capacity a case example - ccop€¦ · co2 storage capacity assessment bangkok 20-23rd august 2013...

CO2 Storage Capacity Estimation

Presenter: Rick Causebrook -Geological Consultant

CCS-M Training Course (T2)

20-23rd August 2013, Bangkok

High Level Assessment of Australia’s Storage

Capacity

– a case example


CO2 Storage Capacity Assessment

Bangkok 20-23rd August 2013

.z

2

z

A Reminder- Basins Are Not Equal

• Sedimentary basins are the regions that offer the opportunity for geological storage of CO2.

• But all sedimentary basins

• do not have the same

• potential for storage

• We need to consider

• the tectonic settings

• and reservoir

• characteristics of each basin

GSQ/GGSS Queensland Carbon Dioxide Geological

Storage Atlas 2009.




.z

3

z

“High Level” Assessment

A “High Level”

Assessment

addresses calculates

a capacity which is

falls somewhere

between “Theoretical

Capacity” and

“Effective Capacity”




.z

4

z

Geoscience Australia’s Involvement in CCS Studies

Australian High Level Storage Potential Studies

GEODISC 2000

Carbon Storage Task

Force 2009

Increasing

world-wide

development of

methodologies

(APCRC)

In between we

also conducted

many detailed

Regional

Studies




.z

5

z

Access to Data

• These regional studies could not have completed

successfully without access to a considerable amount

of exploration data.

In Australia data and samples

submitted under Commonwealth and

State legislation is held for public use

at Geoscience Australia and by State

Geological Surveys




.z

6

z

GEODISC - Mapping the storage potential of

Australia’s sedimentary basins

- The first significant attempt

GEODISC (APCRC) 1999-2003

• First review of sedimentary basins &

creation of portfolio of storage options

• Carried out under the APCRC*

• 48 basins (out of >300)

• 65 sites (out of 102) viable and

ranked based on capacity, injectivity,

technical & economic viability,

containment, existing resources

• Disparity between sources & sinks

• Theoretically >1600 years of storage

• Realistically 100-115Mt/y

*Australian Petroleum Co-operative Research Centre




.z

7

z

• Carbon Storage Task Force

GHG Storage Project 2009




.z

8

z

Reasons behind study

• Carbon Storage Task Force.

• Established by Australian Government in

October 2008 under the:

• National Low Emissions Coal Initiative

• to develop the

• National Carbon Mapping and Infrastructure

Plan




.z

9

z

Senior geologists from

all the main State

Geological Surveys

convened on several

occasions in Canberra,

over a period of four

months to provide their

expertise and

knowledge of the

regional geology of

Australia’s sedimentary

basins

Getting the experts together




.z

10

z

Carbon Storage Task Force

Basin Ranking and Capacity

• Updated high level assessment completed 2009

• Aims

– Development of prospectivity

and capacity assessment

methodologies

– Incorporation of new information from recent regional and basin studies

– Basins summarised and ranked using publicly available data (OPA)




.z

11

z

Carbon Storage Task Force

Basin Ranking and Capacity (2)

Outcomes

– Basins ranked

– Eliminated small eastern basins & other poor, but convenient, sites

– Identified and documented prospective and non-prospective basins

– Scientific rationale for recommendations regarding priorities for future study and data acquisition programmes




.z

12

z

Geographical distribution of emissions by industry

estimated for 2020

Carbon Storage Taskforce 2009, National Carbon Mapping and Infrastructure Plan – Australia: Concise Report, Department of Resources, Energy

and Tourism, Canberra.




.z

13

z

Australia’s Storage

Prospectivity as

understood in 2009

Geographical

distribution of

emissions by

industry estimated

for 2020




.z

14

z

• Critical Geologic Inputs

– Distribution of top and fault seal (containment)

– Define the Criteria against which the basins are “scored”–

– Basin outlines - single agreed set especially where boundaries cross state borders

– Define key boundary issues

• 800 m top aquifer (supercritical phase change)

• 3500 m top of deepest aquifer (generous)

• 250 m bathymetric contour

– Distribution of oil & gas fields

• Just geology – nothing discounted on economic, resource conflict, commercial, logistical issues

