0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
22 просмотров8 страниц
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE / DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium. A small 43 ton single well, huff-and-puff has been designed, implemented and completed in the Loudon oilfield. Site selection, equipment layout, test results and background information will be presented.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE / DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium. A small 43 ton single well, huff-and-puff has been designed, implemented and completed in the Loudon oilfield. Site selection, equipment layout, test results and background information will be presented.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE / DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium. A small 43 ton single well, huff-and-puff has been designed, implemented and completed in the Loudon oilfield. Site selection, equipment layout, test results and background information will be presented.
Overview of the Illinois Basin's Sequestration Pilots
Scott M. Frailey and Robert J. Finley, Illinois State Geological Survey Copyright 2008, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2008 SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, U.S.A., 1923April2008.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.
Abstract As part of the DOE's Phase II and III Geologic Sequestration Partnership program, the Illinois State Geological Survey is leading the Midwest Geologic Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) in various field demonstrations. MGSCs Phase II/III is six sequestration pilots of which there are four EOR pilots, one S/ECBM pilot and one, large-scale brine-saturated formation injection pilot.
A small 43 ton single well, huff-and-puff has been designed, implemented and completed in the Loudon oilfield. The well was a single formation completion at 1500 ft at pressure and temperature considered immiscible. The well's initial oil response was 8x the pre- CO 2 oil rate. The site selection, equipment layout, test results and background information will be presented.
Selection of a pattern flood is in the late part of the screening process. Because of the relative low reservoir temperatures and high fracture gradient, this pilot is being designed as a liquid CO 2 flood. Model results suggest 6-8 months of continuous injection followed by 2-3 months of water injection are required to have a measurable response at this site. Finalization of pilot contract with oilfield operator and UIC permit application process is being initiated at this time. The plans for the remaining two EOR pilots are similar to the pattern flood except these sites will be screened for pressure and temperature conducive to immiscible and traditional miscible conditions.
The S/ECBM pilot is scheduled for injection in summer of 08. Presently two wells in the pilot have been drilled, cored and DST'd. DST permeability results were lower than expected and drilling was suspended in order to carry out additional pressure transient testing including two falloff tests and one pulse tests. Results of the PTA tests confirmed the DST results and subsequent suggest closer well spacing is required.
The deep saline formation test is scheduled to have the injection well drilled in spring 08. The UIC permit application has been submitted. This one million ton injection project is intended for the Mt. Simon sandstone in central Illinois; the Mt. Simon is the deepest sedimentary formation in the Basin.
Introduction The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) is one of seven regional partnerships selected by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to determine the best regional approaches for capturing and storing carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) that might otherwise contribute to global climate change. The MGSC is led by the Illinois State Geological Survey, in conjunction with the Indiana Geological Survey and the Kentucky Geological Survey, and covers Illinois, southwestern Indiana, and western Kentucky. This partnership was established to assess geological carbon sequestration options in the 60,000 mi 2 , oval-shaped, geologic feature known as the Illinois Basin (figure 1). Within the Basin are deep, less economic coal resources, numerous mature oil fields, and deep saline (brine-saturated) reservoirs with potential to store CO 2 . MGSCs objective is to determine the technical and economic feasibility of using these geologic formations for long-term storage.
The MGSC will assess the CO 2 storage feasibility, capacity, and safety of these geological formations. Testing will focus on the ability of these types of reservoirs to serve as sinks for some of the more than 326 tons of annual CO 2 emissions from fixed sources in the Illinois Basin. Five pilot field tests will be conducted during the current DOE Phase II Validation, which is a 4- year effort (20052009) focused on demonstrating and validating promising geological sequestration opportunities. These pilot projects include the testing of the deeper and/or thinner coal seams to adsorb gaseous CO 2 , and the ability to enhance oil production or recovery from old fields by CO 2 flooding. The sixth pilot is primarily a large scale demonstration (DOE Phase III) that overlaps with the Phase II effort. The Phase III 2 SPE 113418 demonstration will inject CO 2 into a deep saline (brine- saturated) formation at a depth of 6000 to 7500 feet measured depth (MD).
