Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Programwww.spe.org/dl

1

Primary funding is provided by

The SPE Foundation through member donations and a contribution from Offshore Europe

The Society is grateful to those companies that allow their professionals to serve as lecturers

Additional support provided by AIME

Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Programwww.spe.org/dl

Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Programwww.spe.org/dl

3

Gary Teletzke

CO2 in the Subsurface – From EOR to Storage

OutlineBackground

− CO2 in the subsurface− What is Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and why is it needed?− Current status of CCS

CO2 Storage− Subsurface lessons learned− Impact of dynamic injectability factors on storage capacity estimates

CO2-EOR− History and current status− Learnings for CO2 storage

Summary

CO2 in the Subsurface

5

CO2 is a dense supercritical fluid at typical reservoir T and P

• Miscibility with oil for enhanced oil recovery

• Efficient storage of CO2 from atmospheric conditions

• Buoyant and mobile compared to water

• Soluble in water, reduces pH

Source: “Strategic Analysis of the Global Status of Carbon Capture and Storage Report 1: Status of Carbon Capture and Storage Projects Globally,” Global CCS Institute, 2009

CCS – a Key GHG Mitigation Technology

6Source: IEA, “Energy Technology Perspectives 2017,” Paris: OECD/IEA, 2017

What is CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS)?

7

StorageStore CO2 in a safe location for 100’s of years

CaptureExtract CO2 fromflue gas

Transport

Is CO2 Storage at Required Scale Feasible?

• Global CO2 emissions ∼35 Gt/y, ∼13 Gt/y from large point sources

• Need to sequester ∼120 Gt CO2 to achieve 450 ppm (2°C)*

• Requires >4 Gt/y by 2050 (comparable to global HC liquid production)

• 22 projects in operation/under construction; capture capacity 40 Mt/yr

8*IEA estimate for 2015-2050

1 Gt = 1 billion tons1 Mt = 1 million tons1 ton CO2 ≈ 9 reservoir bbl

Large-Scale CCS Operational Milestones• 21 large-scale CCS projects in operation or under construction globally with CO2 capture

capacity of 40 million MTA• Storage dominated by EOR: 16 projects and 32 MTA• Additional 6 large-scale projects are at Define stage, with capture capacity of around 8 MTA.

A further 11 large-scale projects are at Evaluate and Identify stages with capture capacity of around 21 MTA (1/2 involve EOR)

9Source: Global Status of CCS 2017 – Summary Report, Global CCS Institute

Boundary Dam CCS ProjectOver two million tonnes of CO2

captured and used mainly for

enhanced oil recovery Petrobras Santos Basin

Pre-Salt Oil Field CCS Project

Four million tonnes of CO2injected into producing reservoirs

QuestOver three

million tonnes of CO2 captured and stored in a

deep saline formation

Sleipner CO2Storage Project

20 years of successful operations, over 18

millions tonnes of CO2stored

Jilin Oil Field EOR Demonstration Project

Over one million tonnes of CO2injected

Air Products Steam Methane Reformer EOR Project

Four million tonnes of CO2 captured and used for enhanced recovery

• Capture dominated by natural gas processing: 10 projects and 25 Mt/yr• Storage dominated by EOR: 16 projects and 32 Mt/yr

Large-Scale CCS Project Startups

10Source: Global Status of CCS 2017 – Summary Report, GCCSI

Illinois Industrial CCS ProjectOnline 2Q 2017

Petra Nova Carbon

Capture ProjectOnline 4Q 2016

Gorgon Carbon Dioxide Injection Project

Operations anticipated in 2018

Abu Dhabi CCS ProjectWorld’s first operational CCS project in the iron and steel

sector; online 4Q 2016

Norway Full Chain CCS

Project2017 budget supports full-chain CCS project

Tomakomai CCS Demonstration ProjectJapan’s first fully integrated

CCS Project

Yangchang Integrated CCS Demonstration Project

2020 startup

ACTLCapturing CO2from multiple

industrial sources for EOR; 2019

startup

• 22 projects in operation or under construction with capture capacity of 40 Mt/yr

