Review of the Carbon Dioxide Injection and Storage Potential of … · 2019-05-12 · CO2CRC...

Review of the Carbon Dioxide Injection and Storage Potential of the Denison Trough,

QueenslandCameron Marsh and Adam Scott

CO2CRC Report No: RPT05-0015

Review of the Carbon Dioxide Injection and Storage Potential of the Denison Trough,

QueenslandCameron Marsh and Adam Scott

CO2CRC Report No: RPT05-0015

Innovative Carbon Technologies Pty Ltd

PO Box 1130, Bentley, Western Australia 6102Phone: +61 8 6436 8655Fax: +61 8 6436 8555Email: [email protected]: www.ictpl.com.au

Reference: Marsh, C, and Scott, A, 2005. A Review of the CO2CRC-Geoscience Australia Queensland Core Workshop. CO2CRC/Geoscience Australia, Canberra. CO2CRC Report Number RPT05-0014, 6pp.

© ICTPL 2005

Unless otherwise specifi ed, Innovative Carbon Technologies Pty Ltd (ICTPL) retains copyright over this publication. You must not reproduce, distribute, publish, copy, transfer or commercially exploit any information contained in this publication that would be an infringement of any copyright, patent, trademark, design or other intellectual property right.

Requests and inquiries concerning copyright should be addressed to the Commercial Manager, ICTPL, PO Box 1130, Bentley, Western Australia 6102. Telephone: +61 8 6436 8655

CO2CRC Project 1 Denison Trough Queensland

- 1 -

Review of the Carbon Dioxide

Injection and Storage Potential of the

Denison Trough, Queensland

by

Cameron Marsh Adam Scott


- 2 -

Executive Summary

The Denison Trough contains the nearest possible injection sites to the Rockhampton-Gladstone region, an area that represents 49 percent of Queensland’s total stationary CO2 emissions Based on reservoir analysis and production data the Catherine Sandstone and Aldebaran Sandstone are the most prospective units. Reservoir quality has restricted the Aldebaran Sandstone’s suitability to isolated narrow regions around existing hydrocarbon fields. Areas where hydrocarbons are unable to be produced have significantly increased risk of poor injectivity and storage potential (e.g. Warrinilla). The Catherine sandstone is similarly restricted, with erosion limiting seal coverage. As a result only one area has been identified where the Catherine Sandstone and Aldebaran Sandstone can be targeted simultaneously. Another key factor is the faulted nature of the hydrocarbon fields. Despite their likely sealing nature a detailed geomechanical study would be required. A four year demonstration of CCS technology, located approximately 200 km east of the Denison Trough, with an annual CO2 output of 75 000 tonnes has been proposed. Assuming injectivity there are 11 fields within the Denison Trough which have an equal or greater storage potential than the projected CO2 volume produced. Four of these fields could have 12 years and two fields more than forty years of storage potential for this scale of project. However it should be noted that the fields are all currently in production and as such are most likely unavailable for use as CO2 storage sites at the present time. The Denison Trough appears to offer many years of potential storage for a demonstration scale CCS project. However areas with different geological histories will need to be investigated to accommodate the storage capacity required for larger CCS projects.


- 3 -

Denison Trough Desktop Review

Table of Contents Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................2 1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................4 2. Geographical and Industrial Setting.........................................................................................5 3. CO2 Properties ............................................................................................................................5 4. Geological Setting and Regional Stratigraphy .........................................................................5 5. Geomechanics..............................................................................................................................7 6. Denison Trough Reservoir Performance ..................................................................................9 7. Demonstration Project Source to Sink Matching ..................................................................11 8. Catherine Sandstone.................................................................................................................11

8.1 Reservoir Potential: Implications for CO2 Storage..................................................................12 8.2 Reservoir Distribution, Quality and Continuity .......................................................................12 8.3 Containment potential : Implications for CO2 storage. ...........................................................12 8.4 Seal Distribution and Continuity..............................................................................................12

9. Aldebaran Sandstone................................................................................................................13 9.1 Reservoir Potential: Implications for CO2 Storage ..............................................................13 9.2 Reservoir Distribution, Quality and Continuity....................................................................15 9.3 Containment potential: Implications for CO2 storage...........................................................19 9.4 Seal Distribution and Continuity ..........................................................................................19

10. Future Work and Prospectivity ...............................................................................................20 11. Significance of the Catherine Sandstone and Aldebaran Sandstone reservoir performance and architecture to CO2 injection and storage. ............................................................................21


- 4 -

1. Introduction Geoscience Australia as part of the CO2CRC was directed to undertake a review of the Denison Trough as a potential storage option for CO2 from a potential power station emission site (using either Oxyfuel or IGCC technology) located in the Rockhampton-Gladstone region. This review represents a discrete month long (three work months) subproject building on the regional assessments within an 18 month, greater South-East Queensland assessment of potential CO2 storage sites due for completion mid-2005. This review was compiled from the analysis and interpretation of limited log data, drill core as well as the review of publicly available data and reports examined over the past 12 months. The Permian Denison Trough is part of the Bowen Basin. It is located 200-300km away from a number of stationary C02 emitters, and could prove to be a useful testing ground for CO2 injection in South East Queensland (Figure 1). If the process of capture, injection and storage of CO2 (geosequestration) was able to be demonstrated in the Denison Trough, then the infrastructure put in place (i.e. capture and transport – pipelines) for that demonstration site could subsequently be utilised for more regional scale solutions; such as the Galilee Basin. By way of comparison, a potential CO2 storage site in the Galilee Basin was investigated under the GEODISC project. This site had a deterministically estimated potential storage volume of 322 TCF, with a 14.4% chance of success, giving a risked volume of 46 TCF (Bradshaw et al. 2003). This risked volume represents 55 years of Queensland’s stationary emissions (Bradshaw et al 2003). Even though the Galilee Basin requires extensive further research, such volumes are not believed to be available in the Denison Trough. A technically successful ESSCI (Environmentally Sustainable Site for C02 Injection) must meet five key criteria (Bradshaw et al. 2002);

