SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Geologic storage”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
NETL’s Techno-Economic Models for Assessing CO2 Pipeline Transport and Geologic Storage
Presentation at Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Workshop: Future Energy Roadmap – Navigating Through the Energy Transition, held in Galveston, Texas, August 22-23, 2022. The presentation provides an overview of the techno-economic models NETL has developed for assessing performance characteristics and cost drivers for CO2 pipeline transport (FECM/NETL CO2 Transport Cost Model or CO2_T_COM), CO2 saline storage (FECM/NETL CO2 Saline Storage Cost Model or CO2_S_COM), and oil production and CO2 storage using CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) (FE/NETL CO2 Prophet Model or CO2_Prophet and FE/NETL Onshore CO2 EOR Cost Model or CO2_E_COM). A high-level description of each model is presented along with useful outputs that can be generated with each model. These tools can be used individually to evaluate the economic opportunity for specific CCUS components, or they can be used in tandem to assess an integrated CCUS value chain.
Pore‐Scale Modeling of Carbon Dioxide and Hydrogen Transport During Geologic Gas Storage
Abstract Geologic storage of CO 2 and H 2 are climate‐positive techniques for meeting the energy transition. While similar formations could be considered for both gases, the flow dynamics could differ due to differences in their thermophysical properties. We conduct a rigorous pore‐scale study of water/CO 2 and water/H 2 systems at relevant reservoir conditions in a Bentheimer rock sample using the lattice Boltzmann method to quantify the effects of capillary, viscous, inertial, and wetting forces during gas invasion. At similar conditions, H 2 invasion is weaker compared to CO 2 due to unfavorable viscosity ratios. Increasing flow rate, however, increases the breakthrough saturation for both gas systems in the range of capillary numbers studied. At isolated conditions of flow rate, viscosity ratio, and wettability, local inertial effects are found to be critical and show consistent increase in the invaded gas saturation. The effect of inertial forces persits for both gases across all field conditions tested.
Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage
The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks.
Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage
The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the $\textit{Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems}$ (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks
Geophysical monitoring for geologic carbon storage
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A Project Lifetime Approach to the Management of Induced Seismicity Risk at Geologic Carbon Storage Sites
The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method that can help reduce atmospheric CO 2 by sequestering it into the subsurface. Large-scale deployment of geologic carbon storage, however, may be accompanied by induced seismicity. We present a project lifetime approach to address the induced seismicity risk at these geologic storage sites. This approach encompasses both technical and nontechnical stakeholder issues related to induced seismicity and spans the time period from the initial consideration phase to postclosure. These recommendations are envisioned to serve as general guidelines, setting expectations for operators, regulators, and the public. They contain a set of seven actionable focus areas, the purpose of which are to deal proactively with induced seismicity issues. Although each geologic carbon storage site will be unique and will require a custom approach, these general best practice recommendations can be used as a starting point to any site-specific plan for how to systematically evaluate, communicate about, and mitigate induced seismicity at a particular reservoir.
Jackson, L., Johnson, M.B., Latrach, A., Grimes, D., Martinez, C., and Mclaughlin, J.F., 2024, Multidisciplinary geotechnical data collection, curation, and analysis for conformity with the regulatory framework for geologic carbon storage in Wyoming, USA: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 56, No. 5, 2024, doi: 10.1130/abs/2024AM-405024
Title: Multidisciplinary Geotechnical Data Collection, Curation, and Analysis for Conformity with the Regulatory Framework for Geologic Carbon Storage in Wyoming, USA. Text: Construction and operation of wells for geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide necessitate that they are permitted under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Underground Injection Control Class VI requirements. Class VI wells conform to stringent requirements to ensure long-term safety and integrity of the storage site and the protection of Underground Sources of Drinking Water. Entities pursuing Class VI permitting must provide comprehensive geologic site characterization, including regional geologic structure and stratigraphy, aquifer information, reservoir and confining unit geomechanical properties, geochemical analyses, assessment of trapping capacity and mechanisms, and a variety of other of multidisciplinary geotechnical data. The Wyoming Class VI Site Characterization Database Project is focused on developing a geologic site characterization database of geotechnical information, which has been compiled and verified from established, public databases/entities and scientific literature to expedite Class VI permitting in Sweetwater County within the Greater Green River Basin of southern Wyoming. The preliminary suite of compiled data from 14,000 wells includes 8,000 wells with logs and 7,250 wells with formation tops, ~70 wells with core data (e.g., X-Ray diffraction, petrographic, and petrophysical data), ~2,500 water analyses, ~740 seismic events data, and ~520 bottom-hole temperature measurements. Future work on—and stemming from—this project will include new core analyses, calculation and interpolation of subsurface temperature gradients, mechanical earth models, geochemical simulations, storage capacity estimation, stratigraphic column generation and correlation, and construction of subsurface maps. Finally, this work will help to inspire and facilitate subsurface data compilation and curation beyond Sweetwater County, Wyoming.