Process




.z

15

z

18 Criteria selected

1. Seismic activity, 11. Reservoir

2. Size, 12. Seal integrity

3. Depth 13. Reservoir/Seal pairs

4. Type 14. Onshore/offshore

5. Fault seal 15. Climate, Accessibility

6. Hydrogeology 16. Infrastructure

7. Geothermal gradient 17. CO2 sources

8. Hydrocarbon potential 18. Knowledge level &

9. Basin maturity data availability

10 .Coal and CBM




.z

16

z

Process continued

• Development of project

– Easily updated- common platform ArcGIS v9.2

• Ranking of basins

– Modified after Bachu (2003)

– ‘zeroed’ on non geologic factors – just the rocks

– Weighted heavily toward seal and reservoir- containment is the priority at this scale

– 5 colour class code

• Capacity- using DOE 2008 simple formula

– Efficiency set between 0.5-5%

– Order of magnitude calculation

– Input parameters ‘Monte Carlo’




.z

17

z

“Modified Bachu” Ranking Criteria




.z

18

z

Weightings:- 0.00 0.04 0.10 0.04 0.14 0.04 0.05

State Onsghore/Offshore Basin Name Total Score Ranking

Seismicity Size Depth TypeFault

sealHydrogeology

Geothermal

gradient

VIC Offshore Gippsland Basin 0.92 1 4 3 3 2 3 3 2

WA offshore North Perth Basin 0.82 2 4 4 3 2 2 3 2

SA Onshore Eromanga Basin 0.79 3 4 4 3 1 3 3 1

WA offshore Northern Carnarvon Basin 0.78 4 5 4 3 2 1 2 2

SA Onshore Cooper Basin 0.69 5 5 3 3 2 2 3 1

WA offshore Browse Basin 0.68 6 5 4 3 3 2 1 2

QLD Onshore Bowen 0.67 7 4 3 3 2 2 3 3

WA offshore Northern Bonaparte 0.65 8 5 4 3 2 1 3 2

SA Offshore Otway Basin 0.63 9 3 3 3 1 1 3 3

NT offshore Money Shoal 0.62 10 3 4 3 2 3 2 3

QLD Onshore Galilee 0.62 11 5 4 3 2 3 3 1

“Modified Bachu” Basin Ranking Scheme




.z

19

z

The Basin Ranking (Traffic Light) Map)




.z

20

z

Parameter Unit Score

(P90)

Score

(P50)

Score

(P10)

Distribution

Area of storage region km2 10000 16000 30000 Triangular

Gross thickness of saline

formation

m 200 500 900 Triangular

Average porosity of saline

formation over thickness

interval

% 19 22 25 Triangular

Density of CO2 at average

reservoir conditions

t/m3 0.5 0.6 0.7 Triangular

E-storage efficiency factor

(% of total pore volume)

% 4 4 4

Calculated storage

potential

gigatons 31.0 48.8 78.3

Input for Monte Carlo Simulation for

Capacity Estimation




.z

21

z

Basin Ranking by Score Versus Capacity




.z

22

z

Basin assessment

Basin Summary

Montages prepared by

GA for 27 basins

(Onshore and

Offshore)




.z

23

z

Fracture pressure vs. depth Reservoir pressure vs. depth Storage capacity estimate

Porosity vs. depth Permeability vs. depth Porosity vs. permeability

Storage capacity curve Storage capacity

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Formation Pressure (psia)

Dep

th (

m)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000

Fracture Pressure (psia)

Dep

th (

m)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Porosity (%)

De

pth

(m

KB

)

3300

2700

2100

2420.5 22

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000

Permeability (mD)

De

pth

(m

KB

)

125 400 1400

2100

2700

3300

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Porosity (%)

Pe

rme

ab

ilit

y (

mD

)

2220.5 24

125

400

1400

1.00

10.00

100.00

HC traps P90 P50 P10

Sto

rag

e c

ap

acit

y (

gig

ato

ns)

Basin ranking vs. capacity

10

100

0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 1,000.00

Capacity (gigatons)

Ba

sin

Sc

ore

(x

10

0)