• Storage Capacity (volume), • Injectivity (reservoir quality), • Containment (trapping style and

integrity), • Site Details (distance from potential source) • Existing Natural Resources (conflict of natural resources).

The first three criteria are intimately linked geologically. For instance, for the site to be geologically successful across a given area, the pore volume must be linked together (permeability) and have a viable seal. If only one component fails, the entire site maybe unsuitable for CO2 storage. For example, the pore throats in porous rocks may be poorly connected (i.e. low permeability), inhibiting the flow of CO2 away from the injection well. The findings of this review suggests that, in non-producing areas, permeability (connectivity of pore space), suitable burial depth and lateral seal are the major risk factors for strata in the Denison Trough, particularly for the Catherine and Aldebaran Sandstone reservoir units. The lack of relatively low risk alternative injection sites away from producing fields, adds a further potential

Figure 1. Approximate Location of the Denison Trough


- 5 -

risk of compromising hydrocarbon resources, which could be an issue both for the operators of gas fields within the Denison Trough and also companies wishing to store CO2.

2. Geographical and Industrial Setting The Bowen Basin is approximately 560 km north-west of Brisbane (Figure 1). North-east of the Denison Trough are a number of Bowen Basin coal fields. These supply coal, via rail, to power stations and other major industrial CO2 emitters in eastern Queensland, including the regional centres of Gladstone and Rockhampton. The Rockhampton-Gladstone region is highly significant because it contains five major CO2 emitters, which represent 49 percent of Queensland’s total potential sequesterable stationary CO2 emissions. This means that the area has the potential for a full size capture project, with storage in the Denison Trough, which would have the economies of scale required to make significant cuts to Queensland’s CO2 emissions profile. A state government built pipeline supplies gas from the Denison Trough to the Rockhampton-Gladstone areas. Together with the coal rail link, the pipeline right-of-way access may provide potential access corridors for CO2 pipelines to the north and south Denison Trough. These pipelines could subsequently be extended to the Galilee Basin if a suitable site is identified there.

3. CO2 Properties Table 1 Physical properties of Carbon Dioxide (Cook et al., 2000)

Queensland is currently emitting large volumes of CO2 and this is expected to grow significantly in the coming years. If geological storage of CO2 is to have a significant impact on these emissions then storage space must be used effectively. Injecting CO2 in a supercritical state has major benefits for injectivity and storage. In a supercritical state, the CO2 has a viscosity less than the liquid state, a diffusivity similar to the gas state, but has been compressed to the point were it has similar density to the liquid state (Table 1). Having the CO2 in a supercritical state greatly increases the volume of CO2 able to be stored within a structure. Having a reservoir-seal pair at depths greater than 800 m is desirable for C02 storage. At 800m, the pressure exerted at depth is approximately 8 MPa, and the temperature is normally greater than 320C which are the conditions at which CO2 enters the supercritical state (Figure 2, Bachu, 2001).

4. Geological Setting and Regional Stratigraphy The Denison Trough is delineated in the west by the Springsure Shelf, Nebine Ridge and a series of north-south trending faults (active during the early phases of the Bowen Basin development), and in the east by the Comet Ridge structural high (Anthony, 2004). The Denison Trough is extensively structured and contains several north-south trending grabens which were deformed during the Late Triassic into fault-propagated anticlines (Figure 3). These anticlines, in most cases, are filled to spill point with hydrocarbons (Brown et al., 1983).

Phase Density (g/mL) Viscosity (poise) Diffusivity (cm2/s) Gas 0.001 0.00005-0.00035 0.1-1.0 Supercritical fluid 0.2 - 0.9 0.002-0.001 0.00033

Liquid 0.8 – 1.0 0.003-0.024 0.000005-0.00002


- 6 -

Carbon Dioxide Phase Diagram

0

1

10

100

1000

10000

-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200

Temperature Celcius

Pres

sure

Mpa

SUPERCRITICAL

Critical Point

SOLID

Triple Point

LIQUID

GAS

STP = 15 Centigrade and 0.101325 Mpa

AOI for carbon-dioxide injection

VAPOR

Figure 2. Phase diagram showing relevant properties of CO2 (modified from Bachu, 2001)

The Denison Trough is a relatively mature hydrocarbon province with several fields nearing the end of production (1998 figures from Qld Dept NRM&E). Depleted gas fields are therefore a potential storage option in the Denison Trough (Bradshaw et al., 2003). The Denison Trough contains several formations which are generically described as sandstone (Figure 4). During the Permian, these sandstones were deposited in environments typically coastal in nature, ranging from fluvially influenced deltaic systems to near shore marine (John & Fielding, 1993) A number of the formations are exploited for hydrocarbons, suggesting the existence of reservoir-seal pairs that have storage potential, at least at a local scale. Regionally, the most suitable of these appears to be the Mantuan Formation, the Catherine Sandstone, Freitag Formation and the Aldebaran Sandstone. Significant periodic uplift and erosion of the sedimentary successions within the Denison Trough has occurred since the Late Triassic (Brown et al., 1983), making many areas and formations too shallow (<800m) for storage of supercritical CO2. The deeper Catherine Sandstone and Aldebaran Sandstone.