Mapping existing wellbore locations to compare technical risks between onshore and offshore CCS activities in Texas
Carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage (CCS; geologic sequestration) is a promising technology for reducing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere from industrial point sources. Aspects of CCS have been investigated for over two decades, and many large- and small-scale geologic storage field demonstration projects are now underway globally. Interest in offshore CCS has been increasing in recent years (e.g., European Union, Australia, Japan, and the United States). Deep geologic storage in offshore settings is analogous to onshore CCS activities in many respects (i.e., geologic and geotechnical aspects), but is distinct from previously explored seabed sediment CO 2 storage) or deep marine dissolution). Given the large subsurface geologic storage volumes available in offshore settings, much discussion of offshore CCS is focused on the benefits and risks of such activity compared to onshore settings. Similar to onshore settings, existing (legacy) wells likely present the most direct migration pathway and largest risk of noncontainment in offshore settings. As part of current studies to evaluate geologic storage options in offshore settings along the Texas coast and greater Gulf of Mexico (GoM), mapping of the geographic distribution and ages of wells in a region containing coastal counties and extending 30 miles offshore Texas indicates that both well spatial density and well age decrease moving from onshore to offshore. Results suggest reduced risk of leakage owing to more rigorous and documented well completion and abandonment practices for these generally younger wells (although many are decades old). A result of decreased well density is that larger areas are available for leasing for CCS projects that avoid legacy wells altogether (> 1 mile from any existing well). The one-mile designation is used as an arbitrary convention, and while it is recognized that this is smaller than a typical area of review (AoR) for permitting, each site will have a different AoR radius for consideration. Finally, the combination of large subsurface storage volumes under control of a single landowner and reduced risks from legacy wells makes offshore CCS attractive in the GoM.
Changes in rock matrix compressibility during deep CO 2 storage
Geologic carbon storage projects aim to permanently trap large volumes of CO 2 in reservoir rock sealed with low permeability layers. As high-pressure supercritical or liquid CO 2 is injected, hydromechanical and chemical processes caused by the reaction between the rock and acidic mixture of brine and CO 2 are initiated. The compressibility of reservoir rock needs to be properly characterized in order to assess the deformation and stability of the host formations, and there are a number of factors to be considered, including the matrix structure, solid, pores, and fluid. Here this study triggers from a fundamental question whether CO 2 treatment affects the compressibility of the rock matrix and its dominant composing solid minerals. Three different reservoir representatives are selected: Berea sandstone for silica-rich rock, and Apulian limestone and Indiana limestone for calcite-rich rock. Quartz and calcite are the main composing minerals of the reservoir rock, and their crystals are separately examined. Experimental methods are introduced for high-pressure CO 2 treatment of water-saturated materials, and measurements of the unjacketed and solid compressibilities are conducted. No change in the solid compressibility of the sandstone and quartz after CO 2 treatment is observed, whereas it increases by 18–21% for the limestones and by 15% for calcite. The latter observation is inconsistent with the ultrasonic wave velocities measurements and is believed to be due to the local dissolution of the calcite crystal surface. Our results show that only the solid matrix of the limestones becomes more compressible after CO 2 treatment. Consequent microimaging and mercury intrusion porosimetry analyses allowed observations of dissolution and precipitation of calcite, and creation of new connected and non-connected pores. Finally, the changes in limestone solid compressibilities and pore structure could significantly affect the rock properties and behavior during and after CO 2 injection and should be accounted for in the reservoir models.
Computational Tools and Workflows for Quantitative Risk Assessment and Decision Support for Geologic Carbon Storage Sites: Progress and Insights from the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership
The 2005 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on CCS raised the profile of CO2 capture and storage (CCS) as an important technology for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. CCS is now recognized as a key component of most climate change mitigation scenarios. Since publication of that report the international research, development, and deployment (RD&D) community has advanced key technical aspects, clarified regulatory requirements, explored value chain and infrastructure solutions, and developed incentive paradigms to enable and promote large-scale deployment of CCS. These efforts have included research to better characterize geologic storage resources, to improve injection performance and storage efficiency, to assess and manage subsurface environmental risks, and to advance monitoring technologies to assure system conformance. These efforts have helped to build confidence in the viability of geologic carbon storage (GCS), but stakeholder concerns about long-term risks and liability associated with GCS remain a hurdle to broad acceptance and large-scale deployment of CCS. Since 2010, the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) – a research collaboration between five contributing national laboratories – has worked to establish and demonstrate methods and tools to quantify and manage the subsurface environmental risks associated with GCS, amidst uncertainty. This work supports the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management Carbon Transport and Storage Program’s goal of advancing safe and secure commercial-scale GCS deployment. To address the technical challenge of simulating the physical response of the GCS site to large-scale CO2 injection, NRAP has adopted an approach that relies on coupling computationally efficient reduced-order and/or data-driven proxy models of important system components (i.e., storage reservoir, sealing caprock, leakage pathways, intermediate formations, overlying groundwater aquifers, and the atmosphere) in integrated assessment framework. That integrated model of the physical system is complemented with fit-for purpose functionality to support site characterization and risk-related decisions. The recently released NRAP Phase II toolset includes the Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP-Open-IAM) for evaluation of trends in leakage risk and potential impact, tools to support monitoring design optimization (Designs for Risk Evaluation and Management – DREAM v3.0 and Passive Seismic Monitoring Tool - PSMT), and tools for state of stress evaluation (State-of-Stress Analysis Tool - SOSAT) and forecasting induced seismicity risk. The NRAP team has also released a pair of reports describing conceptual workflows to incorporate physics-based, quantitative risk assessment into many of the design, planning, operation, and closure decisions for GCS projects. An online catalogue highlights published studies where these tools and methods are demonstrated. In this presentation, the utility of these products to assess risks and address key stakeholder questions will be highlighted through examples, and related insights about the safety and security of geologic carbon storage in qualified storage sites will be discussed. The prospect of rapid, large-scale deployment of GCS technology to aggressively reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions requires careful consideration of interference between multiple commercial-scale storage projects within a basin. Going forward, NRAP is expanding and adapting site-scale risk quantification tools and methods to enable assessment of risks and inform management decisions for basin-scale deployment. Increasingly, this work will leverage next-generation approaches for surrogate modelling, fast prediction, and advanced visualization enabled by machine learning and artificial intelligence to promote virtual learning, scenario evaluation, and augment risk-based decision making.
Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage (GCS) Inventory
The Offshore Geological Carbon Storage Inventory Web Map is an online web mapping application designed to help users explore and visualize the Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Inventory. This dataset is an inventory of offshore geologic carbon storage (GCS) projects and studies, gathered to summarize ongoing GCS efforts taking place offshore globally. This inventory includes both actualized projects as well as characterization studies and aggregates a variety of attribute fields for each project / study. It is intended to be used for research and comparison purposes, see full disclaimer and credits.
Deep learning model for fast, science-based forecasting of fluid migration along faults in geologic carbon storage scenarios
Effective long-term geologic storage depends on robust site selection and credible, science-based forecasting of subsurface behavior to ensure storage integrity. For this work, we develop a deep learning–based reduced-order model (ROM) to quantify potential carbon dioxide (CO₂) and brine migration through geological faults. The ROM combines a Transformer model for binary classification and a Stacked Ensemble for regression, trained on a comprehensive dataset generated from 1400 physics-based reservoir simulations. Key geologic and operational parameters—including fault geometry, reservoir structure, and injection conditions—were systematically varied to capture a wide range of fluid migration scenarios. The ROM accurately predicts the onset of migration, cumulative migration volumes of both CO₂ and brine, and associated migration rates, as compared to an independent set of validation simulations, while significantly reducing computational cost compared to traditional simulation methods. Model performance was evaluated across diverse fault configurations, revealing that shallow reservoir geometry and fault angle are among the most influential factors governing migration behavior. Sensitivity analysis using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) provided interpretability, revealing distinct patterns in how geological and operational features drive transient versus cumulative migration outcomes. The ROM’s ability to rapidly simulate fault migration scenarios enables efficient sensitivity analyses, scenario evaluations, and decision support for site selection and monitoring design. This approach enhances the safety, scalability, and long-term operational performance of geologic carbon storage (GCS) systems by providing a robust, interpretable tool for predicting subsurface fluid migration and assessing fault-related migration potential.
International Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Story Map
The International Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Story Map provides an overview of offshore geologic carbon storage (GCS) project maturity on a global scale. This story map reviews the history of CO2 storage in offshore sedimentary basins, basic geologic requirements, project timelines and lessons learned through defined project stage progression, areas previously studied for potential future domestic offshore GCS development, and regulatory considerations within different global regions. This resource is a distillation of information collected and recorded in the Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Inventory Version 1.0 (https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/offshore-gcs-data-inventory).
Geologic CO2 Storage Optimization under Geomechanical Risk Using Coupled-Physics Models
Not provided.
Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Inventory Dashboard
The Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Inventory Dashboard is an interactive dashboard. The dashboard showcases the Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage (GCS) Inventory. It is intended to be used for research and comparison purposes, see full disclaimer and credits.
A review of risk and uncertainty assessment for geologic carbon storage
Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) in geological formations play a key role in mitigating anthropogenic CO 2 emissions and achieving the aggressive goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. Risk and uncertainty assessment is crucial for ensuring the safety and reliability of geologic carbon storage (GCS) by evaluating CO 2 migration in subsurface, forecasting potential leakage and induced seismicity risks, and optimizing operational and monitoring plans. In this review, the use and progress of risk assessment for GCS over the last few decades are examined. Here, we use the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP), which is one of the seven regional partnerships supported by the United States Department of Energy (U.S. DOE), as an example of large-scale CCUS projects in North America. Additionally, future trends and requirements for risk assessment in GCS are discussed. The information provided in this review can help readers understand the significance of risk and uncertainty assessment and apply it effectively in large-scale GCS projects.
Basin Management of Geologic CO2 Storage: Effect of Well Spacing on CO2 Plume and Pressure Interference
This is the conference paper accompanying an oral presentation made at the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Western Regional Meeting (WRM) held in Bakersfield, California, April 26–28, 2022. The paper provides the results of a basin-scale CO2 storage modeling project investigating subsurface pressure interference among CO2 injection wells located in proximity to each other.