Workshop on Capture and Sequestration of CO2Mexico D.F.

9-10 July 2008

Frank MouritsNatural Resources Canada

Overview of the IEA GHG Weyburn-Midale CO2

Monitoring and Storage Project

2

About the Weyburn-Midale Project

The IEA GHG CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project is the world’s largest, full-scale, in-the-field study of all aspects of CO2 storage in a commercial EOR operation – frequently referred to as Measurement, Monitoring and Verification (MMV)

The Weyburn - Midale commercial EOR operations, begun in 2000, currently constitute the largest CO2injection project in the world (~2.8 Mt/y).

Other large projects include:Sleipner, Norway (~1 Mt/y, started in 1996)Snøhvit, Norway (0.7 Mt/y, started in 2008)In-Salah, Algeria (1.2 Mt/y, started in 2004)

3

Outline of this presentation

• Encana Weyburn and Apache Midale Commercial EOR Operations

• IEA GHG Weyburn CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project: Overview and Results of Phase I (2000-2004)

• IEA GHG Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project : Final Phase (2007-2011)

4

Encana Weyburn and Apache Midale Commercial EOR Operations

5

Location of the Weyburn-Midale CO2 Project

Weyburn-Midale

6

Location of the Weyburn-Midale CO2 Project

Weyburn

7

Storage Capacity Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

Aquifers ECBM Depleted gas Depleted oil EORUlti

mat

e St

orag

e C

apac

ity (M

t)

Canada's 2003 Large Stationary Point Source GHG Emissions: 411 Mt/yr

WCSB's 2003 LFE GHGs: ~ 200 Mt/yr

(WC

SB)

450 Mt 5000 Mt ???~1,000,000 Mt 100 Mt

*

* Note: Logarithmic scale

**

260 Mt/yr2005

130

2005

8

Weyburn (EnCana) Midale (Apache)Field Size 180 km2 104 km2

Depth 1500 m 1500 m

Gross Pay / Net Pay 25 / 7.8 m 22 / 7.5 m

Zone Porosity Marley Dolomite zone: 26% ; Vuggy

Limestone zone:15%

Average Porosity 17.2% 16.3%

Zone Permeability Marley Dolomite zone: 10 mD

; Vuggy

Limestone zone: 30 mD

Average Water Saturation 31.7% 16.3%

Average Oil gravity 29.3 API (880 kg/m3) 29.8 API (877 kg/m3)

Minimum miscibility pressure 2030 -

2320 psi

(14 -16 MPa)

Original oil in place 1.4 billion bbl 515 million bbl

Oil recovery pre-EOR (primary, waterflood, infill)

370 millions bbl(26.4% OOIP)

154 million bbl(25.4% OOIP)

Number of injector wells n/a 60 –

70, incl. 10 CO2

Number of producing wells 360 (in EOR area) 270 (total field)

Weyburn and Midale Oilfield Characteristics

9

Weyburn and Midale Operational StatisticsWeyburn (EnCana) Midale (Apache)

Start of CO2 injection / duration 2000 / 30 years 2005 /30 years

Injection pressure 1450 -

1600 psi

(10 -

11 MPa)

Injection of source CO2Recycle of CO2 & produced gas

6,500 t/d

(125 MMscf/d)60 MMscf/d

1,300 t/d

(25 MMscf/d)6 –

8 MMscf/d

Annual amount of source CO2 injected

2.4 million tonnes 474,000 tonnes

Total amount source CO2 injected to date

9.5 million tonnes

(Feb 2007) n/a

Incremental oil production 18,000 b/d for EOR area30,600 b/d for total unit

n/a

Projected total incremental oil recovery due to CO2

155 million barrels 60 million barrels(17% OOIP)

CO2 utilization factor 3 -

4 Mcf/b 2.3 Mcf/b

Projected amount of CO2 stored at project completion

30+ million tonnes* (gross)26+ million tonnes (net)

10+ million tonnes* (gross)8.5+ million tonnes (net)

Total capital cost of EOR project CAD$1.3 billion CAD$95 million

10

How does CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) work?

