus, Ohio, and the Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS) in Champaign, Illinois, and benefitted from the experience these organizations have acquired over the past 10-plus years leading two Department of Energy (DOE) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs): the Midwestern Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP), led by Battelle, and the Midwest Geologic Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), led by the ISGS.

CCS↗
DOE OSTI2025

MRCI Subtask 2.1: Defining Sub-Regional Carbon Storage Systems Final Technical Summary Report

In order to assess the regional and subregional geologic framework of the MRCI area and expand carbon dioxide (CO2) storage characterization efforts in this larger region, the current state of geologic knowledge relative to carbon storage (CS) has been summarized by compiling available geologic data and interpretive results into a centralized resource under Subtask 2.1. The MRCI region is a large area, which includes (1) part of the Forest City Basin and Western Arches, (2) Illinois Basin, (3) Upper Mississippi Embayment, (4) Michigan Basin, (5) Central Arches, (6) Appalachian Basin, and (7) Atlantic Coastal Plain and West Atlantic basins. Basins and arches are subdivided into areas of similar geology based on geologic structures and state-specific stratigraphic nomenclature. A concerted effort was made to present the current understanding of rock-unit stratigraphy in the subsurface of each basin and arch region (and subdivisions therein). Rock units are characterized based on their relative CS potential (saline reservoirs, confining intervals, etc.) within CS systems. CS systems are defined by regional confining units (usually thick, widespread shales), and contain all reservoirs and strata between the regional confining units. Report Authors – Steve Greb and Tom Sparks (Kentucky Geological Survey), Mark Kelley, Sanjay Mawalkar, John Hershberger, Priya Ravi Ganesh, Derrick James, and Stuart Skopec (Battelle), Charles Bopp, Yaghoob Lasemi and Hannes Leetaru (deceased) (Illinois State Geological Survey), Kristin Carter (Pennsylvania Geological Survey), William Harrison (Michigan Geological Repository for Research and Education – Michigan Geological Survey), Susan Pool (West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey), James McDonald (Ohio Geological Survey), John Schmelz (Rutgers University), Ryan Clark (Iowa Geological Survey). Other Technical Contributors – Seth Carpenter and John Hickman (Kentucky Geological Survey), Jessica Moore, Eric Lewis, Philip Dinterman, Timothy Vance, and Gary Daft (West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey), Michele Cooney, Robin Anthony, Cheyenne Woodward, and Katherine Schmid (Pennsylvania Geological Survey), Autumn Haagsma and Amber Conner (Michigan Geological Repository for Research and Education – Michigan Geological Survey), Kenneth Miller (Rutgers University), Ashley Douds and Valerie Beckham-Feller (Indiana Geological & Water Survey), Michael Solis (Ohio Geological Survey).

Appalachian,Arches,Forest City,Illinois,MRCI,Michi↗
DOE OSTI2025

MRCI Subtask 2.2: Precambrian Basement Structure, Faulting, and Stress Final Technical Summary Report

Subtask 2.2 was largely focused on compiling information about the Precambrian basement rock that underlies the MRCI region. Understanding the nature and extent of the basement rock is important in order to mitigate certain risks associated with CO2 injection. For example, this information will provide a resource for defining areas where a storage reservoir is in direct contact with the Precambrian or indirectly via a fault. Also, an understanding of the stress field in addition to fault orientations will help determine which faults may be subject to reactivation under increased pore pressures.

Battelle,CCS,CCUS,Carbon storage,MRCI,Midwest Regi↗
DOE OSTI2025

MRCI Subtask 2.3: Developing Industrial Partnerships and Regional Technical Collaboration Final Technical Summary Report

Under the objective of regional data collection and helping accelerate deployment, MRCI collaborated with industrial stakeholders in their project planning, characterization, and analysis. Some examples of these collaborations are given below. The data and information shared by the industrial collaborations added to the regional CCS framework development and were incorporated into the overall datasets, while addressing any proprietary data requirements. Three examples of collaborative partnerships with industry that have provided geologic characterization data relevant and beneficial to the MRCI program are discussed below, including: the UIC Class II Injection Facility in Eastern Ohio, the Core Energy CO2-EOR (enhanced oil recovery) operation in Otsego County Michigan, and the Marquis ethanol plant in Hennepin Illinois.