Injection of CO 2 into coals may produce additional methane to augment natural gas supplies. Injection into mature oil fields is expected to demonstrate methods to recover some of the approximately 0.861.3 billion barrels of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) resource that was projected in the DOE Phase I Assessment for the Illinois Basin.
DOE Phase I Assessment Data gathered during the Assessment Phase (20032005) indicates that the geology of the Illinois Basin is favorable for CO 2 sequestration. MGSCs initial research estimated up to 485 million tons of potential CO 2 storage capacity in existing mature oil and gas reservoirs, 3.9 billion tons of storage potential in coalbeds considered to be unlikely to be mined, and 126 billion tons of storage potential in saline formations. In some locations, all three potential CO 2 sink types are stacked vertically. A site specific characterization includes formation properties that control CO 2 injectivity, total storage capacity near major CO 2
sources, the safety of injection and storage processes, and the integrity of the overlying stratum acting as a seal. The integrity of these seals is critical for safe and effective storage of CO 2 .
DOE Phase II: Validation (Pilot Projects) The overall goal of the MGSCs Validation Phase is a targeted, coherent demonstration of geological sequestration that will meet regional needs as well as contribute to a broader understanding of CO 2
sequestration in saline formations, mature oil reservoirs, and coal seams. Objectives that will contribute to this goal include: Assess and validate aspects of geological CO 2 storage in the Illinois Basin. Continue investigations into the methods and economics of CO 2 capture at facilities such as coal-fired power plants. Examine the costs of transporting large quantities of CO 2 via pipeline. Develop measurement, mitigation, and verification (MMV) protocols to ensure safe and effective sequestration operations.
The MGSC is engaged in six geologic field tests during the Validation Phase to assess geological sequestration opportunities in the Illinois Basin. Each test will have an extensive monitoring program designed for each pilot location and research objectives. Monitoring of air, shallow groundwater, oil and water produced from oil reservoirs, and saline water produced from deep reservoirs, to provide data to enhance understanding of the fate of injected CO 2 at the test sites is planned. The entire Phase will be scrutinized in detail to determine what contribution Illinois Basin geological sinks can make to national and international CO 2 sequestration goals in achieving carbon emissions reductions, and how technology developed by the MGSC can be exported to other regions.
EOR I: Immiscible Huff n Puff. This single well CO 2
injection field test, also known as a Huff n Puff (HNP), began in March 2007 to evaluate the potential for geological sequestration of CO 2 and for EOR in mature Illinois Basin oil reservoirs. During a HNP, CO 2 is injected (normally as a gas) into the casing/tubing annulus of a producing well (the Huff phase). The well is shut- in and CO 2 is allowed to diffuse into the oil within the formation, and then the well is placed back on production (the Puff phase). Site evaluation, evaluation of well data, CO 2 injection, modeling, and MMV efforts were completed during a test schedule of several months. EOR 1 was located in the southern part of the Loudon Field in Fayette County, Illinois. Forty-three tons (40 tonnes) of CO 2 were injected into the formation at a depth of approximately 1,500 feet. Loudon Oilfield. The Loudon oilfield was discovered in 1937 by Carter Oil. Primary production continued via solution gas drive until the 1950s when began waterflooding. In the 1980s two polymer pilot floods in the southern part of the field were implemented successfully, but were discontinued in the 1990s due to low oil prices. With few exceptions the field continues to produce via waterflood operations. Geologically, most all wells in the field have Mississippian formation completions, with some geologically older formations present in some parts of the field. Originally, the Devonian was an oil producing formation, but presently it is used by Kinder-Morgan for natural gas storage. The original oil in place for Loudon is estimated at 800 MMstb. The oil produced to date is about 400 MMstb. A decline curve projection of remaining oil production for the entire field under current operations is 7-10 MMstb. In DOE Phase I the assessed CO 2 -EOR potential of Loudon was 35-47 MMstb. Screening Process. Geologically, the zone selected needed to represent a relatively large proportion of the Basins oil production; this limited selection to the Cypress, Aux Vases, or St. Genevieve formations (or their equivalence). Likewise, the API gravity of the crude oil needed to be representative of the Basins oil. API gravity of 37 is very common so a range of 35-40 was considered. In commercial application, a HNP well can have a CO 2 tank truck drive to the well site and inject CO 2