11

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

Date

bopd(gross)

WaterfloodHorizontal Infills

Vertical Infills CO2Actual

1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015

Projected

CO2

EnCana Corporation

EnCana’s Weyburn Unit Production Data

12

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

Jun-

53Ju

n-56

Jun-

59Ju

n-62

Jun-

65Ju

n-68

Jun-

71Ju

n-74

Jun-

77Ju

n-80

Jun-

83Ju

n-86

Jun-

89Ju

n-92

Jun-

95Ju

n-98

Jun-

01Ju

n-04

Jun-

07Ju

n-10

Jun-

13Ju

n-16

Jun-

19Ju

n-22

Jun-

25Ju

n-28

Jun-

31Ju

n-34

Jun-

37

Oil

Rat

e, b

bl/d

Waterflood Wedge Primary Wedge

EOR Phase Group #3 EOR Phase Group #2

EOR Phase Group #1

Apache’s Midale Unit Production Data

Apache Canada

Wat

erflo

od

Vert

ical

Infil

l

Hor

izon

tal I

nfill

13

Dakota Gasification Company (DGC), Beulah, North Dakota, U.S.A.:

•

Produces 13,000 tonnes/d

(250 mmcf/d) of CO2

as by-product of lignite coal gasification, of which 8,000 t/d

is available for EOR

•

DGC delivers CO2 to Weyburn/ Midale

field gates through 320-km pipeline, built and operated by DGC

•

CO2

purity is 95% (less than 2% H2

S); trace mercaptans

•

CO2

is delivered to 2175 psi/ 15 MPa)

Source of CO2

14

IEA GHG Weyburn CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project

Phase I (2000-2004) Overview and Results

15

Objectives•

to develop monitoring and modeling methods to address the long- term migration and fate of CO2

•

to predict and verify the ability of oil reservoirs to securely and economically contain CO2 through a comprehensive analysis of various methodologies

Phase I: 2000-2004

To address these objectives, Phase I was organized along 4 main “themes”, which comprised over 50 separate research subtasks:

1.

Geological characterization of geosphere

and biosphere

2.

Prediction, monitoring and verification of CO2

movements

3.

CO2

storage capacity and distribution predictions

4.

Long-term risk assessments of the storage site

16

Phase I Partners

21 Research Organizations / Research Performers(in kind contributions)

7 Government Sponsors $18 million (cash)

•

Natural Resources Canada•

United States Dept. of Energy•

European Commission•

IEA GHG R&D Programme•

Saskatchewan Industry and Resources•

Alberta Energy Research Institute•

RITE (Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth)

•

Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC)•

Alberta Research Council (ARC)•

Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI)•

ECOMatters (ECOM)•

GEDCO Inc. (GEDCO)•

Geological Survey of Canada (GSC)•

Hampson

Russell (HR)•

J.D. Mollard

and Associates Ltd. (JDMA)

•

Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO (CSM)

•

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories, Berkeley, CA (LBNL)

•

Monitor Scientific Corporation International, Denver, CO (MSCI)

•

North Dakota Geological Survey (NDGS)

•

British Geological Survey (BGS)

•

Bureau de Recherches

Geologiques

et Minieres

(BRGM)•

Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS)

•

Istituto

Nazionale

di

Geofisica

e Vulcanologia

(INGV)•

Quintessa

Ltd

8 Industry Sponsors $22 million (cash + in-kind)

•

Nexen•

SaskPower•

Total•

TransAlta

•

EnCana•

BP•

ChevronTexaco•

Dakota Gasification Co.

