Summary
Among the three types of geological CO2 sequestration (mature oil
and gas fields, unminable coalbeds and deep saline formations), depleted gas
condensate reservoirs are particularly interesting. First, because of the
high-compressibility of gas, these reservoirs have larger storage capacity than
oil reservoirs or aquifers. Second, the condensate that has dropped out from
the gas phase during natural depletion will re-vaporize because of
re-pressurization of the reservoir and by miscibility with the injected
CO2. This condensate can be recovered from producing wells and
leaves more pore volume for available storage of CO2.
The objective of this study is to investigate the CO2 storage
capacity in different formation types, for different levels of CO2
purity and different injection schedules. To this aim, we analyzed the
injection of a CO2-based stream into a depleted gas condensate
reservoir and into a saline aquifer using a compositional reservoir simulation
model.
The dynamics of the reservoir impose a minimum period of injection that is
required in order for the storage scheme to benefit from 100% of the reservoir
storage capacity. Hence, over and above a certain CO2 injection
rate, it becomes meaningless to invest in bigger compressors to increase this
rate to reduce the time of injection.
When the CO2 stream contains impurities, such as N2 or
methane, the storage capacity of the reservoir decreases proportionally to the
impure stream's compressibility factor and its concentration of impurities.
This finding suggests that an economic optimum between the costs of separation,
compression and injection can be determined.
Finally, the mass of CO2 sequestrated per pore volume in the
equivalent aquifer model is approximately 13 times lower that of the depleted
gas condensate reservoir model. This confirms that, because of their low
overall compressibility, aquifers offer a far lower ratio of CO2
stored per pore volume than depleted gas condensate reservoirs. However,
aquifers tend to have a far larger extent, which often compensates somewhat for
this lower ratio and therefore provides storage for significant volumes of
CO2.
© 2010. Society of Petroleum Engineers
View full textPDF
(
1,406 KB
)
History
- Original manuscript received:
25 March 2009
- Meeting paper published:
17 June 2009
- Revised manuscript received:
8 April 2010
- Manuscript approved:
2 June 2010
- Published online:
5 August 2010
- Version of record:
3 August 2010