skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Geophysical Monitoring Methods Evaluation for the FutureGen 2.0 Project

Abstract

A comprehensive monitoring program will be needed in order to assess the effectiveness of carbon sequestration at the FutureGen 2.0 carbon capture and storage (CCS) field-site. Geophysical monitoring methods are sensitive to subsurface changes that result from injection of CO 2 and will be used for: (1) tracking the spatial extent of the free phase CO 2 plume, (2) monitoring advancement of the pressure front, (3) identifying or mapping areas where induced seismicity occurs, and (4) identifying and mapping regions of increased risk for brine or CO 2 leakage from the reservoir. Site-specific suitability and cost effectiveness were evaluated for a number of geophysical monitoring methods including: passive seismic monitoring, reflection seismic imaging, integrated surface deformation, time-lapse gravity, pulsed neutron capture logging, cross-borehole seismic, electrical resistivity tomography, magnetotellurics and controlled source electromagnetics. The results of this evaluation indicate that CO 2 injection monitoring using reflection seismic methods would likely be difficult at the FutureGen 2.0 site. Electrical methods also exhibited low sensitivity to the expected CO 2 saturation changes and would be affected by metallic infrastructure at the field site. Passive seismic, integrated surface deformation, time-lapse gravity, and pulsed neutron capture monitoring were selected for implementation as part of themore » FutureGen 2.0 storage site monitoring program.« less

Authors:
 [1]; ;  [1]; ;  [1]; ;  [1]; ;  [1]; ;  [1]; ;  [1];
  1. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1209004
Grant/Contract Number:
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Journal Article: Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Energy Procedia
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 63; Journal Issue: C; Journal ID: ISSN 1876-6102
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; 58 GEOSCIENCES; carbon sequestration; carbon capture and storage; monitoring; geophysics