directly into the tubing-casing annulus by observing and regulating the surface casing pressure. However, for the purpose of this research project, a production well with existing wells surrounding it was desired so that the surrounding wells could be used to monitor the distribution of the CO 2 . A single geologic zone completion was desired so that there was less doubt of the vertical distribution of the CO 2 within the zone. For the volume of CO 2 budgeted for this test (150 tons), the pressure of the formation could SPE 113418 3 not be depleted nor could it be very high. For a HNP, the pressure had to be high enough to ensure that the CO 2 had enough energy to mix with oil but not high enough to displace too much oil from around the well. As such, pressure between 300 and 700 psia was considered. A field implementation criterion was to have roads available that are accessible for CO 2 tanker truck delivery to the well site. For township roads there are seasonal variations for winter load limits that need to be coordinated daily with the township road commissioner. For oilfield lease roads, the CO 2 delivery company had to give approval to allow their trucks to location. Owens #1. Based on screening criteria listed above, the Owens #1 within the Loudon oilfield, Fayette County, Illinois was selected. The Owens lease originally had four Cypress only producing wells; presently it has two, the Owens #1 and #4, which are the west most wells within the 40 acre lease (figure 2). Owens #4 is south of Owens #1. The Coddington lease is to the west of the Owens lease: Coddington #2 a water injector is west of Owens #1 and Coddington #4, an oil producer, is southwest of Owens #1. The Hawkins lease is north of the Owens lease. Hawkins #1, a water injector, is immediately north of the Owens #1. No wells presently bound the Owens #1 to the northeast, east, or southeast; however, geologic models suggested very limited to no geologic communication between Owens # 1 and the remainder of the Owens lease, including Owens #4. Due to the current water injection in the area (Coddington #2 to the west and Hawkins #1 to the north), the Cypress at Owens #1 bottom-hole shut-in pressure was about 450 psia; the temperature was about 80 F. The API gravity was 37. Via a simplistic and limited method called a bucket test, the operator reported the oil rate 2 barrels per day (bopd) and the water rate as 46 barrels per day (bwpd); hydrocarbon gas production rate is not recorded primarily due to very low gas content of Illinois Basin crude oils. The well is completed open-hole in the Cypress with casing set to 1516 ft. Total depth was 1546 ft. The history of the well shows several tubing and rod related workovers, which is typical for the age of most wells in the Illinois Basin. Field Work. The original plan was to locate all of the injection and production equipment around the Owens #1 well. However, the Air Liquide CO 2 transport trucks could not access the lease road leading to the Owens site. Consequently, the injection equipment was located near the Owens lease tank battery, which was very close to a township road. A 1.5 pipe with couplings and unions was run about 330 ft to the north lease boundary and 950 ft east to the tank battery. The site around the injection equipment is referred to the pump site and the area around the Owens #1 is referred to as the well site. Gravel was added to both sites and the road leading to the well site.
Pre-Injection: The liquid CO 2 pumping equipment was installed and pressure tested the week before injection. A gravel pad was placed around Owens #1 for the portable test separator, office trailer and parking. Gravel was also placed in the area of the pump site for the CO 2
tanker delivery. Baker-Hughes designed the chemical corrosion treatment plan. The recommended chemical was Baker Hughes CRO195, which is commonly used in West Texas CO 2 EOR floods. Additionally, Petco was using this chemical as part of the waterflood chemical treatment of the highly saline injection water. Based on actual flow rates, 1.0 gallon per week batch treatment was used on this well. Coupons were placed in the three producing wells and monitored weekly for changes in the pitting rate. A batch treatment was applied immediately before CO 2 injection. A portable test separator was piped in parallel to the flow line at the Owens #1. A back pressure regulator was initially placed upstream of the portable test separator. After various attempts to produce through the separator at higher pressure, the back pressure regulator was moved upstream of the separator and was kept in this place through the remainder of the flow period. Injection. Liquid CO 2 was pumped from the storage tank using one of the three liquid CO 2 pumps. The CO 2
