7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
1/44
www.slb.com/carbonservices
CO2 Storage Process
Dwight [email protected]
6 June 2012
RECS 2012
Pre Selection
Appraisal
Development
CO2 Injection
Closure
Post closure
Post liability transfer
Performance Management
& Risk Control
Pre-injection Injection Post-injection
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
2/44
Potential Saline Storage Basins
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
3/44
Decades ago, potential oil & gas fields were mappedin a similar way that potential storage sites are beingmapped today
An Oil & Gas Analogy
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
4/44
Heres what we learned after decades of oil &gas related data collection
The Importance of Data
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
5/44
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
6/44
Porosity and Permeability are Key
Big Grains= high permeability Small Grains= low permeability
These have the same porosity (40%) but different permeability
SAND
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
7/44
Comparing Geologic Site Characteristics
RoughDepiction
ForComparison
2000F
eet
30% 0% 1D .1MD
Porosity
Scale
Perm
Scale
SLEIPNER ILLINOIS MISSISSIPPI W.VIRGINIA
30% 0%
1D .1MD
GULF COAST APPALACHIAMIDWESTSLEIPNER
7
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
8/44
Scenario A
Scenario BScenario C
Scenario A
Scenario BScenario C
Scenario B
Scenario A
Scenario C
Scenario B
Scenario A
Scenario C
Injected CO2:
400,000 tonnesover 4 years
Monitoring:
46 years after injectionstops
Injection zone:bottom 20 feet offormation
t = 50 years
Reducing Uncertainty
8
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
9/44
(Johnston and Terrell, 2006)
Data Scales
9
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
10/44
Conventional Data vs Hi-Resolution Data
Conventional data
Producer
Injector
Single-sensor data
Producer
Injector
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
11/44
Data Integration
11
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
12/44
Current Knowledge
Scientific work has identified many potential storage sites in the US and rest of worldOnly some of these sites can provide low risk, low cost commercial storageInjection pilots build acceptance but leave many unknowns about commercialityToday s best practices manuals have been derived from small scale experiencesMany important pilot project experiences are not completely understoodScale-up will require commercial processes adapted from the oil and gas industry.
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
13/44
Project Needs
Modelling and Data Acquisition: Coupled non-linear geological, geomechanical and geochemical processes Thermodynamics of complex fluids and solids Monitoring - > Dynamic imaging of plume, integration Visualization for non-technical actors Basin water system modeling Geophysics
Design and Implementation: Field Development Plans / Economics (preliminary and advanced) Controlling plume Migration Well designs to improve injection dynamics + Well Integrity stability assessment Upstream operational integration with partners
Commercial: Contractual models Risk tolerance & decision making under risk and uncertainty
Community acceptance Optimization of CO2 Sequestration & CO2-EOR combined
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
14/44
Construction Injection Equalization Closure
Risk Control & Performance Assessment
Possible site Probable site Appoved site
5 yrs 100+0 30 yrs 35 yrs
Uncertainty
Commercialization timeline, costs and uncertainty
* Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume
Cume Cost
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
15/44
Construction Injection Equalization Closure
Risk Control & Performance Assessment
Possible site Probable site Appoved site
5 yrs 100+0 30 yrs 35 yrs
UncertaintyDesktopStudies
(penniesp
erton)
1-Study existing data and start risk methodology
* Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume
Cume Cost
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
16/44
Construction Injection Equalization Closure
Risk Control & Performance Assessment
Possible site Probable site Appoved site
5 yrs 100+0 30 yrs 35 yrs
UncertaintyDesktopStudies
(penniesp
erton)
Collect Data
Build Models( ~50 cents / ton )
wells and seismic
models
2-Collect and analyze new data
* Per ton estimates and total costs (in current day $USD) are based on 100Mton lifetime storage volume
Cume Cost
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
17/44
Construction Injection Equalization Closure
Risk Control & Performance Assessment
Possible site Probable site Appoved site
5 yrs 100+0 30 yrs 35 yrs
UncertaintyDesktopStudies
(penniesp
erton)
Collect Data
Build Models(~50 cents / ton)
Design and
Permit(
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
18/44
Design and
Permit(
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
19/44
Design and
Permit(
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
20/44
Design and
Permit(
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
21/44
CO2 Monitoring Dependence on Wells
Boundaries
Containment
Watch stored CO2
Watch possible leakage paths
Well Integrity
Sealed fault
Monitoringwell
Abandonedwell
Monitoringwell
CO2injection
well
Freshwateraquifer
21
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
22/44
CO2 Injection Well
Wellhead
Cement
Surface casing
Cement
Long-string casing
Pressurized annulus
Packer
Perforations
C
O
2
Injection tubing
Injection Zone
Confining zone
Lowest USDW
22
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
23/44
Why monitor?