•

Rakhit

Petroleum Consulting Ltd. (RPCL)

•

University of Regina (U of R)•

University of Saskatchewan (U of S)

•

University of Alberta (U of A) •

University of Calgary (U of C)

2000-2004$40 million

Manager

17

N

Midale Beds pinchout

Biosphere

Bearpaw Aquitard

Belly River

Colorado Aquitard

New castleJoli Fou Aquitard

Mannville

JurassicVanguard Aquitard

Watrous Aquitard

Mississippian

Sub-Mesozoic Unconformity

Midale Evaporite

Performance Assessment Area(System Domain)

Midale Beds

10km

EOR

Surface lineaments

Regional hydrogeological flow

Potable aquifers

wells

Midale Beds subcrop

1.5km

Horizon of CO2 Injection

N

Midale Beds pinchout

Biosphere

Bearpaw Aquitard

Belly River

Colorado Aquitard

New castleJoli Fou Aquitard

Mannville

JurassicVanguard Aquitard

Watrous Aquitard

Mississippian

Sub-Mesozoic Unconformity

Midale Evaporite

Performance Assessment Area(System Domain)

Midale Beds

10km

EOR

Surface lineaments

Regional hydrogeological flow

Potable aquifers

wells

Midale Beds subcrop

1.5km

Horizon of CO2 Injection

Source: Saskatchewan Geological Survey; University of Alberta

Project Location and Study Areas

18

Where is the CO2 Stored?

Downdip

density flow in Midale

beds helps trap CO2

19EnCana Corporation

Annual Seismic Surveys Track CO2 Movement Seismic Surveys (Baseline to 2004) –

Phase 1a

Baseline -

2001 Baseline -

2002 Baseline -

2004

20

Tracking CO2 Chemistry: Fluid Monitoring Surveys (Phase 1)

Total Alkalinity (mg/L) Ca+2

(mg/L) δ13CHCO3

(‰)

Baseline  (08‐2000)     

Competing Reactions: CO2

+ H2

O ↔

H+

+ HCO3-

/ CO2

+ Ca2+

+ H2

O ↔ 2H+

+ CaCO3

/ CO2

+ H2

O + CaCO3

↔ Ca2+

+ 2HCO3-

University of Calgary

Monitor 1  (03‐2001)    Monitor 2  (07‐2001)    Monitor 3  (09‐2001)      Monitor 4   (03‐2002)    Monitor 5   (06‐2002)    Monitor 6   (09‐2002)   Monitor 7   (04‐2003)     Monitor 8   (06‐2003)   Monitor 9   (09‐2003)   Monitor 10   (03‐2004)     

21

Phase I Results: Risk Assessment Study

Initial simulation results indicate that after 5000 years over 98% of the initial CO2 in place will remain stored:

•

More sophisticated simulation work is required

•

Risk management practices need to be developed

Geological “container” at Weyburn is very effective:

•

Primary carbonate and secondary shale seals are highly competent

•

There is hydraulic separation and no fluid flow between adjacent aquifers

Potable Aquifer

18%

0.0%

9%

0.02%

0.14%

After 5000 years, 27% of CO2

moved outside EOR area, but remained within study area

22

Phase I ConclusionsPhase I results for the four themes:1.

Geological characterization of geosphere

and biosphere:•

the geological setting at Weyburn-Midale

appears to be highly suitable for long-term CO2

geological storage

2.

Prediction, monitoring and verification of CO2

movements:•

Seismic monitoring proved effective to track CO2 movements, as did geochemical fluid sampling

3.

CO2

storage capacity and distribution predictions•

History matching was successful

4.

Long-term risk assessments of the storage site•

>98% of the injected CO2

will remain stored

Phase I developed the most complete, comprehensive, peer-reviewed data set in the world for CO2 geological storage

Recommended further work, moving onto the Final Phase

23

IEA GHG Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project

The Final Phase (2007-2011)

24

Issues to be AddressedTechnical•

Unfinished work (“gaps”) from Phase I•

Gaps identified by IPPC (Special Report on CCS, 2005)

Non-Technical / PolicyFavourable regulatory regime•

Site selection•

Operations•

Abandonment / post-abandonment•

Orphaned sitesPublic understanding and acceptanceFacilitating fiscal policy regime•

Value placed on stored CO2•

Credit trading mechanisms•

Financial / fiscal incentives

Why pursue a Final Phase project?