passed through the inline heater before moving to the 1200 ft pipeline to the wellhead. Various pump-related problems occurred during the pumping process. Most of these were diagnosed as reduced pump rates assumed to be from CO 2 vaporization upstream of the pumps. To improve and maintain pump rates, CO 2 was bled upstream at different times during active injection. Causes of this were suspected as heat loss, which was reduced by adding insulation, and regular cleaning of a screen, which was found to have leaves and other foreign matter. It was not determined if the foreign material was from the pump skid or the storage tank. Other problems were the flow meter stop working and v- belts coming off of the pulleys. The injection process was constrained by the injectivity of the Cypress at Owens #1. Because gas CO 2
was desired, very little hydrostatic head was available to increase subsurface injection pressure. Consequently, a portion of the pumped CO 2 was re-circulated to the storage tank. To increase the CO 2 injection rate, the injection pressure and volume regulator were controlled. However, this frequently did not work because as rate was lowered, the residence time of the CO 2 in the line increased, which led to a temperature increase, which caused expansion of the CO 2 , which added additional pressure to the pumps (because of the low Cypress injectivity). When this occurred, injection would cease for several hours. Consequently, the inline heater temperature became a more important factor for maintaining higher injection rates for this injection project. To improve injection rate during daylight hours, the inline heater temperature was lowered. Over 5 days, 43.0 tons of CO 2 were injected. The active injection time was 4.4 days. Post-Injection. The post-injection shut-in or soak was eight days. During the flowback period, three consultants, the field superintendent and production 4 SPE 113418 foreman were on location with ISGS personnel. The three consultants expertise was as follows: HNP operations, data acquisition, and portable test separator. There was agreement among the consultants and field personnel that the casing pressure needed to be lowered in order to produce liquid from the insert rod pump. The objective was to minimize the gas entering the pump and to keep gas dissolved in the liquid phases. Prior to attempting liquid production with the pumping unit, 10 Mscf (0.59 ton) casing gas was produced (primarily CO 2 ) from a surface casing pressure of 543 to 318 psig. Then the pumping unit was turned on. It was very difficult to initiate liquid production via the tubing. Various combinations of casing pressure and tubing pressure were used to initiate production of liquid from the pump. Initially, while the pump was on, a modest amount of gas would be bled-off of the tubing to 25-100 psig. (Bleeding off to atmospheric pressure never resulted in liquid production.) Following this period liquid production occurred for 15-45 mins followed by an extended gas production period of 30 mins to two hours. Afterwards the well was shut-in so that pressure could equalize and another production attempt could be made; this shut-in two to four hours. This time sequence allowed two to three of these attempts daily. Various combinations of casing and tubing pressure were attempted unsuccessfully. Towards the end of the week, the casing was bled to atmospheric pressure and various tubing pressure were applied. None of these worked either. After nearly four days of these types of attempts, it was decided to pump the well continuously through the period of gas-only production. After nearly four hours, the well started to produce liquid. It is hypothesized that gas was separating from liquid in the casing-tubing annulus and liquid and some gas is entering the downhole pump. As liquid is pumped to the surface, the pressure is reduced and gas comes out of solution. The lower viscosity, lower density gas moves faster upward in the tubing than the liquid while the well continues to pump; the liquid level rises to the surface and the well begins to pump liquid. The well produced liquid continuously for several hours to several days before liquid flow rates returned to zero. Eventually the back pressure regulator was opened completely. Corrosion treatment was applied at the rate of 0.5 gallons per day continuously. No evidence of corrosion that was attributable to CO 2 was detected. Corrosion due to O 2 was detected twice, once when the casing was open and allowed air to enter. The other time the source of O 2 was not certain of. Over a two month period, the well produced 96 barrels of oil above the pre-CO 2 oil rate projection (figure 3). About 33 tons of CO 2 was produced at the Owens #1 during this time. Later in the fall, Owens #1 pump was down for about one week. At the end of this period, CO 2
was detected at Owens #4; however, this CO 2 production disappeared when Owens #1 was returned to production. The casing gas continues to have over 50% CO 2
concentration, and the oil production continues to be about 1 bopd above the base rate.