Stakeholder acceptance and support HSE: health, safety, environment
Risk mitigationRegulatory complianceAccountingCost control
If part of utilization activity - dont waste CO2EOR effectiveness more oil
CO2 goes where you want it to go CO2 behaves as per plan
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
24/44
Types of Monitoring
Operational monitoringVerification monitoringEnvironmental monitoring
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
25/44
Operational monitoring
Basic HSE alerts/alarmsHigh frequency
pressure temperature volume rate
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
26/44
Verification monitoring
To ensure that the projectstays in its stakeholdersacceptable risk frameworkover time
Stakeholders must agree onan acceptable risk profilefrom the start
Hazard Analysis and Risk Control
Standard SLB-QHSE-S020
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
27/44
Risk informed action
Collect more data to reduce uncertainty reduce likelihood of a negative event
Create an operational plan that can be adapted over time, includes: which measurements (site related) what resolution (level of detail) when (time interval: short, medium, long) where (3-D placement)
Change plan based on new information (must history match)
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
28/44
Verification monitoring types
Plume monitoringStorage integrity monitoring:
caprock wells
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
29/44
Monitoring quality - resolution
narrow azimuth 15k ft aperturewide azimuth 34k ft aperture
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
30/44
Baseline data requirements
Static models (original state)Dynamic models (make predictions about future))
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
31/44
Predicting the monitoring response
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
32/44
Environmental monitoring
Also requires baseline dataLooking for impacts. No anomaly is
good news.
Types: soil sampling water sampling atmospheric monitoring cement sampling
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
33/44
Costs
Operational monitoring (very small pennies per ton)Environmental monitoring (very small pennies per ton)Verification monitoring (small relative to CCS - dollars per ton ?)
depends on site driven by risk tolerance -risk informed decisions overlaps with characterization and operational costs (baselines needed)
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
34/44
Why Worry About Wellbore Integrity
CO2 Volumes
The volume of CO2 is so large that there will need to be thousands ofinjection and monitoring wells and the injected CO2 will interact withexisting wells
CO2 PropertiesAggressive nature of CO2 combined with its density may increase the
risk of leakageWellbore Material Properties
Typical wellbore materials are susceptible to degradation undertypical CO2 sequestration conditions
Wellbore Construction Practices
Poor wellbore construction practices can lead to increased risk ofleakage
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
35/44
CONFINING LAYER
SALINE AQUIFER
INJECTION
WELL
LEAKAGE
CO2
BRINEABANDONED
WELL
Possible storage-leakage scenario
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
36/44
Lowest USDW
Conductor casing
Surface Casing
Long String Casing
Injection Tubing
Packer
Cement
Fluid Filled Annulus
Well Construction
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
37/44
Leading Causes of Cementing Failures
Incomplete mud removalIrregular wellbore profileBreakdown of formation during cementingWell fluid flow during or after cement is placedInappropriate cement slurry designIncorrect downhole hardwareSurface execution problemsApparent failures that are not real
37
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
38/44
Well Integrity?
38
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
39/44
Injection Well Construction Requirements
Casing and cement or other materials used in the construction of each Class VIwell must have sufficient structural strength and be designed for the life of the
geologic sequestration project. All well materials must be compatible with fluidswith which the materials may be expected to come into contact
Cement and cement additives must be compatible with the carbon dioxidestream and formation fluids and of sufficient quality and quantity to maintain
integrity over the design life of the geologic sequestration project.At least one long string casing, using a sufficient number of centralizers, mustextend to the injection zone and must be cemented by circulating cement to thesurface in one or more stages
Tubing and packer materials used in the construction of each Class VI wellmust be compatible with fluids with which the materials may be expected tocome into contact
What about the mandatory in-zone monitor wells?39
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
40/44
Evaluation: Well integrity evaluation ultrasonic
USIT pulse-echo measurement Skin-deep (casing-cement interface) measure, like the CBLIsolation Scanner pitch-catch propagation measurement from 2006 Integrates USITProvides information on the condition of the casing and the condition of thematerial in the annulus
Ultrasonic measurements (higher resolution, lower depth of penetration)around 250 kHz
The Isolation Scanner delivers 3 independent measures Z (acoustic impedance): inverted from a normal incidence, pulse-echo
measurement same as the USIT
(flexural attenuation): measured from the arrival amplitude at two transducerof a flexural wave propagating along the casing
v (annular velocity): migrated from the arrival time of the cement-formationinterface echo, knowing the caliper
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
41/44
Well Log
Perforation for VITtest
Point permeabilitymeasurement
CHDT Sample Point
Sidewall Core Sample
Fluid Sample Point
VIT Interval
Wellbore and casing walls
Well Cement
Geologic Formation
LEGEND
Cores
Perfs
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
42/44
Cement Bond Log
Measurements provide information on casing-cement and cement-formation bonds. Measuresamplitude or attenuation of casing arrival andVDL
Rule of thumb: 80% BI over given distance (5-18ft)
Strongly affected by tool eccentering and fastformation
Should be run along with an ultrasonic loggingtool to gain fullest picture of cement integrity
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
43/44
Evaluation: CBL-type tools Bond Index
The bond index is a measure ofthe measured attenuation dividedby the total possible attenuationachievable
This could lead to zones withhydraulic pathways havingsufficient bond index values to beconsidered isolating
In this example each row has thesame percentage (80%) ofbonded cement
Red squares are unbonded sectionsGreen squares are bonded sections
7/31/2019 CO2 Storage Process / Subsurface Monitoring and Wellbore Integrity
44/44
Lessons Learned Through Demonstrations
Geologic uncertainty is scary to some (esp. engineers)CO2 moves farther, faster, and with fingeringCan monitor CO2 better than anticipatedNo chance of 100% accounting
Old wells will need special focusLarge problem in depleted oil fields
Need to consider the entire system or suffer the consequencesStudy the public mood before speaking to them
44