- 7 -

0

1

2

3

4

Springsure 19

Basement

Springsure 5

SpringsureAnticline

Springsure Shelf

Denison Trough

ConsueloAnticline

Me rivale Faul t

Aldebaran Sst

Rolleston 1

0.58

~ 0.65 < 0.75

0.98

1.07

Purbrook 1

Comet Platform

Km

0 10

Appr

ox. D

epth

(km

)

EW

Modified from Baker, J.C., 1989 Figure 3. Cross section of the Denison Trough showing vitrinite reflectance values (higher number equals great

temperature (i.e. greater depth of burial)). Note: The increase in vitrinite reflectance to the east and lower value at shallower present day depths (at Springsure) indicates trend is independent of present day depths, suggesting

structural reorganisation post burial. are mostly at supercritical depth and are therefore the main focus of this review. Although, the Freitag Formation, which is also at appropriate depths, is a good quality reservoir in places, and contributes significantly to the gas production and reserves, there is insufficient published data to allow a meaningful review of its CO2 storage potential.

5. Geomechanics The Denison Trough has undergone extensive structural reorganisation since the early to mid Permian resulting in a heavily faulted trough with a complex tectonic history (Baker, 1989). This reorganisation is highlighted using burial history charts (Figure 5) and vitrinite reflectance profiles (Figure 3, Vitrinite reflectance is a method used to determine the maximum temperature to which an organic particle in sedimentary rock has been exposed). The burial history chart for Cometside-1 shows that the Denison Trough was subjected to relatively rapid and continuous deposition of more than 3000m of sediment during the Permian and Triassic. This is also the period of maximum oil generation and expulsion, suggesting the timing of trap formation is contemporaneous with hydrocarbon charge. A cross section of the Denison Trough, with present day vitrinite reflectance values, shows that these values are not related to present day depths or structural trends (Figure 3). This confirms that compression and uplift of the Denison Trough occurred after the period of maximum burial. Vitrinite reflectance values also indicate greater burial depths towards the east of the trough, implying that increased diagenesis may have occurred towards the east, consequently reducing reservoir quality. This scenario is reinforced by illite-smectite compositions, which show a greater percentage of smectite converting to illite, a diagenetic process, occurring towards the east (Figure 6; Tuker, 1981).

Figure 4. Stratigraphy of the Denison Trough (from Korsch et al., 1998).


- 8 -

1000

0

2000

3000

4000

286

248

213

144

65 0CainozoicCretaceousTriassicPermian Jurassic

Time (my)Bu

rial D

epth

(m)

Accu

mul

atio

n of

Ald

ebar

an S

st to

Band

anna

Fm

inte

rval

Accu

mul

atio

n of

Rew

an G

p , C

lem

atis

Gp

& M

oola

yem

ber F

m

Accu

mul

atio

n of

Jur

assic

par

tof

Sur

at B

asin

sequ

ence

Def

orm

atio

n up

lift

& e

r osio

n

Gen

tle u

plift

- in

cipi

ent s

outh

war

d tilt

ing

Extru

sion

of O

ligo c

ene

basa

lt

Uplift

, sou

thw

ard

tiltin

g &er

osio

n

Functiona l heating dura tionMax

. Pal

aeog

eoth

erm

al g

radi

ent ~

52C

/km

0

152 C0

Modified from Baker, J.C., 1989

?

Figure 5.Burial history of the Aldebaran Sandstone in Cometside-1. Note maximum depth of burial and

temperature reached in the Triassic Present day gas fields occur in fault-bound, inverted Triassic half-graben anticlines associated with reverse faulting of Late Triassic age (Anthony, 2004). Almost all of these fields are filled to spill (Elliott, 1989) i.e. filled until they come in contact with the bounding fault (Brown et al., 1983) This suggests that the bounding faults in the Denison Trough have leaked at some time in the past. Consequently a detailed geomechanical study of the fault sealing capacity at any potential site in the Denison Trough will need to be undertaken. The present day maximum horizontal stress regime, is approximately east-northeast in the northern Bowen Basin (Enever, J. R., 1990). This suggests that currently the bounding faults are in all likelihood sealing, but further geomechanical work is required, especially at specific sites.

