Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Geologic carbon 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.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Thermal and solubility effects on fault leakage during geologic carbon storage

Geologic carbon storage (GCS) is a promising method for reducing anthropogenic CO 2 emissions to the atmosphere. To safely deploy GCS in the field, it is necessary to assess risks and the effect of uncertainty on safe storage. The effect of uncertainty can be quantified using batches of simulations, but the high computational costs of high-resolution simulations necessitate use of reduced-order models (ROMs). Previous work involves ROMs for quantifying the risk of different potential leakage paths from storage reservoirs to shallow formations. However, previous studies on development of fault-leakage ROMs have limited numbers of uncertain parameters and do not explicitly examine impacts of CO 2 solubility and thermal stresses on fault reactivation, which can generate high-permeability pathways and compromise CO 2 storage. Here, we analyze an ensemble of simulations considering CO 2 leakage from a storage reservoir to a shallow aquifer through a fault while varying a number of uncertain parameters related to thermo-hydro-mechanical properties and CO 2 injection. We show the effects of solubility on: free-phase CO 2 -leakage rates, brine-leakage rates, and poroelastic fault destabilization. We find that CO 2 solubility is more important for estimating free-phase CO 2 -leakage rates compared to brine-leakage rates or poroelastic fault destabilization. We also find that thermal stresses and overpressures have different spatial distributions within the fault, indicating that the spatial variability of overpressures due to variation in flow parameters does not necessarily make the spatial variability of thermal stresses negligible. We suggest the use of the CO 2 phase-change path as a variable in future fault-leakage ROMs.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2021

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.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

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

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

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.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

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).

Assessment↗
DOE OSTI2022

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.

quantitative risk assessment, geologic carbon stor↗
DOE OSTI2023

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.

Assessment↗
DOE OSTI2025

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.

Carbon Sequestration↗
DOE OSTI2024

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.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Multi-system analysis of offshore geologic carbon storage: a review of open-source data science solutions

Geologic carbon storage projects are maturing worldwide and the footprint of deployment in the offshore is expanding. At present, there are ten projects in operation or that have been completed, more than 50 in construction and development, and dozens of characterization studies completed or underway. Offshore geologic carbon storage offers potential benefits over onshore geologic carbon storage. These offshore projects are generally remote in location, distant from population centers, and avoid complicated pore space rights while having abundant prospective storage potential. Some offshore fields targeted for carbon storage have comparatively fewer prior borehole penetrations except for areas that have been explored for petroleum production, minimizing potential issues such as pressure interference and infrastructure impacts. Yet offshore geologic carbon storage projects face distinctive technical and economic challenges, such as seafloor geohazards (e.g., seabed instability), expensive maritime transport, and meteorological-oceanographic conditions that can damage infrastructure and impact operations. Analytical capabilities and improved computational speeds have advanced engineering, earth and energy sciences in the wake of the arrival of modern data science over the last decade. These advancements have created an opportunity for integrated, multi-systems modeling approaches utilizing artificial intelligence and machine learning that are no longer limited by computational issues. Analytical tools developed alongside this advancement in data science can be leveraged to calibrate the potential advantages and challenges of carbon storage operations in the offshore. New methods and approaches that incorporate data science to analyze multiple aspects of engineered and natural systems can provide insights that complement the characterization and onsite engineering that traditional commercial and operational software addresses. These new methods and approaches can potentially improve the outcome of energy operations and carbon storage. Providing multi-system, science-driven data analytics enhances the knowledge base that offshore developers, operators, and regulatory bodies may draw from to improve offshore site selection and operational efficiency. Here, we provide a brief synopsis of geologic carbon storage efforts to date, an overview of the engineered and natural systems involved in offshore geologic carbon storage, and a review of publicly available, open-source, offshore and/or carbon storage related data- and science-driven tools developed by 2010 or later that are suitable for screening and assessing regions for offshore geologic carbon storage.

artificial intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2024

Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage (GCS) Data Collection Web Application

The Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Data Collection Web Application is an interactive data collection which aggregates and disseminates publicly available data to support offshore geologic carbon storage (GCS) in the United States. This data collection can be leveraged by stakeholders to understand where GCS may be viable offshore, create GCS project analogs, and address challenges to GCS in offshore environments. Use of this tool is solely at the discretion of the user. See full Federal Disclaimer for further information (https://netl.doe.gov/home/disclaimer).