CCS,CCUS,MRCI,Midwest USA,Technical Challenges,inj↗
DOE OSTI2025

MRCI Task 2: Addressing Key Technical Challenges - Executive Summary Report

This report provides a high-level overview of Task 2 products that were developed through defining carbon storage systems, Precambrian basement structure and stress, developing regional technical collaboration, modeling and risk assessment. Subtask 2.1: Defining Sub-Regional CS/CCUS Systems Subtask 2.2: Defining Precambrian basement faulting/stress Subtask 2.3: Developing industrial partnerships and regional technical collaborations Subtask 2.4: Conducting regional/subregional analysis Subtask 2.5: Assessing and managing risk for potential commercial-scale storage complexes

MRCI,Technical Challenges↗
DOE OSTI2023

Utah FORGE 2-2439: A Multi-Component Approach to Characterizing In-Situ Stress: Laboratory, Modeling and Field Measurement - Workshop Presentation

This is a presentation on A Multi-Component Approach to Characterizing In-Situ Stress at the U.S DOE FORGE EGS Site: Laboratory, Modeling and Field Measurement project by Battelle [Columbus, OH], presented by Mark Kelley. The project's objective was to characterize stress in the Utah FORGE EGS reservoir using three methods: a laboratory rock-core stress estimation combined with a Machine Learning approach for estimation of in-situ stress from field sonic-log data, a field based in-situ measurement (min-frac) approach, and a modeling approach. This presentation was featured in the Utah FORGE R&D Annual Workshop on September 7, 2023. The workshop provided a valuable opportunity to explore the progress made in each of the 17 Research and Development projects funded under Solicitation 2020-1 which aim to enhance our understanding of the crucial factors influencing the development of Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) reservoirs and resources.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Utah FORGE 2439: Well 16B(78)-32 Field-Test Data from Mini-Frac Tests

This submittal includes the field-test data collected during stress tests conducted in the Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32 wellbore to measure/characterize the stresses in the geothermal reservoir. The type of stress test performed is referred to as a mini-frac test or a micro-frac test. The test is a hydraulic fracture test that involves injecting a small volume of water into a short interval of the reservoir that is isolated by a straddle packer to create a fracture. The test provides information about the minimum and maximum horizontal stress at the test depths. A total of seven mini-frac tests were performed within the upper (vertical or nearly vertical) section of the 9-5/8-inch diameter uncased wellbore, between depths of 5,202 ft MD [5,202 ft TVD] and 5,980 ft MD [5966.18 ft TVD]. Two types of data were generated as part of the mini-frac tests. The first type of data is time-series data for each mini-frac test (e.g., injection-rate, test-interval pressure), and are contained in the "Mini-Frac Test Data.zip" file below. The second type is geophysical log data, attached below in the "Geophysical Logs.zip" file. Here, two types of image logs and acoustic logs were obtained before and after the mini-frac tests to examine each test depth for visual evidence of induced fracture(s) and to measure the azimuth (orientation) of any observed fractures. The attached Readme file includes the test depth information and contents of each data file included here. Analysis of the field-test data was conducted and is documented in the attached report below.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utah FORGE 2439: A Multi-Component Approach to Characterizing In-Situ Stress

Core-based in-situ stress estimation, Triaxial Ultrasonic Velocity (labTUV) data, and Deformation Rate Analysis (DRA) data for Utah FORGE well 16A(78)-32 using triaxial ultrasonic velocity and deformation rate analysis. Report documenting a multi-component approach to characterizing in-situ stress at the U.S. DOE FORGE EGS site: laboratory, modeling and field measurement. Core-based methods for in-situ stress estimation were applied using samples from 5 intervals within the Utah FORGE 16A(78)-32 well. At three of these locations, Triaxial Ultrasonic Velocity (labTUV) tests were performed, resulting in experimentally-determined relationships between wave velocities and stresses. Non-monotonic increase in the velocity-stress relationships are inferred provide evidence of stress history and are therefore used to estimate in-situ stress magnitudes. Additionally, Deformation Rate Analysis (DRA) tests were run on core plugs from various orientations at each of the 5 sampling locations. These, too, provide evidence of stress history based on stress-strain behavior. A novel Weight of Evidence (WoE) method was developed as a means of synthesizing in-situ stress evidence from these two types of tests. Results indicate the minimum horizontal stress gradient ranges from 0.58 psi/ft to 0.69 psi/ft, with 4 of the 5 values between 0.66 psi/ft and 0.69 psi/ft. The vertical stress gradient ranges from 1.05 psi/ft to 1.12 psi/ft, with 4 of the 5 zones given results between 1.09 psi/ft and 1.12 psi/ft. The maximum horizontal stress gradient ranges from 0.98 psi/ft to 1.34 psi/ft, with 4 of the 5 zones falling between 0.98 psi/ft and 1.24 psi/ft. The stress regime thus appears to be on the edge between normal faulting and strike-slip faulting, potentially flipping back and forth between the two regimes due to variability of rock properties, structures such as faults, and/or thermal anomalies.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

FutureGen2 Petrel Project

This Petrel project features geomechanical models that takes advantage of existing modeling work from PNNL and expands upon its framework to included overlying and underlying geologic zones. Where available, geomechanical logs were incorporated into these models. While the existing CO2 storage interval and caprock (Mt. Simon Ss and Eau Claire Shale) were finely layered by PNNL, the overlying layers were more coarsely layered to limit cell count.