Figure 6. Percentage of illite interlayers in illite-smectites in mudrock and

sandstones of the Aldebaran Sandstones (Baker, 1989)


- 9 -

6. Denison Trough Reservoir Performance The structural trapping style of the Denison Trough fields is typified by stacked reservoirs within an anticlinal closure. Given this structural style, the largest volume and deepest gas pool (the Aldebaran Sandstone in most cases, Figure 7) should have the greatest reservoir pressure. This pressure differential would indicate that, the larger gas pool will dominate the production until, the pools pressure systems equilibrate, even if the reservoir quality is the same. As the Aldebaran Sandstone has been exploited over the same time period as the Catherine Sandstone, it would be expected that the larger Aldebaran Sandstone resource has had a proportionally larger share of the cumulative production. This is reflected in the production data, from Queensland Department of Natural Resources and Mines (Figure 7). Comparison of recoverable reserves versus cumulative production by field, suggests the better performing fields are Yellowbank, Arcturus, Springton, Rolleston and Merivale (Figure 8). The reservoirs of these fields are interpreted to barrier bar-tidal inlet facies and thus field performance might be predictable using sequence stratigraphic models (Baker, 1989). Comparison of percentage recoverable reserves produced by field and formation indicates the lithic prone Cattle Creek Formation, and the Punchbowl Gully, Reids Dome, Warrinilla and Westgrove fields failed to perform (Figure 9). The low performance of these fields was predicted by the stratigraphic model of Baker (1989).

Figure 7. The majority of the reserves and production come from four reservoirs, Aldebaran Sandstone, Catherine Sandstone, Mantuan Formation and the Freitag Formation. Comparison of recoverable

reserves vs. cumulative production by reservoir unit suggests the Aldebaran Sandstone and the Catherine Sandstone reservoirs are connected to the extent of at least the reserve volume.

Denison Trough initial recoverable reserves reported as at 1998 by formation

2,708

7794

590

1,155

135

53

AldebaranCatherineCattle CreekFreitagMantuanReids DomeRewan

Units: Millions of Cubic MetersSource: Qld Dept NRM&E

Denison Trough cumulative gas production by reservoir to 1998

4100

410

62386 36 1,874 Aldebaran

Catherine

Cattle Creek

Freitag

Mantuan

Reids Dome

RewanUnits: Millions of Cubic MetersSource: Qld Dept NRM&E


- 10 -

Denison Trough reserves by field as at 1998

803

779

40

172

20

4

676772226372

12

362

1,186

ArcturusMerivaleMooroolooMyrtlevillePunchbowl GullyReids DomeRollestonSpringtonSpringvaleTurkey CreekWarrinillaWestgroveYellowbank

Units: Millions of Cubic Meters

Denison Trough cumulative production by field to 1998

370

654

27

124

1

0

494416179

192

0

0

982

ArcturusMerivaleMooroolooMyrtlevillePunchbowl GullyReids DomeRollestonSpringtonSpringvaleTurkey CreekWarrinillaWestgroveYellowbankUnits: Millions of Cubic Meters

Source: Qld Dept NRM&E

Denison Trough: proportion of reserves produced from 1990-1998 by Formation

01020304050607080

Aldeba

ran

Catherine

Cattle C

reek

Freitag

Mantua

n

Reids D

ome

Rewan

Formation

Per

cent

of r

eser

ves

volu

me

prod

uced

Figure 9 Comparison of percentage recoverable reserves produced by field and formation indicates the lithic prone Cattle Creek formation and the Punchbowl Gully, Reids Dome, Warrinilla and Westgrove fields failed to

perform, as predicted by the stratigraphic model of Baker (1989).

Figure 8. Comparison of recoverable reserves vs. Cumulative production by field, suggests the better performing fields are Yellowbank, Arturus, Springton, Rolleston and Merivale.

Denison Trough: Percentage of reserves produced from 1990 to 1998 by field

0102030405060708090

Arcturu

s

Meriva

le

Mooroo

loo

Myrtlev

ille

Punch

bowl G

ully

Reids Dome

Rolleston

Spring

ton

Spring

vale

Turkey

Creek

Warrinilla

Westgrov

e

Yellowban

k

Field

Per

cent

age

of fi

eld

rese

rves

pro

duce

d


- 11 -

7. Demonstration Project Source to Sink Matching (One possible demonstration project of Oxy-Fuel-CC&S technology with an annual CO2 output of 75 000 tonnes using a single Callide A 30MWe unit) has been proposed under the Coal 21 programme (Spero, 2005). At the time of writing, this proposal suggests a minium four year operation of the power plant, capture and storage technologies would be required for proof of concept. There are 11 fields within the Denison Trough which are producing commercial volumes of hydrocarbons. Converting the hydrocarbons produced to date to equivalent subsurface carbon dioxide volume, suggests that there are five fields that have a storage potential equal to or greater than the 300,000 tonnes of CO2 which would be produced during the first fours years of the demonstration (Table 2). Assuming that CO2 could be injected at a suitable rate without damage to the vertical or lateral seal, there are four fields which could potentially store at least 12 years volume of CO2 and two fields that would be suitable for a forty year project. The Denison Trough offers many years of potential storage for a demonstration scale project. However storage capacity for larger projects will need to be investigated further afield in areas with different geological histories. To place the volume in perspective, if the demonstration proved successful and the four generating units at Callide A were converted, the two largest fields hold the equivalent of 39 years of emissions.

8. Catherine Sandstone The Catherine Sandstone forms part of a north-south elongate, coarse clastic wedge extending along much of the Denison Trough. This clastic wedge is interpreted to be a marginal marine - delta system, that also includes the Crocker Formation, described as a wave-fluvial influenced delta, and the coal-prone German Creek Formation to the north (John and Fielding,1993). From the general descriptions of the Catherine Sandstone, Crocker Formation and the German Creek Coal Measures it can be interpreted that the three formations are part of one large deltaic depositional system. The Catherine Sandstone represents the shoreface to near offshore, the Crocker Formation the delta distributary system, and the German Creek Coal Measures the fluvial flood plain environment (John and Fielding, 1993).