CCS Challenges

Cost is mostly in the CO2 capture step• CO2 sources are at low pressure and low concentration, while storage

demands high pressure and high concentration

Subsurface Challenges• Capacity• Injectivity • Containment

11

Industry Capture Cost, $/ton

Nat. gas processing, hydrogen, ethanol 20 - 30Power gen., iron and steel, cement 60 - 200

Source: Global Status of CCS 2016 – Summary Report, GCCSI

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

O&G Res.inc. EOR

Deep SalineFormations

UnmineableCoal Bedsinc. ECBM

IgneousRocks

Gas/OilShale

Estimated Storage Capacity, Gt CO2

Low High

100s of Years Potential Storage Capacity?

12Source: IPCC SRCCS, 2005 – other than the O&G Reservoirs, the numbers are very approximate

??

Pioneering Large-Scale Projects Saline Formations

13Source: Eiken et al., “Lessons Learned from 14 years of CCS Operations: Sleipner, In Salah and Snøhvit,” Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 5541–5548

Sleipner(North Sea)

Snøhvit(Barents Sea)

In Salah(Algeria)

Thick, laterally continuous,high NTG sand (> 1 D) Thin, fractured sands

(10 mD matrix)

Thinner, laterally discontinuous, lower NTG sands (100s mD)

Sleipner Subsurface Lessons Learned

14Source: Ringrose, et al., “Leveraging Infrastructure, Storage and EOR to Get Significant CCS Scale-Up,: Norway Case,” SCCS Workshop, May 26, 2017

Time-Lapse Seismic

• More that 18 Mt injected since 1996

• Good injectivity, CO2plume movement dominated by gravity

In Salah Subsurface Lessons Learned

15Source: Eiken et al., “Lessons Learned from 14 years of CCS Operations: Sleipner, In Salah and Snøhvit,” Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 5541–5548

• 3.8 Mt injected 2004-2011• Low injectivity, evidence of fracture activation and surface uplift

InSAR Surface Elevation Map

Thin, fractured sands (10 mD matrix)

Snøhvit Subsurface Lessons Learned

16Source: Ringrose, et al., “Leveraging Infrastructure, Storage and EOR to Get Significant CCS Scale-Up,: Norway Case,” SCCS Workshop, May 26, 2017

• Rapid build-up of pressure during CO2 injection into Tubåen Formation– Attributed to injection into confined fluvial-deltaic channel system

• Injection then diverted into Stø Formation (shoreface depositional environment)• More than 4 Mt injected since 2008 (1.1 Mt into Tubåen)

N. American Storage Capacity Estimates

• Largest potential storage volume in saline aquifers• Wide variations in estimates• “Static” estimates – dynamic injectability factors not considered• Potential storage in oil and gas reservoirs < 10% of total

17

0

50

100

150

200

250

Low Mean High

Gt o

f CO

2 St

orag

e

CO2 Storage Capacity in O&G

DOE O&G USGS O&G

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Low Mean High

Gt o

f CO

2St

orag

e

Total CO2 Storage Capacity

DOE Total USGS Total

Sources: DOE 2015 Carbon Storage Atlas, USGS 2013 National Assessment of Geological CO2 Storage Resources

Impact of Dynamic Injectibility Factors

Lower estimate – correlation of reservoir simulation estimates with formation volume – ∼6X lower than upper estimate

18

Source: Kearns et al., “Developing a consistent database for regional geologic CO2 storage capacity worldwide,” GHGT-13, 2016

Upper Estimate Lower Estimate

Upper estimate – correlation of USGS static capacity estimates with formation volume

Global Storage Prospectivity

19Source: Kearns et al., “Developing a consistent database for regional geologic CO2 storage capacity worldwide,” GHGT-13, 2016

Adequate Capacity in Most Regions

20

Source: Kearns et al., “Developing a consistent database for regional geologic CO2 storage capacity worldwide,” GHGT-13, 2016

