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

Title: An Assessment of the National Risk Assessment Program’s CO 2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools, Subtask 6.1 – NRAP Assessment Topical Report

Abstract

The CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin project team explored and assessed the carbon sequestration site characterization National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) Toolset, developed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for the NRAP. We ran the Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) tool using inputs derived from verified regional geologic data. We investigated CO 2 and brine leakage rates, and total CO 2 and brine leaked, from a hypothetical cemented injection well borehole to the nearest underground source of drinking water (USDW), identified as the St. Peter Sandstone, in a hypothetical monitoring well. The distance of the monitoring well from the injection well was varied to identify leakage variations with increasing distance from the injection well and to establish an area of review (AOR) for the project, and the effect of high and low wellbore cement permeability on model results was compared.

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [1];  [2];  [2];  [2]
  1. University of Illinois
  2. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
University of Illinois
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Fossil Energy (FE), Clean Coal and Carbon (FE-20)
OSTI Identifier:
1480065
Report Number(s):
DOE/ FE0029445‐6
DOE Contract Number:  
FE0029445
Resource Type:
Other
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT; 20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS; 29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY; CarbonSAFE Illinois; NRAP

Citation Formats

Carman, Carl, Damico, James, Blakley, Curt, White, Signe, Bacon, Diana, and Brown, Christopher. An Assessment of the National Risk Assessment Program’s CO2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools, Subtask 6.1 – NRAP Assessment Topical Report. United States: N. p., 2018. Web.
Carman, Carl, Damico, James, Blakley, Curt, White, Signe, Bacon, Diana, & Brown, Christopher. An Assessment of the National Risk Assessment Program’s CO2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools, Subtask 6.1 – NRAP Assessment Topical Report. United States.
Carman, Carl, Damico, James, Blakley, Curt, White, Signe, Bacon, Diana, and Brown, Christopher. Wed . "An Assessment of the National Risk Assessment Program’s CO2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools, Subtask 6.1 – NRAP Assessment Topical Report". United States. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1480065.
@article{osti_1480065,
title = {An Assessment of the National Risk Assessment Program’s CO2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools, Subtask 6.1 – NRAP Assessment Topical Report},
author = {Carman, Carl and Damico, James and Blakley, Curt and White, Signe and Bacon, Diana and Brown, Christopher},
abstractNote = {The CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin project team explored and assessed the carbon sequestration site characterization National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) Toolset, developed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for the NRAP. We ran the Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) tool using inputs derived from verified regional geologic data. We investigated CO2 and brine leakage rates, and total CO2 and brine leaked, from a hypothetical cemented injection well borehole to the nearest underground source of drinking water (USDW), identified as the St. Peter Sandstone, in a hypothetical monitoring well. The distance of the monitoring well from the injection well was varied to identify leakage variations with increasing distance from the injection well and to establish an area of review (AOR) for the project, and the effect of high and low wellbore cement permeability on model results was compared.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {2018},
month = {10}
}