EOR II: Liquid CO 2 Pattern Flood. Because many Illinois Basin oil reservoirs are relatively low temperature (75-85F) and have relatively high fracture pressure gradient (1.0 psi/ft), numerous reservoirs in the Basin can sustain a subcritical, liquid CO 2 flood, which is anticipated to behave very similarly to a traditional miscible CO 2 flood. MMP slim tube tests on Illinois crude oil samples at reservoir temperatures less than the subcritical temperature of CO 2 are very close to the vapor pressure of pure CO 2 . For example for a reservoir presently waterflooded at 1500 ft with a reservoir temp of 76 F, the BHIP can be 1500 psi, and average pressure may be 1200 psi. The vapor pressure of CO 2 at 78 degrees is approximately 950 psia, so this reservoir can sustain liquid CO 2 in situ. However, field operations required to control pressure that will achieve and maintain a liquid CO 2 flood in the injection well tubing, reservoir, and the producing wells are not certain. Site selection screening is underway for this pilot. Based on a water injection well and surrounding wells, a five tier screening process was used: CO 2 flood classification, operation/development history, surface conditions, wellbore conditions, and geologic/reservoir modeling. CO 2 flood classification. The first tier screening is primarily designed to classify the CO 2 -crude oil interaction as immiscible-gas, miscible-liquid, or miscible-critical fluid. (A 4 th CO 2 flood classification for pilot tests is for those reservoirs too close to the boundary between these three classifications; for pilot purposes only, these formations were avoided.) The screening is primarily based on current reservoir pressure and temperature, API gravity, and geologic formation. Operation/development history. The second tier is number of geologic zones open to the injector, a centrally located well injection well with (preferably) four, existing producing wells surrounding the injection well. Surface injection pressure, water injection rate (bwpd), and oil/water/gas production at the surrounding wells are considered in this tier, too. Surface condition. The third tier is the surface conditions that will accommodate the injection and data acquisition equipment and CO 2 tank truck delivery. Other surface features include proximity to lakes/ponds, flood plains, homes, major roads, plus road commissioner cooperation is also required. Wellbore conditions. The number of zones currently completed in the injector and ability to isolate zones is also considered. Therefore, type of completion (e.g. cased and perforated or openhole) is important. Injection pressure history over the last few months was reviewed. Workover type and frequency is important in the screening process Geologic/reservoir modeling. The fifth tier is the geologic modeling and reservoir modeling results. Higher consideration was given to injection patterns models that give oil production and pressure results that are SPE 113418 5 measurable and quantifiable within the CO 2 and time budget of the project. Pilot summary. For the tier 1 screening, primarily formations within fields nominated by Basin oil field operators, were classified or grouped. Tier 2 was applied injection well by injection well. Over 100 injection wells on 5 to 10 acre spacing were considered for this pilot and were screened to 32. Tier 3 included 32 site visits; of which 10 sites were give acceptable reviews. These 10 sites were reviewed for Tier 4 criteria and 6 were acceptable; the primary screening factor was the presence of a 4 liner that was restricting isolation of zones via a packer. Tier 5 is development of geologic and reservoir models to provide indications of CO 2 volume and injection duration required to get an oil response during the pilot project. The modeling results suggest that a 10-15 thick formation will require 6-8 months of continuous CO 2
injection followed by 3-4 months of waterflooding to have a measurable response in the field. Cumulative CO 2
injection is 6000-8000 tons. The EOR II field test does not require the drilling of any new wells because an available water injection well will be converted to handle CO 2 injection and the pattern and spacing of existing wells is adequate to test EOR processes in the reservoir. This pilot will measure volumes of CO 2 injected, volumes of CO 2 recovered with oil, the incremental oil production, and volume of sequestered CO 2 . Well conversion represents a potential near-term, low-cost opportunity to implement CO 2 EOR. A comprehensive MMV plan will be implemented in all phases of the pilot.