Outcomes Sought

•

Technical knowledge transferred to enable widespread deployment

•

Solid technical basis established

for policy development

•

Storage security•

Risk management•

Long-term liability•

Verifiable GHG reductions•

Public health and safety

•

License to operate

•

Sources-to-sinks infrastructure•

Widespread use•

Deep GHG cuts

25

Vision: “To encourage the widespread deployment of long-term carbon capture and storage (CCS) in Canada, the USA and around the world by developing and

demonstrating technology solutions required for the design, implementation, monitoring and verification of CO2 geological storage projects and by influencing

and facilitating good public policy development”

Objectives:•

Build a Best Practices Manual

(BPM) as a practical “How To”

guide for the design and implementation of CO2

storage associated with EOR

•

Influence the development of clear, workable regulations

for CO2 storage, building upon existing, effective regulatory framework

•

Influence the development of an effective public consultation process

•

Influence the development of effective public policy

to seed the development of a large, economic CO2

supply and infrastructure, and a mechanism for monetizing credits for CO2

storage

Why pursue a Final Phase (2007-2011) project?

26

Final Phase Deliverable

Technical Components (90% of budget)

1. Site Characterization / Selection

2. Wellbore

Integrity

3. Monitoring and Verification

4. Risk Assessment

Non-Tech Components (10% of budget)

1. Regulatory Issues

2. Public Communication and Outreach

3. Business Environment / Fiscal Policy

Best Practices ManualWill guide all aspects of future CO2 EOR storage projectsWill accelerate development of regulatory frameworks, public communication and dialogue, and policy/fiscal incentives

“Must ensure integration”

27

Final Phase: Partners to Date

19 Research Organizations / Research Perfomers

6 Government Sponsors •

Natural Resources Canada•

United States Dept. of Energy•

IEA GHG R&D Programme•

Saskatchewan Industry and Resources•

Alberta Energy Research Institute•

RITE (Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth)

•

Alberta Research Council (ARC)•

Canadian Light Source – Synchrotron•

ECOMatters (ECOM)•

Geological Survey of Canada (GSC)•

Permedia Group•

Saskatchewan Research Council (SRC)•

Canada Capital Energy Corp

•

Fugro Seismic Imaging•

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories

•

Bluewave Resources

•

University of Bristol UK•

International Energy Agency (IEA) GHG R&D Programme

•

Discussions with UK, Netherlands and EU

9 Industry Sponsors

•

SaskPower.•

Schlumberger•

Shell•

Dakota Gasification•

Nexen•

Discussions with other companies

•

Apache•

EnCana•

Chevron•

OMV Austria•

Aramco Services Co

•

T.L. Watson & Associates•

University of Regina (U of R)•

University of Sask. (U of S) •

University of Alberta (U of A) •

University of Calgary (U of C)•

URS Canada Inc.•

Saskatchewan Geological Survey

2008 - 2011$40 Million

(cash + in-kind)

Manager-Technical

28

Final Phase – Technical Program

The Best Practices Manual will provide Protocols for:

• Storage site selection

• Wellbore

integrity, monitoring and remediation

• Monitoring and verification of stored CO2

• Long-term risk assessment and risk management

• Maximizing economic CO2

storage capacity

29

Final Phase – Technical ProgramTheme 1 – Geological Integrity (Site Selection)

•

develop firm protocols for site selection•

identify minimum data set required for successful site selection

using full-cycle risk assessment

•

integrate hydrogeological, geophysical, geological data sets to create complete picture of seal integrity

•

further study leakage and storage integrity in natural analogues•

summarize impact of CO2

on geochemical and geomechanical

processes and regional reservoirs and seals

Theme 2 – Wellbore Integrity•

complete identifying essential parameters for well-bore integrity•

compile list of well remediation technologies that can be applied•

describe current well abandonment trends and how they may impact

future abandonment requirements

•

conduct cased-hole dynamic testing (look for pressures and mobile fluids that signal CO2

migration out of the zone)•

document safe practices and effect on wellbore

integrity and geomechanics

30

Final Phase – Technical Program

Theme 3 – Storage Monitoring Methods•

Characterize the accuracy of monitoring technologies for quantitative prediction of CO2 location and volume

