DOE OSTI2024
Large-scale decarbonization using carbon capture and storage (CCS) is likely to involve many commercial-scale CO 2 storage projects located in close proximity to each other. This close proximity raises concerns over pressure interference among the storage projects. Pressure interference between injection and storage efforts can reduce the practicable CO 2 storage resource and force wells to inject CO 2 at a lower rate to avoid the fracture pressure thresholds per United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Class VI well regulations to preserve injection and confining zone integrity and potentially mitigate against inducing seismic activity. These analyses employ numerical full-physics reservoir modeling to evaluate how pressure buildup fronts and CO 2 plumes evolve under commercial-scale injection volumes of CO 2 in which multiple storage sites located in close proximity occur in tandem. The simulation models mimic injection at pseudo basin-scale and assume homogeneous saline formation(s) as storage targets with a pair of upper and lower homogeneous seal layer/s. These analyses specifically investigate the efficacy of two basin-wide reservoir pressure management strategies in addressing the technical challenges associated with pressure buildup and CO 2 plume commingling. The strategies explored include: 1) enlarging the area of injection well spacing (WS) and 2) storing CO 2 in a stacked sequence (SSS) of saline formations compared to a single formation. The storage and confining zones properties assumed were held common across the scenarios, unless specified otherwise. Analyses results show that after injecting 4 million tons per year for 30 years using 4 separate wells (each injecting 1 million metric tons per year), the radius of CO 2 plume extends to a mere 3 km or less from injection wells. Meanwhile, the radius of pressure buildup ranges on the order of tens to a few hundreds of kilometers, depending on the magnitude of pressure buildup threshold that one would use to define the front. CO 2 plume commingling from different injection wells appears to occur 50 years post-injection, especially under scenarios with narrowly spaced (i.e., < 5 km apart) injection well locations. Findings from sensitivity cases on the well spacing suggest that storage formations modeled would require different well spacing to avoid fracture pressure thresholds. For instance, modeled storage formations with high fracture gradients (i.e., 0.8 psi/ft) would need less than 5–km well spacing, whereas those with lower fracture gradients (i.e., 0.7 psi/ft) would need approximately 20–km well spacing, based on assumed modeling parameters. Under stacked injection, the pressure challenges (described above) still exist but are more alleviated due to distributing the same injection volume across more available reservoir volume. These analyses demonstrate that stacked-sequence storage can effectively address the challenges, while still providing the same target CO 2 storage volumes and allowing a large number of storage projects to be deployed in the same basin by better utilizing the available storage resource across different reservoir depths. Among cases modeled, the resulting pressure buildup front is most suppressed when each storage project distributes injection volumes over several wells, each of which injects a portion of the total CO 2 across the stacked sequence. This strategy results in the smallest CO 2 aerial footprint amongst scenarios evaluated but also shows the largest reduction in the pressure buildup at the top of perforation at the injection wells (upwards of approximately 42 percent compared to the commercial-scale single-formation storage), the result of which is crucial to maintain caprock integrity. The findings presented by this research draw attention to the importance of greater coordination among storage operators and regulatory stakeholders to foster the upscaling and deployment of CCS. These analyses provide insights into required decision-making when considering multi-project deployment in a shared basin. Because these analyses evaluate a very specific geologic situation, they bear further investigations across other geologic situations.