EOR III and IV. The last two pilots selection has not been finalized. At least one of these two will be an immiscible flood. In DOE Phase I, about half of the OOIP in the Basin was at depths that would sustain immiscible CO 2 floods. Simulations showed oil recovery to be about 50% lower than for immiscible floods, but CO 2 net utilization was only 20-35% of the miscible net utilization. In other words 50% less oil would be recovered, but 65-80% less CO 2 is required. For an immiscible flood for reservoirs with temperatures below the critical temperature of CO 2 , the reservoir pressure must be below the vapor pressure of pure CO 2 . For a pilot project with limited CO 2 budget, the reservoir pressure cannot be entirely depleted or there will be inadequate CO 2 to pressurize the reservoir to have any significant mixing between CO 2 and the in situ crude oil. Therefore current average reservoir pressure of at least 250 psi and preferably 350-700 psi was desired. Presently, a Cypress formation with a modest structural trap is being investigated for a vertical flood. The structure has an underlying water aquifer that supports fluid level up to 200-300 feet below the surface. Reservoir pressure is estimated at 700 psi. Because the gas formation volume factor of CO 2 is quite large at subcritical pressures, a relatively lower volume of CO 2 is required. (For example at 80F, 500 and 700 psia, B gCO2 is 4.4 and 2.7 rb/Mscf compared to 0.4-0.5 rb/Mscf for a range of miscible conditions.) About 2500 tons of CO 2 is estimated to be 1.0 PV for an area of about 70 acres around a central injection well down to a group of down- dip producers. Operations and monitoring an immiscible flood is less stringent compared to a liquid or a miscible flood as no minimum pressure is required to maintain miscibility. Moreover, because a modest structure is present to control the movement of CO 2 , intermittent CO 2 supply and injection rate is acceptable. Consequently, the storage tank, pump skid and inline heater would not be necessary for an immiscible pilot. For this specific site, a small CO 2
transfer pump may be required to overcome the natural pressure support via the underlying aquifer pressure. This field has been waterflooded, but it has not been rigorously implemented. EOR IV will be selected as another liquid CO 2 pattern flood or a conventional miscible flood (supercritical pressure and temperature). Because of the limits in time and CO 2 volume associated with a pilot project of 10-acre injection spacing, a water-injection 5-spot pattern is of most interest. To balance the choice of geologic formations, an Aux Vases or St. Genevieve formation is preferred.
Sequestration/Enhanced Coalbed Methane (S/ECBM). The purpose of this project is to determine the CO 2
injection and storage capability along with the enhanced coalbed methane recovery potential of Illinois Basin coal seams. The target formation is the Pennsylvanian Springfield coal with planned injection of up to 600 tons of CO 2 . The site on the Tanquary Farms in southeast Illinois is between Albion and Mt. Carmel, Illinois (figure 4). Reservoir simulation (COMET) cases of 10, 25 and 50 md required a 150 ft distance between injector and observation wells to observe a detectable pressure (5 psi) and saturation (10%) change during the planned 1-2 month injection period of up to 600 tons of CO 2 . In summer 2007, two wells were drilled 150 ft apart. Drillstem tests gave perm of 2 and 7 md and skin +6 and +9. Drilling operations ceased until falloff and pulse tests could be conducted to confirm the DST perms. The DST also showed positive skin and coal cleat pressure very close to the fresh water gradient. The wells were cased and cemented to surface. The Springfield coal was perforated with 6 shot per foot, 60 phasing, and 3/8 inch diameter. A 250 gallon, 9% formic acid treatment was used to breakdown the perfs; the acid was displaced with 1000 gallons water. The wells were swabbed and gas was brought to surface. The wells were shut-in to achieve static pressure prior to the pressure transient tests. The coal cleat pressure supported water level to surface. Downhole pressure gauges with surface readout were placed in both wells during all tests. A step rate test was conducted in the first well. Injection rates were maintained for about two hours for each rate. A step rate test gave a fracture pressure gradient of 0.96 psi/ft so injection rate and pressure could be maximized without 6 SPE 113418 fracturing the coal. This corresponded to a water injection rate of 0.78 gpm (26.7 bwpd). During the step rate test, pressure in the second well was recorded. The butt cleat direction permeability was estimated at 3.3 md and storativity was estimated at 25x10 -6 /psi. An injection period of nine hours followed the injections of the step rate test at a rate below the parting pressure (0.6 gpm). Afterwards, the first well was shut-in for a 24-hour falloff test. Because water was at surface, the well was shut-in at the surface and very little wellbore storage occurred. The falloff gave 4.0 mD and skin of -1.5. After the falloff test, a two-cycle pulse test with 10 hour flow and 10 hour shut-in periods was conducted. For each injection pulse, a pressure