•

determine if multi-year 4D seismic programs are an appropriate monitoring and verification requirement

•

determine CO2 distribution through in-situ time-lapse well logging; spinner surveys; selective drilling, coring and logging of slim holes

•

continue to explore passive seismic monitoring

Theme 4 – Risk Assessment and Storage Mechanisms•

complete full-field risk assessment from Phase 1•

determine risk levels for various storage optimization scenarios•

describe ultimate fate of CO2

, the relative volumes in each storage/ trapping mechanism, the time needed for trapping, and factors affecting these mechanisms

•

Study ways for stimulating and accelerating CO2

mineral fixation at reservoir conditions

31

Public Communications and Outreach Theme•

Theme Leader and Expert Advisory Panel in place

• Working with sponsors to develop a Communication Strategy and Action Plan

based on the Weyburn-Midale experience and

other major international CO2

geological storage projects:

•

Identify and focus on issues of key interest to policy makers, regulators and the local and national public

•

Communicate in the most appropriate manner the technical information from the Best Practices Manual and other relevant sources to these essentially non-technical audiences

•

Develop and/or participate in development of CCS educational and

outreach materials

•

Already produced outreach materials for policy makers and public

Final Phase – Non-Technical Program

32

ACCEPTANCEDE

SIRA

BLE

TOLERANCE

REJECTION

BENEFIT COST

Public Acceptance

BENEFIT

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High

RISK

Very Low Low Moderate High Very High

33

Final Phase – Non-Technical Program (Cont’d)Regulatory Theme•

Consultant hired for scoping study:-

Survey of CCS regulatory initiatives in Canada and internationally-

Gap analysis of Weyburn-Midale

technical program-

Development of regulatory work program and budget•

Consultant supported by Expert Advisory Panel (governments, industry, IEA GHG R&D Programme)

Business Environment Theme•

Consultant hired for scoping study-

Likely recommendation is to wait for Alberta CCS Development Council report this fall before proceeding

Results of scoping studies will inform sponsors by early September 2008 on whether to implement these themes

34

•

Continued financial support by governments for the Final Phase is confirmed: NRCan, US DOE, Saskatchewan, Alberta and Japan

•

Sponsorship from industry is enhanced by including new participants from different sectors

•

Total cash amount committed to date by all sponsors: $17.0 million; an equal amount is being contributed in-kind

•

Approximately $3-4 million in further funding is being sought from new sponsors (industry, EU countries) for additional projects

•

Most agreements with research providers have been signed, representing approximately 35 individual research programs; work is underway since the end of 2007

•

On non-technical side, the Communications theme has been established and a strategy and workplan

will be presented by end of August

•

Scoping studies, to be completed this summer, will inform sponsors whether to implement the Regulatory and/or Business Environment themes

Overall Status of the Final Phase

35

•

Based on preliminary Phase I results, the geological setting at Weyburn-Midale appears to be highly suitable for long-term CO2

geological storage

•

Project has arguably has developed and will continue to develop the most complete, comprehensive, peer-reviewed data set in the world for CO2

geological storage

•

An international team of researchers has been established and strong international leadership has been demonstrated by Canada, the USA and the EU (Phase I) through their continued financial and managerial support

•

Project achieved international credibility and recognition by the IEA GHG R&D Programme

and the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF)

•

The final product –

the Best Practices Manual -

will serve as a practical technical guide for the design and implementation of EOR-type CO2

storage, while accelerating the development of: (i) appropriate regulatory frameworks for CO2

storage; (ii) effective public consultation processes; and (iii)

public policies that provide effective incentives for long-term CCS

Conclusions

36

Thank you for your attention!Any Questions?

For more information, emailfmourits@nrcan.gc.ca

Frank MouritsNatural Resources Canada

Ottawa, Canada+1-613-947-3482