Storage potential of Denison Trough fieldst Field NameStorage years for an Oxy fuels project*

"4 year" storage for demonstration Oxy fuels project*

23,071 Moorooloo 0.3 0.197,343 Yandina 1.3 0.3

109,979 Yellowbank 1.5 0.4136,712 Arcturus 1.8 0.5182,934 Myrtleville 2.4 0.6211,588 Rolleston 2.8 0.7433,018 Glentulloch 5.8 1.4922,730 Turkey Creek 12.3 3.1

1,182,429 Springvale 15.8 3.93,643,476 Merivale 48.6 12.17,976,690 Springton 106.4 26.6

14,919,970 Total

CO2 STORAGE POTENTIAL OF EXISTING PRODUCABLE DENISON TROUGH FIELDS

* based on 75000 tonnes of CO2 per annum captured from an Oxy Fuels demonstration plant. t based on gas and water Production, converted to tonnes of CO2. Regional "compressibility of Hydrocabon gases" trend used to predict the formation volume factor introduces a potential error of up to 20%


- 12 -

8.1 Reservoir Potential: Implications for CO2 Storage. The cumulative production of the Catherine Sandstone hydrocarbon fields indicates a well connected reservoir at the field scale. Indications from production performance and formation architecture suggest the Catherine Sandstone could be a suitable reservoir for the injection and storage of CO2; providing all of the other criteria of a viable storage site are satisfied.

8.2 Reservoir Distribution, Quality and Continuity A cross plot of Permeability vs. Porosity, by facies, indicates the original environment of deposition has often had a significant influence on present day reservoir performance (Figure 10), although new wells in the east are yet to be incorporated into this data and may show more complex trends. The high energy shoreface facies (Facies D1, Figure 10) has the best porosity and permeability (up to 24% porosity and 850mD permeability, Figure 10). It is consistently sand prone. The sandstone beds are amalgamated and have a tabular external geometry with little internal variation in grain size. This facies extends over tens of kilometres in a north-south direction (John and Fielding, 1993), parallel to the current structural trends. The shoreface facies is a prime candidate for injection of CO2, assuming other factors such as depth, seal and structure are favourable.

8.3 Containment potential : Implications for CO2 storage.

The Catherine Sandstone is sealed by the offshore shelf facies of the underlying Ingleara Formation, and of the overlying offshore/distal marine deltaic facies of the Peawaddy Formation. The offshore facies comprise siltstones, mudstones and thinly bedded sandstones (John and Fielding, 1993).

8.4 Seal Distribution and Continuity. Mild compressional events began in the Late Permian and continued periodically through to the Middle Triassic (Elliott, 1989). Coincident with this, tilting elevated the north of the Denison Trough relative to the south. Consequently deposition contracted to the south of the Denison Trough, whilst maximum uplift and erosion occurred in the north. At the same time the Catherine Sandstone and the Peawaddy Formation were exhumed and eroded at the Serocold Anticline, Reids Dome, Springsure Anticline and the Consuelo Anticline (Figure 11; John and Fielding, 1993). This has significantly compromised the top seal west of Area 1 (Figure 12).

Figure 10. Cross plot of core porosity v horizontal

permeability to air for the Catherine Sandstone (John and

Fielding 1993).


- 13 -

At the regional scale, an opportunity for a Catherine Sandstone injection and storage pilot-demonstration site appears to exist in an area extending from the Moorooloo -1 well in the north to the Rolleston Field in the south east (Area 1 Figure 12). Here, John and Fieldings’ (1993) deltaic sequence stratigraphic model for the Catherine Sandstone predicts high energy offshore facies. Within Area 1 (Figure 12) the Catherine Sandstone is at a depth of around 700m and greater, with facies modelling predicting permeabilities of the Catherine Sandstone greater than 100 mD, certainly suitable for injection of CO2.


SpringsureAntic line

RollestonAntic line

ConsueloAntic line

Miss

ing

sect

ion

Triassic

Bandanna Fm

Aldebaran Sst

Peawaddy Fm

Cattle Creek Fm

Reids Dome Beds

Basement?

Me rivale Fault

Ap rox . De pth (km)

0 10 4

3

2

1

0

Kilometres

Datum183m

Rolleston 1Springsure 5

?

?

Catherine Sst

Ingelara Fm

Figure 11. Cross section of the Denison Trough showing eroded section and outcrop locations. Note all potential

CO2 storage reservoirs crop out, suggesting leakage from regional scale stratigraphic traps through lateral migration and compromised seal are significant risks.

9. Aldebaran Sandstone

9.1 Reservoir Potential: Implications for CO2 Storage The Aldebaran Sandstone has the largest gas reserves of any formation in the Denison Trough. It is described as comprising two main deltaic cycles, separated by an uplift event resulting in the upper cycle disconformably overlying the lower (Totterdell et al., 1995). Both cycles are interpreted to have been sourced from the west through the Springsure Shelf area, opening out to a broad distributary delta (Baker, 1989).


