DOE OSTI2014
In topical Report DOE/FE0002068-1 [2] technical performance evaluations on the Cambrian Potosi Formation were performed through reservoir modeling. The data included formation tops from mud logs, well logs from the VW1 and the CCS1 wells, structural and stratigraphic formation from three dimensional (3D) seismic data, and field data from several waste water injection wells for Potosi Formation. Intention was for two million tons per annum (MTPA) of CO2 to be injected for 20 years. In this Task the 2010 Potosi heterogeneous model (referred to as the "Potosi Dynamic Model 2010" in this report) was re-run using a new injection scenario; 3.2 MTPA for 30 years. The extent of the Potosi Dynamic Model 2010, however, appeared too small for the new injection target. It was not sufficiently large enough to accommodate the evolution of the plume. Also, it might have overestimated the injection capacity by enhancing too much the pressure relief due to the relatively close proximity between the injector and the infinite acting boundaries. The new model, Potosi Dynamic Model 2013a, was built by extending the Potosi Dynamic Model 2010 grid to 30 miles x 30 miles (48 km by 48 km), while preserving all property modeling workflows and layering. This model was retained as the base case. Potosi Dynamic Model 2013.a gives an average CO2 injection rate of 1.4 MTPA and cumulative injection of 43 Mt in 30 years, which corresponds to 45% of the injection target. This implies that according to this preliminary model, a minimum of three (3) wells could be required to achieve the injection target. The injectivity evaluation of the Potosi formation will be revisited in topical Report 15 during which more data will be integrated in the modeling exercise. A vertical flow performance evaluation could be considered for the succeeding task to determine the appropriate tubing size, the required injection tubing head pressure (THP) and to investigate whether the corresponding well injection rate falls within the tubing erosional velocity limit. After 30 years, the plume extends 15 miles (24 km) in E-W and 14 miles (22 km) in N-S directions. After injection is completed, the plume continues to migrate laterally, mainly driven by the remaining pressure gradient. After 100 years post-injection, the plume extends 17 miles (27 km) in E-W and 15 miles (24 km) in N-S directions. The increase of reservoir pressure at the end of injection is approximately 370 psia around the injector and gradually decreases away from the well. The reservoir pressure increase is less than 30 psia beyond 14 miles (22 km) away from injector. The initial reservoir pressure is restored after approximately 20 years post-injection. This result, however, is associated with uncertainties on the boundary conditions, and a sensitivity analysis could be considered for the succeeding tasks. It is important to remember that the respective plume extent and areal pressure increase corresponds to an injection of 43 Mt CO2. Should the targeted cumulative injection of 96 Mt be achieved; a much larger plume extent and areal pressure increase could be expected. Re-evaluating the permeability modeling, vugs and heterogeneity distributions, and relative permeability input could be considered for the succeeding Potosi formation evaluations. A simulation using several injectors could also be considered to determine the required number of wells to achieve the injection target while taking into account the pressure interference.