Carbon Sequestration↗
DOE OSTI2025

Failure Analysis–Informed Risk Assessment Framework for Geological Carbon Storage Using Numerical Simulation and Machine Learning

Geological carbon storage (GCS) is recognized as a critical technology for achieving large-scale reductions in anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions. Ensuring long-term containment and safety requires robust risk assessment frameworks that account for geological uncertainty and identify potential failure scenarios. Among various indicators, the area of review (AoR) serves as a key metric for evaluating storage performance, regulatory compliance, and monitoring design, as it delineates the spatial extent impacted by pressure buildup and plume migration. However, conventional AoR-based risk assessments typically perturb parameters within narrow uncertainty bounds, potentially overlooking rare but high-impact events arising from extreme geological conditions. In this study, we present a failure analysis–informed risk assessment framework for large-scale GCS projects to improve site prescreening and monitoring design. A suite of 300 numerical simulations was generated using stochastic geological models that vary five key parameters: net-to-gross ratio, anisotropy azimuth, porosity multiplier, permeability multiplier, and vertical-to-horizontal permeability ratio. Among these, 200 realizations represent normal geological uncertainty, while 100 additional cases explore extreme yet plausible conditions for failure-case analysis. The AoR was simulated and computed from pressure and CO 2 saturation fields, where the baseline AoR boundary, representing the extent predicted under typical geological uncertainty, was defined as the union of 200 normal-range simulations, and failure was identified when extreme-range cases exceeded this baseline. Results show that incorporating broader parameter uncertainty produces significantly larger AoR extents, underscoring the potential underestimation of risk under conventional uncertainty ranges. Furthermore, spatial probability maps derived from failure-induced AoR exceedance identify regions requiring enhanced monitoring attention. Various machine learning (ML)–based classifiers were developed to predict failure occurrence from geological parameters, with the random forest model achieving the highest performance (F1-score of 0.986). Consistent findings from correlation coefficient, feature importance, and Sobol sensitivity analyses reveal that low net-to-gross ratios and permeability multipliers are the dominant risk drivers, reflecting reduced reservoir connectivity and limited pressure dissipation. Altogether, these results provide a novel framework for risk-informed site prescreening and monitoring design that explicitly considers rare but high-impact geological scenarios in GCS projects.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Real-time deep-learning inversion of seismic full waveform data for CO 2 saturation and uncertainty in geological carbon storage monitoring

Deep-learning inversion has recently drawn attention in geological carbon storage research due to its potential of imaging and monitoring carbon storage in real time, significantly improving efficiency and safety of carbon storage operations. We present a deep-learning full waveform inversion method that after the neural network has been trained can image CO 2 saturation and its uncertainty in real time. Our deep-learning inversion method is based on the U-Net architecture with the neural network trained on pairs of synthetic seismic data and CO 2 saturation models. Accordingly, our training establishes a mapping relationship between seismic data and CO 2 saturation models and once fully trained directly estimates CO 2 saturation as a function of subsurface location. We further quantify uncertainties of CO 2 saturation estimates using the Monte Carlo dropout method and a bootstrap aggregating method. For this proof-of-concept study, the CO 2 training models and data are derived from the Kimberlina 1.2 model, a hypothetical 3D geological carbon storage model that is constructed based on various geological and hydrological data from the Southern San Joaquin Basin, California. We perform deep-learning inversion experiments using noise-free and noisy training and test data sets and compare the results. Our modelling experiments show that (1) the deep-learning inversion can estimate 2D distributions of CO 2 fairly well even in the presence of Gaussian random noise and (2) both CO 2 saturation imaging and uncertainty quantification can be done in real time. Our results suggest that the deep-learning inversion method can serve as a robust real-time monitoring tool for geological carbon storage and/or other time-varying reservoir/aquifer properties that result from injection, extraction, and/or other subsurface transport phenomena.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Geologic Carbon Storage of Anthropogenic CO2 under the Colorado Plateau in Emery County, Utah

Geologic Carbon Storage (GCS) is a promising technology for storing large volumes of anthropogenic CO2 effectively and permanently. Numerical simulations are an integral part of site selection and characterization for any potential GCS site. As part of the DOE-funded CarbonSAFE Rocky Mountains Phase I project, a regional GCS analysis was undertaken to understand the efficacy of storing CO2 emissions from the power generation and heavy industry in central Utah’s favorable geology. In this study, the injection of CO2 for geologic storage was simulated in the Navajo Sandstone Formation in Emery County, Utah. Carbon dioxide was sourced from regional power generation stations and heavy industries throughout Utah, with an emphasis on emissions reduction at the Hunter Power Plant near Castle Dale, Utah. A simulation grid was extracted from the project’s geological model encompassing an area around Price, Huntington, and Castle Dale in central Utah. The Navajo Sandstone Member of the Glen Canyon Group was the target of CO2 injection with the overlying Carmel formation providing the primary seal. A suite of simulations was performed assessing the viability of this area for permanent CO2 storage. Results indicate that the area can not only store 46 million metric tons of anthropogenic CO2, meeting the project goals, but this area has the capacity to securely store at least 1.3 billion tons of CO2, suggesting the injection site and surrounding geology are suitable locations for commercial-scale GCS.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

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.

42 ENGINEERING↗