Citation Formats

Strickland, Chris E., USA, Richland Washington, Vermeul, Vince R., USA, Richland Washington, Bonneville, Alain, USA, Richland Washington, Sullivan, E. Charlotte, USA, Richland Washington, Johnson, Tim C., USA, Richland Washington, Spane, Frank A., USA, Richland Washington, Gilmore, Tyler J., and USA, Richland Washington. Geophysical Monitoring Methods Evaluation for the FutureGen 2.0 Project. United States: N. p., 2014. Web. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.474.
Strickland, Chris E., USA, Richland Washington, Vermeul, Vince R., USA, Richland Washington, Bonneville, Alain, USA, Richland Washington, Sullivan, E. Charlotte, USA, Richland Washington, Johnson, Tim C., USA, Richland Washington, Spane, Frank A., USA, Richland Washington, Gilmore, Tyler J., & USA, Richland Washington. Geophysical Monitoring Methods Evaluation for the FutureGen 2.0 Project. United States. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.474.
Strickland, Chris E., USA, Richland Washington, Vermeul, Vince R., USA, Richland Washington, Bonneville, Alain, USA, Richland Washington, Sullivan, E. Charlotte, USA, Richland Washington, Johnson, Tim C., USA, Richland Washington, Spane, Frank A., USA, Richland Washington, Gilmore, Tyler J., and USA, Richland Washington. Wed . "Geophysical Monitoring Methods Evaluation for the FutureGen 2.0 Project". United States. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.474. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1209004.
@article{osti_1209004,
title = {Geophysical Monitoring Methods Evaluation for the FutureGen 2.0 Project},
author = {Strickland, Chris E. and USA, Richland Washington and Vermeul, Vince R. and USA, Richland Washington and Bonneville, Alain and USA, Richland Washington and Sullivan, E. Charlotte and USA, Richland Washington and Johnson, Tim C. and USA, Richland Washington and Spane, Frank A. and USA, Richland Washington and Gilmore, Tyler J. and USA, Richland Washington},
abstractNote = {A comprehensive monitoring program will be needed in order to assess the effectiveness of carbon sequestration at the FutureGen 2.0 carbon capture and storage (CCS) field-site. Geophysical monitoring methods are sensitive to subsurface changes that result from injection of CO2 and will be used for: (1) tracking the spatial extent of the free phase CO2 plume, (2) monitoring advancement of the pressure front, (3) identifying or mapping areas where induced seismicity occurs, and (4) identifying and mapping regions of increased risk for brine or CO2 leakage from the reservoir. Site-specific suitability and cost effectiveness were evaluated for a number of geophysical monitoring methods including: passive seismic monitoring, reflection seismic imaging, integrated surface deformation, time-lapse gravity, pulsed neutron capture logging, cross-borehole seismic, electrical resistivity tomography, magnetotellurics and controlled source electromagnetics. The results of this evaluation indicate that CO2 injection monitoring using reflection seismic methods would likely be difficult at the FutureGen 2.0 site. Electrical methods also exhibited low sensitivity to the expected CO2 saturation changes and would be affected by metallic infrastructure at the field site. Passive seismic, integrated surface deformation, time-lapse gravity, and pulsed neutron capture monitoring were selected for implementation as part of the FutureGen 2.0 storage site monitoring program.},
doi = {10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.474},
journal = {Energy Procedia},
number = C,
volume = 63,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Dec 31 00:00:00 EST 2014},
month = {Wed Dec 31 00:00:00 EST 2014}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 3works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:
  • Geochemical monitoring is an essential component of a suite of monitoring technologies designed to evaluate CO2 mass balance and detect possible loss of containment at the FutureGen 2.0 geologic sequestration site near Jacksonville, IL. This presentation gives an overview of the potential geochemical approaches and tracer technologies that were considered, and describes the evaluation process by which the most cost-effective and robust of these were selected for implementation
  • The FutureGen 2.0 Project will design and build a first-of-its-kind, near-zero emissions coal-fueled power plant with carbon capture and storage (CCS). To assess storage site performance and meet the regulatory requirements of the Class VI Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program for CO2 Geologic Sequestration, the FutureGen 2.0 project will implement a suite of monitoring technologies designed to 1) evaluate CO2 mass balance and 2) detect any unforeseen loss in CO2 containment. The monitoring program will include direct monitoring of the injection stream and reservoir, and early-leak-detection monitoring directly above the primary confining zone. It will also implement an adaptive monitoringmore » strategy whereby monitoring results are continually evaluated and the monitoring network is modified as required, including the option to drill additional wells in out-years. Wells will be monitored for changes in CO2 concentration and formation pressure, and other geochemical/isotopic signatures that provide indication of CO2 or brine leakage. Indirect geophysical monitoring technologies that were selected for implementation include passive seismic, integrated surface deformation, time-lapse gravity, and pulsed neutron capture logging. Near-surface monitoring approaches that have been initiated include surficial aquifer and surface- water monitoring, soil-gas monitoring, atmospheric monitoring, and hyperspectral data acquisition for assessment of vegetation conditions. Initially, only the collection of baseline data sets is planned; the need for additional near- surface monitoring will be continually evaluated throughout the design and operational phases of the project, and selected approaches may be reinstituted if conditions warrant. Given the current conceptual understanding of the subsurface environment, early and appreciable impacts to near-surface environments are not expected.« less
  • The impact of temperature variations of injected CO 2 on the mechanical integrity of a reservoir is a problem rarely addressed in the design of a CO 2 storage site. The geomechanical simulation of the FutureGen 2.0 storage site presented here takes into account the complete modeling of heat exchange between the environment and CO 2 during its transport in the pipeline and injection well before reaching the reservoir, as well as its interaction with the reservoir host rock. An ad-hoc program was developed to model CO 2 transport from the power plant to the reservoir and an approach couplingmore » PNNL STOMP-CO 2 multiphase flow simulator and ABAQUS® has been developed for the reservoir model which is fully three-dimensional with four horizontal wells and variable layer thickness. The Mohr-Coulomb fracture criterion has been employed, where hydraulic fracture was predicted to occur at an integration point if the fluid pressure at the point exceeded the least compressive principal stress. Evaluation of the results shows that the fracture criterion has not been verified at any node and time step for the CO 2 temperature range predicted at the top of the injection zone.« less
  • FutureGen 2.0 site will be the first near-zero emission power plant with fully integrated long-term storage in a deep, non-potable saline aquifer in the United States. The proposed FutureGen 2.0 CO 2 storage site is located in northeast Morgan County, Illinois, U.S.A., forty-eight kilometres from the Meredosia Energy Center where a large-scale oxy-combustion demonstration will be conducted. The demonstration will involve > 90% carbon capture, which will produce more than one million metric tons (MMT) of CO 2 per year. The CO 2 will be compressed at the power plant and transported via pipeline to the storage site. To examinemore » CO 2 storage potential of the site, a 1,467m characterization well (FGA#1) was completed in December 2011. The target reservoir for CO 2 storage is the Mt. Simon Sandstone and Elmhurst Sandstone Member of the lower Eau Claire Formation for a combined thickness of 176 m. Confining beds of the overlying Lombard and Proviso Members (upper Eau Claire Formation) reach a thickness of 126 m. Characterization of the target injection zone and the overlying confining zone was based on wellbore data, cores, and geophysical logs, along with surface geophysical (2-D seismic profiles, magnetic and gravity), and structural data collected during the initial stage of the project . Based on this geological model, 3D simulations of CO 2 injection and redistribution were conducted using STOMP-CO 2, a multiphase flow and transport simulator. After this characterization stage, it appears that the injection site is a suitable geologic system for CO 2 sequestration and that the injection zone is sufficient to receive up to 33 MMT of CO 2 at a rate of 1.1 MMT/yr. GHGT-11 conference« less