increase of 5-6 psi after about 10 hours was measured at the observation well. An interwell permeability of 3.3 mD and storativity of 27x10 -6 /psi was calculated. Lastly a falloff of the second well gave a permeability of 4.4 md and skin of -3.0. The skin was reduced substantially from the DST to the falloff test results, and the interference and pulse tests showed pressure communication between the wells. Falloff tests confirmed the DST permeability estimates. A comparison of the single well permeability and interwell permeability gave very little difference suggesting that the face and butt cleat permeability may not be very different. When the injection pattern is completed later this year, another pulse test will be conducted to estimate the face cleat perm. Assuming the falloff perm is equal to the geometric average of the face and butt cleat permeability, the face to butt cleat permeability ratio is 1.5:1. Reservoir modeling with the lower perm required reduced well spacing to expect measurable results during the planned injection period. Two additional wells are planned to complete this pilot. The injection well will be drilled in the butt cleat direction between the first two wells: 50 feet from one and 100 feet from the other. The last well will be drilled 100 ft from the injection well in the face cleat direction. CO 2 delivery will be by 20 ton liquid CO 2 tanker trucks. On site, the CO 2 will be transferred to a 50 ton storage tank and pumped through an inline heater to ensure the CO 2 is in the gas phase before entering the coal seam. Gaseous CO 2 has lower viscosity which should improve injectivity in the cleat system of the coal. Moreover, low density CO 2 (gas) is expected to be less reactive with coal compared to relatively higher density CO 2 (liquid or supercritical). Initially, the observation wells will have no pressure drawdown, but without some pressure sink around these wells it is unlikely that CO 2 or CH 4 will be detected at these wellbores. However, too large a pressure drop around these well may desorb gas from the near wellbore around these wells. Because the objective of this pilot is to account for free gas due to CO 2 injection the observation wells bottom hole pressure will be reduced but will be maintained above the CH 4 desorption pressure to ensure that free gas is a result of CO 2 injection, not pressure reduction. This should reduce ambiguity if free CH 4 gas is detected at the observation wells.
Saline Reservoir. The MGSC and the Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) joined as partners to expand the originally planned Phase II small-scale, deep-saline reservoir CO 2 injection of 10,000 tons into a deep saline reservoir. The newly combined Phase II and Phase III effort will be a large-scale multiyear deployment of geological sequestration of 1,100 tons per day injection of 1,100,000 tons of CO 2 over three years. This large-scale injection will occur at the ADM ethanol production plant site in Decatur, Illinois into the Mt. Simon Sandstone saline formation The goal of this injection project is to demonstrate the potential of the Mt. Simon Sandstone, a major regional saline-water bearing reservoir in the Illinois Basin, to be a significant CO 2 geologic sequestration formation. The Mt. Simon is the deepest sedimentary rock that overlies the Precambrian-age basement granites of the Illinois Basin. The key research targets for this large-scale injection test relate to CO 2 injectivity and volumetric storage capacity and efficiency of the Mt. Simon, the integrity of the Eau Claire seal to contain the CO 2 in the subsurface, and the entire process of pre-injection characterization, injection process monitoring, and post-injection monitoring to understand the fate of the CO 2 . The sequestration site at the ADM facility will be supplied with 99% CO 2 from the ethanol production part of ADMs operations. The CO 2 is wet at atmospheric pressure from the fermentation vessels, so it will be dehydrated and compressed to between a minimum of 1,050 to 1,300 psi and a maximum of 1,500 to 2,200 psi. The dehydration/compression facility is proposed to be developed near the north boundary of the ADM facility; the CO 2 will be transported about 3,200 ft through a 4- inch to 6-inch pipe to the injection wellhead. The injection well will be located on an ADM owned, 150- acre tract that adjoins the facility. Injection Fluid. Outlet CO 2 streams which are downstream of product recovery scrubbers from ethanol fermentor vents are typically 99%+ CO 2 , saturated with water vapor at 80F and atmospheric pressure. Common impurities are ethanol and nitrogen in the range of 600 to 1,000 ppmv each. Other impurities in lesser amounts often include oxygen, methanol, acetaldehyde and hydrogen sulfide. Injection Plan. Injection rates will be metered and may be suspended from time to time for operational reasons, pressure transient testing, or for other reservoir testing. It is expected that injection may cumulatively cease as much as 1 month per year. Based on regional geology, the specific injection interval within the Mt. Simon is expected to be near the base of the Mt. Simon Sandstone, near the granitic basement rock. The injection interval will be identified