E = 4%Gi-off

Er

CoBw

Ga

SuDa

Ba

Ot-WToGu CM

Ba Bass

Bo-NT Bonarparte NT

Bo-WA Bonarparte WA

Bw Bowen

Br Browse

Co Cooper

Cn-N Carnarvon-North

Cn-S Carnarvon-South

Ca-off Canning offshore

Ca-on Canning onshore

CM Clarence-Moreton

Da Darling

De Denison Trough

Er Eromanga

Ga Galilee

Gi-off Gippsland offshore

Gi-on Gippsland onshore

Gu Gunnedah

Ot-W Otway West

Ot-E Otway East

NP-off North Perth offshore

NP-on North Perth onshore

Ro Roma Shelf

Su Surat

Sy Sydney

To Torquay

Vl Vlaming

Sy

VlRo

Gi-onNP-on

Br

De

Ca-off

Ca-on Bo-NT

Bo-WANP-off

Cn-N

Ot-E

Cn-S

Gippsland - offshore

Parameter Unit Score

(P90)

Score

(P50)

Score

(P10)

Distribution

Area of storage region km2 10000 16000 30000 Triangular

Gross thickness of saline

formation

m 200 500 900 Triangular

Average porosity of saline

formation over thickness

interval

% 19 22 25 Triangular

Density of CO2 at average

reservoir conditions

t/m3 0.5 0.6 0.7 Triangular

E-storage efficiency factor

(% of total pore volume)

% 4 4 4

Calculated storage

potential

gigatons 31.0 48.8 78.3

Capacity estimates based on geological parameters

`




.z

24

z

• These basin analyses formed the input to high level

engineering and economic assessments involving

conceptual pipeline length and well number to transport

and inject an industrial scale volume > ~40 Mtpa for

25yrs

Engineering and economic analyses




.z

25

z

National Carbon Mapping and Infrastructure

Plan-Australia

• Concise report delivered to

the Minister of Resources

and Energy in September

2009

• Released publically

December 2009

http://www.ret.gov.au/resources/resources_programs/nleci/cst/Pages/default.aspx




.z

26

z

• There is high confidence that the east of Australia has

aquifer storage capacity for 70 -450 years at a storage

rate of 200 Mtpa, and that the west of Australia has

capacity for 260-1120 years at 100 Mtpa, with the

possibility that a far greater capacity will be defined as

basins and their CO2 storage behaviour become better

known.

Conclusions on Storage Capacity

Carbon Storage Task Force 2009, National Carbon Mapping and Infrastructure Plan –

Australia: Concise report, Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism, Canberra.




.z

27

z

National Carbon and Infrastructure Plan

• Element 1: Pre-Competitive Exploration

Programme: – Recommended acquisition of strategic data by State and

Commonwealth Governments to encourage exploration.

• Element 2: Exploration: – Acreage release under OPGGSA 2006 (Offshore Petroleum and

Greenhouse Gas storage Act)

• Element 3: Demonstration: – Encouragement of significant scale (>1Mtpa) projects




.z

28

z

• Pre-competitive data under the Australian Petroleum licencing

system is data that is acquired by the Government over lightly

or unexplored areas and given to interested companies at very

low cost.

• This is to enable them to properly evaluate the exploration

potential of licence areas on offer, and it is hoped, encourage

them to bid for them.

• This stage is called “precompetitive” because it happens

before the acreage is realised for bidding for exploration rights

• This system is being extended to cover GHG Storage areas

both onshore and offshore in Australia.

The next step: Acquisition of precompetitive

data




.z

29

z

The next step: Acquisition of data

Western

Australia

Queensland

Victoria

New South

Wales

Northern

Territory Offshore

seismic

Onshore

seismic

Offshore

seismic

Onshore and

offshore seismic

and onshore wells

Onshore wells




.z

30

z

GHG Acreage Release 2009 A World First:10 Blocks in 5 Basins

Major input from Geoscience Australia

OFFSHORE PETROLEUM AND

GREENHOUSE GAS STORAGE ACT

2006

The next step: Acreage release for

Exploration




.z

31

z

The next step: Encouragement of significant scale

(>1Mtpa) projects

CCS Flag ships Initiative

South

West Hub

- WA CarbonNet -

Vic

TBA - Qld




.z

32

z

Participants in the Study

• Geoscience Australia

• Department of Primary Industries Victoria

• Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation , Queensland

• Department of Mines and Petroleum, WA

• Department of Primary Industries, NSW

• Department of Primary Industries and Resources, SA




.z

33

z

• Thank You

• Questions?

capacity a case example - ccop€¦ · co2 storage capacity assessment bangkok 20-23rd august 2013...

Documents