FutureGen2↗
DOE OSTI2022

Perch Area Petrel Project

The SEM in this Petrel project is based, in part, on an earlier model prepared at Battelle (1) that covers Michigan's Northern Pinnacle Reef trend. While the existing SEM focused on the Niagaran section, this Petrel project expands the framework to included overlying and underlying geologic zones. Where available, geomechanical logs were incorporated into the model.

carbonates↗
DOE OSTI2022

FutureGen VSP

Processed SEGY files from the FutureGen2 project. Data includes 5 categories of OVSP data with 15 lines in each category (all in TWT). VSP data was processed from Sterling Seismic.

FutureGen2↗
DOE OSTI2022

TASK3 Laboratory Experiments Data

Laboratory Experiments Data of TASK3 of DOE project DE- FE0031686. Each signal has its own excel file. 150 signals are sent through the rock sample per each load configuration. There were approximately 50 to 150 load combinations tested during the experiments. Experiments were repeated after changing the polarity direction of the transducers. Signals of these repeats are in separate folders called "Reverse". There are three formations tested from the Michigan Core and four formations tested from the FutureGen site. The "Code" folder contains the Python code developed to analyze the signals. Large Dataset, please contact EDXSupport@netl.doe.gov

core↗
DOE OSTI2022

Task 5 Field Scale Stress Modeling Scripts and Data

Project data and Matlab scripts for Task 5 of the project “A Non-Invasive Approach for Elucidating the Spatial Distribution of In Situ Stress in Deep Subsurface Geologic Formations Considered for CO2 Storage”. Project includes the static earth models, grids and other data used for simulation and calibration of the two case studies addressed in the project, referred to herein as the “FutureGen2” model (Illinois) and the “Perch” model (Otsego county, Michigan). Large Dataset, please contact EDXSupport@netl.doe.gov

FutureGen2↗
DOE OSTI2022

Perch 3D

Processed SEGY files from the Perch 3D seismic area in the Michigan Basin. Data was used to make estimates of the stress field in the study area. Data was processed from Texseis, Inc.

3D↗
DOE OSTI2022

Estimating SHmax azimuth with P sources and vertical geophones: Use P-P reflection amplitudes or use SV-P reflection times?

We compared two methods for extracting the azimuth of maximum horizontal stress (SHmax) from 3D land-based seismic data generated by a P source and recorded with vertical geophones. In the first method, we used the direct-SV mode that is produced by all land-based P sources. P sources generate SV illumination that radiates in all azimuth directions from a source station and creates SV-P reflections that are recorded by vertical geophones. Unless stratigraphy has steep dip, SV-P raypaths recorded by vertical geophones are the reverse of P-SV raypaths recorded by horizontal geophones. Thus, SV-P data provide the same S-wave sensitivity to stress fields as popular P-SV data do. In the second method, we retrieved P-P reflections and then performed an amplitude-variation-with-azimuth (AVA) analysis of the amplitude-gradient behavior of P-P reflection wavelets. We did this analysis in narrow azimuth corridors to determine the gradient of reflection-wavelet amplitudes as a function of azimuth. This P-P AVA amplitude-gradient method has been of great interest in the reflection seismology community since it was introduced in the late 1990s. Each of these methods, AVA analysis of the gradient of P-P reflection amplitudes and azimuth-dependent arrival times of SV-P reflections, can be used to determine the azimuth of SHmax stress. We compare the results of the two methods with ground truth measurements of SHmax azimuth at a CO 2 sequestration site in the Michigan Basin. SHmax azimuths were determined from P-P and SV-P data at three major boundaries at depths of approximately 3500 ft (1067 m), 5500 ft (1676 m), and 7500 ft (2286 m). Two estimates of SHmax azimuth (one using SV-P data and one using P-P data) were made at each stacking bin inside a 24 mi 2 (62 km 2 ) image space. The result was approximately 98,000 estimates of SHmax azimuth across each of these three boundaries for each of these two prediction strategies. Histogram displays of PP AVA gradient estimates had peaks at correct azimuths of SHmax at all three depths, but the spread of the distributions widened with depth and split into two peaks at the deepest boundary. In contrast, each histogram of SHmax azimuth predicted by azimuth-dependent SV-P traveltimes had a single, definitive peak that was positioned at the correct SHmax azimuth at all three boundary depths.

Geochemistry & Geophysics↗