based on well logs, core samples, and drill stem tests from the initial well drilled on the site. For the anticipated Mt. Simon net thickness and permeability, reservoir modeling SPE 113418 7 and nodal analyses suggest that a single injection well with 95/8 inch diameter long-string casing and 4.5-inch diameter tubing will be adequate to meet the 1,100 ton per day injection rate. One research target will be to revise this modeling once well logs and core samples are recovered from the first well on the site. The project timeline calls for a twelve-month period between drilling/casing the well and CO 2 injection. Anticipating that the lower interval is found and selected as the injection interval, the well completion (perforation of the injection zone) will occur immediately before injection about 12 months after the well is drilled and cased. If the injectivity of this interval is not high enough or the interval is not found, the well may be perforated earlier and permeability tests conducted so that the injection interval can be determined as early as possible. During the 12 month period prior to injection, intense assessment of perforation strategies and subsequent modeling to predict the behavior of the CO 2 plume will completed. Permeability-thickness product and injectivity of several sub-intervals within the Mt. Simon will be calculated and assessed to fully understand the impact of a lower permeability interval(s) within the Mt. Simon to the distribution of the buoyant CO 2 plume. Based on Champaign and Fayette County Mt. Simon wells, at least one relatively lower reservoir quality interval within the Mt. Simon was found above the likely injection interval. Similar Mt. Simon sub-intervals are expected to be found at the ADM site. Supplemental Monitoring. Initial site environmental monitoring is designed to obtain a baseline of environmental parameters for at least one year before CO 2
is injected. This monitoring will benefit from MGSC and ISGS experience at the small-scale enhanced oil recovery (EOR) pilots at which reservoir fluids, groundwater, gases in the vadose zone, and wellbore gas were sampled and analyzed. The pre-CO 2 injection geologic baseline will be established with geophysical well logs, a 3D seismic survey and possibly also pre-injection vertical seismic profiles (VSP), depending upon the final interpretation of the 2D survey and the surface access constraints with respect to the layout of the 3D survey. Geophysical techniques may include permanently placing geophones in the injection well that would facilitate microseismic monitoring and repeat VSPs. This appears especially appropriate given the features on the surface. Monitoring will continue during injection (three years) and post- injection (two years). Downhole fluid samples will be taken to determine composition of the formation water, which is important to assess mineral trapping and dissolution of CO 2 into the brine. Pressure and temperature data from the Mt. Simon are limited in the deeper part of the Basin. Drill stem and pressure falloff tests will be used to estimate flow characteristics. Post-injection seismic imagery will provide an improved understanding of the geologic structure, which is expected to be regional dip of about 0.5 degrees to the southeast. The extensive suite of data collected in and around the injection well through core analyses and petrophysical tests, borehole tests, well logging, and seismic profiling will be analyzed and used to build geologic models of the entire stratigraphic column from the Mt. Simon to the surface. Reservoir flow modeling will be used to history match the injection performance and predict the distribution of the CO 2
plume. When the verification wells are drilled to further understand the CO 2 plume movement, lateral variations in the geologic and reservoir properties of the Mt. Simon will be learned. Activities To-Date. Two, orthogonal 2-D seismic lines were acquired in October 2007 in preparation for drilling the injection well planned for the second quarter of 2008; no indications of faults or fractures were observed at the injection site. After the first well is drilled, 3D seismic will be acquired to improve the baseline characterization of the Mt. Simon and the shallower formations. The UIC permit application process was started in the fall of 2007 and a final application was submitted to the Illinois EPA in January 2008. A Class I Nonhazardous permit was requested. In the first quarter 2008, a risk management assessment will be conducted to identify the risks associated with this project and the impact each will have. These are to include HSE risks as well as project management risks, e.g. supply and contractor availability.
Acknowledgements This work was funded by the DOE/NETL Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership program through Contract DE-FC26-05NT42588. The Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Development through the Illinois Clean Coal Institute Contract 06-02 (Project # DEV05-2(2)) provided additional funds for these pilot projects. The State of Illinois provided cost sharing through the Illinois State Geological Survey.
The authors would like to thank Daniel Byers for working on the graphics.