Lower Estimate of Storage Capacity Supply Compared with Potential Demand for CCS, Gt

Cost of CO2 Transportation and Storage

• Wide range of cost estimates: $10 – 30/ton• Cost components are site-specific and have large range of uncertainty:

– Site Characterization– Wells– Pipelines and Facilities– Opex– Monitoring– Land Use– Legacy Well Remediation– Post-Injection Site Care

CO2-EOR History and Status• Began in Permian Basin in 1970s

• Majority of projects in North America

• Active pilot programs in Middle East, China, and elsewhere

• Over 1 billion bbl oil produced to date

• Over 1 Gt of CO2 injected, > 90% from natural sources

• Estimated 480 billion bbl oil recovery potential with 139 Gt of storage with “best practice” CO2-EOR*

22

* IEAGHG, “CO2 Storage in Depleted Oilfields: Global Application Criteria for CO2 EOR,” IEA/CON/08/155, 2009

North American CO2-EOR

23Source: “A Review of the CO2 Pipeline Infrastructure in the U.S.,” DOE/NETL-2014/1681, 2015

• Phased development initiated in 1984• CO2 miscibly displaces trapped oil• Closed-loop – injection balances production• Goal: Minimize CO2 injected/bbl oil produced

Means CO2 EOR Project

24

EOR project improves recovery and stores CO2

• Incremental EOR recovery of 12+% OOIP at 80% HCPV CO2 injected• ∼1/2 of injected CO2 (18 million tons) retained in reservoir

CO2 Injection

Means CO2 Injection Results

25

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%HCPVi CO2

%O

OIP

from

CO

2

Means (San Andres)

Other West Texas CO2 Floods

12%

10%

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

HCPVI CO2

% O

OIP

from

CO

2

MeansOther PB CO2 Floods

Oil Recovery

Recycle

Implications of CO2-EOR for CO2 Storage

• Four decades of CO2-EOR experience provides confidence in feasibility of safe and secure CO2 storage

– > 1 Gt injected with no measurable leakage to surface• CO2 replaces oil that has been trapped over geologic time

• Closed-loop process maintains steady pressure

• Well-established industry practices for well construction, operation, and abandonment

– Pipeline networks provide model for linking CO2 sources and sinks

– Adaptive reservoir management provides model for dealing with subsurface uncertainties

• Similarity in relevant skills/technology required26

Transitioning from CO2-EOR to Storage

• CO2-EOR can be an important stepping stone to large-scale CO2 storage:− Majority of existing and planned CCS projects involve EOR− Envision transitioning to anthropogenic sources− Oil sales provide revenue source to offset cost of capture

• Challenges:− EOR projects aim to minimize the amount and cost of CO2 purchased

and left in the reservoir− Storage projects aim to maximize the amount of CO2 left in the reservoir− Aligning CO2 supply and demand

27

Summary• Dynamic injectability factors reduce CO2 storage capacity estimates−Hundreds of years of CO2 storage capacity is potentially available, even after

accounting for dynamic limitations−Areal distribution of potential storage capacity is widely varied

• Industry has a long history with CO2-EOR that provides a strong experience base for CO2 storage− CO2-EOR alone likely will be insufficient to meet emission reduction targets

• Geologic and reservoir engineering studies are essential for identifying storage sites having adequate capacity, containment, and injectivity− Similarity in relevant skills and technology to O&G development

28

For More Information

• Howard J. Herzog, “Carbon Capture,” MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series (2018)

• F. M. Orr, Jr. “Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: An Update,” SPE Journal invited paper SPE 194190-PA (December 2018)

• Global CCS Institute, “Global Status of CCS: 2018,” https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/

Society of Petroleum Engineers Distinguished Lecturer Programwww.spe.org/dl 30

Your Feedback is ImportantEnter your section in the DL Evaluation Contest by

completing the evaluation form for this presentationVisit SPE.org/dl

#SPEDL