- 14 -

25 00’0

24 00’0

24 30’0

148

00’

0

148

30’

0

0 20km

Springsure

Shelf

Denison

Trough

Comet

Ridge

Taroom

Trough

A

BC

D1

D2.1Catherine Sandstone outcropEastern Limit of Fluvial Channel Fac ies

Eastern Limit of Lagoonal FaciesEastern Limit of Tidal Inlet Facies

Southeastern Limit of Highenergy Shoreface Fac ies

Limit of Fluvially-influencedLow-energy Shoreface FaciesApproximate boundaryof structural domain

FaultControl point

Legend

Modified from Baker, J.C., 1989 and John and Fielding, 1993)

1

Prospective Area

Figure 12. Facies map of the Catherine Sandstone overlain by Denison Trough structural elements.

The limit of the tidal zone/shoreface is roughly coincidental with the majority of northern gas fields (Figures 13 and 14). Well intersections of the Aldebaran Sandstone indicate a barrier bar/lagoonal system, interpreted to extend from the delta in the north towards the south.


- 15 -

The palaeogeographic interpretations also show that the wells drilled in the eastern Denison Trough are beyond the main body of the delta (Figures 13 and 14), thus explaining their poor reservoir characteristics and consequent unsuitability for CO2 injectivity e.g. the Warrinilla Field. Examination of the core photos and electric logs from the wells in the north east, some of which were not included in the palaeogeographic analysis of Baker (1989), indicate that the near-shore facies associated with the Aldebaran Sandstone could be interpreted to extend a further 20 to 30 kilometres east. This suggests the delta may extend further than the current model. Permeability and porosity values from the eastern wells indicate a lack of reservoir quality and injectivity. There is insufficient core data to allow a comprehensive re-analysis of the facies, such as that undertaken by Baker (1989), therefore it is not possible to predict, with any confidence tidal channel facies beyond the limit defined by the Baker (1989) model.

9.2 Reservoir Distribution, Quality and Continuity Permeability analysis of the Aldebaran Sandstone within the Denison Trough establishes the generally poor permeability of this unit in the Trough (Baker 1989). However, it also shows there are some facies, particularly tidal channels, which show good permeability >100mD (Figure 15). An additional and key factor is that porosity and permeability in the Aldebaran Sandstone are positively related (Figure 16), suggesting that the areas with improved permeability are also likely to have improved storage potential Palaeogeographic maps provide a useful tool for predicting the likely location of the tidal channel facies (Figures 13 and 14), which occur in localised areas, are thin, but are the most prospective zones in the Aldebaran Sandstone. The presence of high permeability, in the tidal channel facies, suggests that the best reservoir quality, results from tidal reworking (e.g. frequent movement of tides going in and out) that has improved the primary reservoir characteristics of these deposits.


- 16 -

N

1480 1490

24 30’0

25 30’0

Sprin

gsur

e Sh

elf

Com

et P

latfo

rm

Aldebaran

Delta

Neb

ine

Ridg

e

20km


Springsure

Rolleston

SP6

SP10

MM1

SP5

SP19

SP4

RL11

PB1

MT1 CS1

AOE1

CC1Reids Dome

AOE2

PBS1

WNN1

WN1

WN2

WN3

WN5

WN4

ED5ED4

CR1

ED1

YB2

WG5MV2

KD1

GL1

Injune

Meriva le

Fault

?

1

2

3

Channel and tidal depositsChannel deposits

Inter-channel deposits

Area of erosion

Prospective Areas

Legend

Approximate boundaryof structural domain

Control pointFault

Figure 13. Palaeogeography of the Lower Aldebaran Sandstone overlain by Denison Trough structural elements


- 17 -

N

1480 1490

24 30’0

25 30’0

Sprin

gsur

e Sh

elf

Com

et P

latfo

rm

Nebi

neRi

dge

20km

Palaeogeography of the Upper Aldebaran Sandstone


Springsure

Rolleston

SP6

SP10

MM1

SP5

SP19

SP4

RL1

PB1MT1 CS1

AOE1

CC1Reids Dome

AOE2PBS1

WNN1

WN1

WN2

WN3

WN5

WN4

ED5ED4

CR1

ED1

YB2

WG5MV2

KD1

GL1

Injune

Merivale

Fault

Inglis Dome

Westwardtransgressionand accumulationas the lowerColinlea Sandstone

Subt

idal

s

hoal

s

and

ti

dal

ch

anne

ls

1

23

Channel and tidal depositsFluvial dominateddepositsArea of erosion

Prospective Areas

Legend

Approximate boundaryof structural domain

Control pointFault

Figure 14. Palaeogeography of the Upper Aldebaran Sandstone overlain by Denison Trough structural elements


- 18 -

Facies (permeability vs depth)

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

750 950 1150 1350

Depth (m)

Perm

eabi

lity

(md

barrier bar

channel

channel bar

cravasse splay

distributary channels

distributary mouth bar

foreshore

foreshore upper shoreface

lagoonal

lower shoreface

nearshore marine

offshore

point bar

shoreface

shoreface to offshore

tidal channel

tidal delta

tidal flat

upper shoreface

Figure 15. Aldebaran Sandstone permeability of facies plotted against depth. Shows a link between facies and reservoir quality (Baker, 1989), with only the tidal and distributary channel facies showing any good quality

permeability values.

