10 research outputs found
Greenhouse gas sources and mitigation strategies from a geosciences perspective
Certain gases that are capable of trapping heat in the Earth’s atmosphere are known as “greenhouse gas” and are important for helping to regulate temperature. Major greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor, chlorofluorocarbons, and nitrous oxide. Burning fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide as a combustion product and atmospheric concentrations have increased dramatically over the past two centuries. The heat trapped by this additional greenhouse gas is changing climates, melting ice sheets and glaciers in polar regions, raising sea levels, and affecting ocean currents. Climate change can be mitigated by preventing the emission of additional fossil fuel combustion products to the atmosphere and reducing existing greenhouse gas levels back to pre-industrial revolution concentrations. This requires switching energy production to sustainable, non-fossil sources and applying carbon capture, use, and storage technology on the fossil fuel combustion that remains. The implementation of direct air capture technology to reduce existing carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere can further remediate climate impacts. Captured carbon dioxide can be stored in plant tissues, soils, deep underground in geological repositories, or as solid materials like concrete or carbonates to keep it from reentering the atmosphere. Although non-carbon energy sources have recently become more cost-competitive with fossil energy, technological advancements and government policies are still needed to overcome the inherent economic advantages of fossil fuels. A global strategy must be developed to convince people that the higher cost of clean, sustainable energy is a price worth paying to replace fossil fuels and prevent a major environmental calamity.Cited as: Soeder, D. J. Greenhouse gas sources and mitigation strategies from a geosciences perspective. Advances in Geo-Energy Research, 2021, 5(3): 274-285, doi: 10.46690/ager.2021.03.04
Leakage Detection of Marcellus Shale Natural Gas at an Upper Devonian Gas Monitoring Well: A 3‑D Numerical Modeling Approach
Potential
natural gas leakage into shallow, overlying formations and aquifers
from Marcellus Shale gas drilling operations is a public concern.
However, before natural gas could reach underground sources of drinking
water (USDW), it must pass through several geologic formations. Tracer
and pressure monitoring in formations overlying the Marcellus could
help detect natural gas leakage at hydraulic fracturing sites before
it reaches USDW. In this study, a numerical simulation code (TOUGH
2) was used to investigate the potential for detecting leaking natural
gas in such an overlying geologic formation. The modeled zone was
based on a gas field in Greene County, Pennsylvania, undergoing production
activities. The model assumed, hypothetically, that methane (CH<sub>4</sub>), the primary component of natural gas, with some tracer,
was leaking around an existing well between the Marcellus Shale and
the shallower and lower-pressure Bradford Formation. The leaky well
was located 170 m away from a monitoring well, in the Bradford Formation.
A simulation study was performed to determine how quickly the tracer
monitoring could detect a leak of a known size. Using some typical
parameters for the Bradford Formation, model results showed that a
detectable tracer volume fraction of 2.0 × 10<sup>–15</sup> would be noted at the monitoring well in 9.8 years. The most rapid
detection of tracer for the leak rates simulated was 81 days, but
this scenario required that the leakage release point was at the same
depth as the perforation zone of the monitoring well and the zones
above and below the perforation zone had low permeability, which created
a preferred tracer migration pathway along the perforation zone. Sensitivity
analysis indicated that the time needed to detect CH<sub>4</sub> leakage
at the monitoring well was very sensitive to changes in the thickness
of the high-permeability zone, CH<sub>4</sub> leaking rate, and production
rate of the monitoring well