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

0 5 10 15 20 25

Porosity (%)

Perm

eabi

lity

(md

Figure 16. Aldebaran Sandstone permeability plotted against porosity.

Generally increased permeability is related to increased porosity (Baker, 1989)

Permeability vs Porosity


- 19 -

Combining the porosity and permeability data with the palaeogeographic maps indicates that, in the southern Denison Trough, there is a subset of the tidal channel facies, which is likely to contain improved permeability (Area 1 Figures 12 and 13). This permeability improvement is assumed to be due to additional reworking of the Aldebaran Sandstone. A likely mechanism for this is reworking by long shore drift, from the north, where the delta is located, to the south, where the barrier bar and tidal inlet system is located. The palaeogeographic maps, in association with the structural elements and the permeability values, highlight that there are significant challenges for exploration for CO2 storage areas. Primarily, the lateral extent of the high permeability sandstones is likely to be restricted to thin elongated strips occurring in a few small areas:

• a narrow strip against the Merivale Fault (area 1). • a strip occurring on the palaeodelta front (area 2). • the eastern edge of the Springsure Shelf (area 3).

These areas are identified in figures 13 and 14 as “1, 2 and 3” with “1” having the least risk and “3” the greatest. These thin elongated strips of palaeo-tidal channels will be very difficult for explorers to target with certainty prior to drilling.

9.3 Containment potential: Implications for CO2 storage The Aldebaran Sandstone is overlain by the marine Ingelara Formation which is a proven sealing unit (Anthony, 2004). This marine facies unit comprises siltstones, mudstones and thinly bedded sandstone (John and Fielding, 1993). In addition to the Ingelara Formation, the overlying deltaic Peawaddy Formation adds a secondary seal but it is present in only some parts of the Trough.

9.4 Seal Distribution and Continuity The Ingelara Formation appears to be a regionally extensive marine shale and siltstone. Thus, it should be capable of sealing CO2, provided the formation is not breached by faults or erosion. The Ingelara Formation has been uplifted, and in some areas is at sub-supercritical depths or even exposed at the surface, e.g. along the Springsure and Sericold Anticlines (Figure 11 and 12). This means that any CO2 migrating to these areas has a significant risk of leaking to the surface. In addition, most potential injection sites are extensively faulted, which further increases this leakage risk. Potential CO2 injection sites in the Denison Trough would require extensive monitoring of the lateral movement of the CO2, particularly towards the Aldebaran Sandstone outcrop. There may be significant issues with CO2 monitoring, as fields towards the south already contain up to 30 percent CO2. Any tracers (an identifier added to injected CO2) to be used would need to be able to distinguish the injected CO2 from the naturally occurring CO2, and verify the long-term storage of CO2 as the Aldebaran Sandstone is re-pressurised.


- 20 -

10. Future Work and Prospectivity This review has established that there are some small areas which require detailed investigation in order to further and fully assess their potential for a CO2 injection site. These areas can be divided into three broad categories which define the key risks associated with each area (Figures 12, 13 and 14):

1. Small fault blocks with the likelihood of good permeability but small capacity (key risk) due to structural size (Area 1).

2. Small fault blocks with the possibility of adequate permeability (key risk) but small capacity (key risk) due to structural size (Area 2).

3. Poorly tested areas with the possibility of adequate permeability (key risk) but possibly not at sufficient depths (i.e. <800m) (key risk) and lacking adequate seal (key risk) (Area 3).

Future drilling activity within the Denison Trough, particularly in the east, should be monitored to identify new information and any signs of improved reservoir quality. This information should subsequently be added to palaeogeographic models, such as Baker (1989) to try and improve exploration chance and prospectivity, for CO2 injection sites, in the Denison Trough.


- 21 -

11. Significance of the Catherine Sandstone and Aldebaran Sandstone reservoir performance and architecture to CO2 injection and storage. The Ingelara and Peawaddy Formations have trapped gaseous hydrocarbon columns within the Aldebaran Sandstone and Catherine Sandstone, probably since the Triassic, and thus have proven sealing potential. The reservoir performance of both the Aldebaran Sandstone and the Catherine Sandstone suggests that they are both laterally extensive, with no significant internal barriers to fluid flow, at the field scale. Studies of both these units suggest it is possible to predict the reservoir character for deltaic/barrier bar/shoreface environments, using sequence stratigraphic concepts, when combined with available well and seismic data. However, despite this theoretical ability, there is insufficient information to identify the exact locations of individual tidal channel facies sandstones. As a result, finding the good quality sandstones with their limited extent is going to be difficult, with only small areas of likely occurrence currently identifiable. This review has identified areas (Figures 12-14) within the Aldebaran Sandstone and Catherine Sandstone which appear to have the geological elements necessary for CO2 injection and storage. Individually, each target has its own inherent risks, which could significantly impact the viability of a potential site, even at the pilot-demonstration site scale. This review identified one area (Area 1 Figure 12 and Area 2, Figures 13 and 14) with potentially stacked reservoirs, which would increase the likelihood of intersecting suitably porous and permeable reservoirs. This would significantly reduce one of the critical risks of any storage project. In this area, the suitably permeable facies of the Aldebaran upper and lower cycle are overlain by the suitably permeable shoreface facies of the Catherine Sandstone. In addition, the target horizon is below 800m, so the CO2 could be stored in a supercritical state. The Denison Trough offers many years of potential storage, assuming adequate injectivity can be achieved , for a demonstration scale project. However storage capacity for larger projects will probably need to be investigated further afield in areas with different geological histories.


- 22 -

References Anthony, D.P. 2004, A review of recent conventional petroleum exploration and in field gas reserves growth in the Denison Trough, Queensland. In Boult, P.J, Johns, D.R. and Lang, S.S. (eds.) PESA’s Eastern Australasian Basins Symposium II Handbook 2004 pgs 277-296. Bachu, S., Geological sequestraion of anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide: Applicability and current issues, 2001, in Gerhard, L.C., Harrison, W.E and Hanson, eds., Geological perspectives of global climate change. pgs. 285-303. Baker, J.C., 1989, Petrology, diagenesis and reservoir quality of the Aldebaran Sandstone, Dension Trough, East-Central Queensland. Ph.D Thesis, University of Queensland. Bradshaw, J., Bradshaw, B.E., Allinson, G., Rigg, A.J., Nguyen, V., Spencer, L., 2002, The Potential for Geological Sequestration of CO2 in Australia: Preliminary Findings and Implications for New Gas Field Development. APPEA Journal, 42(1) pp. 25-46 Bradshaw, B., Bradshaw, J., Dance, T., Reilly, N.S., Sayers, J., Spencer, L. and Wilson, P., 2003, Geodisc ArcView GIS Version 2.01. APCRC Confidential GIS. Brown, R.S., Elliot, L.G. and Mollah, R.J., 1983, Recent exploration and petroleum discoveries in the Denison Trough, Queensland. APEA Journal, 23(1), pp.120-135. Cook, P.J., Rigg, A., Bradshaw, J., 2000, Putting it back were it came from: is geological disposal an option for Australia?. APPEA Journal 40(1), pp654-666 Elliott, L., 1989, The Surat and Bowen Basins. APEA Journal, 29(1), pp398-416 Enever, J.R., 1990, Insitu stress measurements in the Bowen Basin and their implications for coal mining and methane extraction. Bowen Basin Symposium 1990, pp 106-109 John, B.H. & Fielding, C.R., 1993, Reservoir potential of the Catherine Sandstone, Denison Trough, East Central Queensland. APEA Journal 33(1X), pp. 176-187. Korsch, R.J., Boreham, C.J., Totterdell, J.M., Shaw, R.D., and Nicoll, M.G. (1998). Development and petroleum resources of the Bowen, Gunnedah and Surat Basins, Eastern Australia. APPEA Journal, 199-237. Spero, C., Oxy-Fuel Technology Update on the Callide A Retrofit feasibility study. Australian Journal of Mining conference, Geosequestration in Australia 3-4th March, Melbourne, Australia, 2005 Tuker, M.E., 1981, Sedimentary petrology: An introduction. Blackwell Scientific Publications, London. Totterdell, J.M., Brakel. A.T., Wells A.T., Hoffmann, K.L., 1995, Basin phases and sequence stratigraphy of the Bowen Basin. In: Follington, I.W., Beeston, J.W. and Hamilton, L.H. (eds) Bowen Basin Symposium 1995, 150 Years On, Proceedings. Brisbane, GSA, Coal Geology Group, 247-56.


- 23 -

Appendix 1

Denison Trough Field Production

Field Formation GasRes

(MMcm)

First year production (MMcm)

First year

reported

Last yearly reported

production (MMcm)

Cumulative production (MMcm)

Last reported

Arcturus Mantuan Formation 0.67 0.02 1990 0.02 0.55 2003

Glentulloch Aldebaran Sandstone 0.34 0.03 2001 0.07 0.15 2003

Merivale Aldebaran Sandstone 0.57 0.04 1990 ?0.04 0.70 2003

Merivale

Reids Dome Beds 0.07 0.01 1991 0.03 0.26 2003

Moorooloo Catherine Sandstone 0.04 0.00 1991 0.03 2003

Myrtleville Aldebaran Sandstone 0.05 0.01 1990 0.02 0.14 2003

Rolleston Freitag Formation 0.11 0.01 1990 0.04 0.63 2003

Rolleston Mantuan Formation 0.28 0.02 1990 0.01 0.20 2003

Springton Aldebaran Sandstone 0.11 0.00 1991 0.01 0.08 2003

Springton Catherine Sandstone 0.12 0.02 1990 0.03 0.41 2003

Springton Freitag Formation 0.03 0.00 1990 0.03 0.22 2003

Springvale Aldebaran Sandstone 0.18 0.01 1990 0.01 0.22 2003

Springvale

Reids Dome Beds 0.04 0.01 2002 0 0.01 2003

Turkey Creek

Catherine Sandstone 0.24 0.01 1993 0.03 0.25 2003

Turkey Creek

Mantuan Formation 0.14 0.01 1993 0.01 0.12 2003

Yandina Freitag Formation 0.43 0.03 2000 0.03 0.15 2003

Yellowbank Aldebaran Sandstone 1.13 0.02 1990 0.07 1.48 2003

Yellowbank Rewan Group 0.03 0.01 1991 0 0.05 2003

Sources: Geoscience Australia and Queensland Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy

Date post:	12-Feb-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Review of the Carbon Dioxide Injection and Storage Potential of … · 2019-05-12 · CO2CRC...

Documents