The Baltic Basin: structure, properties of reservoir rocks, and capacity for geological storage of CO2

Baltic countries are located in the limits of the Baltic sedimentary basin, a 700 km long and 500 km wide synclinal structure. The axis of the syneclise plunges to the southwest. In Poland the Precambrian basement occurs at a depth of 5 km. The Baltic Basin includes the Neoproterozoic Ediacaran (Vendian) at the base and all Phanerozoic systems. Two aquifers, the lower Devonian and Cambrian reservoirs, meet the basic requirements for CO2 storage. The porosity and permeability of sandstone decrease with depth. The average porosity of Cambrian sandstone at depths of 80–800, 800–1800, and 1800–2300 m is 18.6, 14.2, and 5.5%, respectively. The average permeability is, respectively, 311, 251, and 12 mD. Devonian sandstone has an average porosity of 26% and permeability in the range of 0.5–2 D. Prospective Cambrian structural traps occur only in Latvia. The 16 largest ones have CO2 storage capacity in the range of 2–74 Mt, with total capacity exceeding 400 Mt. The structural trapping is not an option for Lithuania as the uplifts there are too small. Another option is utilization of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR). The estimated total EOR net volume of CO2 (part of CO2 remaining in the formation) in Lithuania is 5.6 Mt. Solubility and mineral trapping are a long-term option. The calculated total solubility trapping capacity of the Cambrian reservoir is as high as 11 Gt of CO2 within the area of the supercritical state of carbon dioxide

The Role of CCUS Clusters and Hubs in Reaching Carbon Neutrality: Case Study from the Baltic Sea Region

The cross-border case study for the Baltic Sea Region includes the large emission sources from energy production, the cement industry, refineries, waste-to-energy plants and other large bio-emissions, identified in the Baltic States. The need to combine CO2 emission sources from three countries into large CCUS cluster projects is explained by geological and regulatory limitations. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are situated within the common Baltic sedimentary basin. The best geological conditions for CO2 geological storage are available in Latvia. In 2021 three countries produced about 15.9 Mt of large CO2 emissions, including more than 2.2 Mt of bio-CO2 emissions, located not far from the existing gas pipelines, which could connect emitters with storage sites and ports. The average optimistic storage capacity of the Cambrian Deimena Regional stage sandstones in the E6 structure, located 80 km from the Port of Klaipeda, is about 365 Mt CO2. The largest onshore storage sites Dobele, North-Blidene and Blidene have a total average optimistic storage capacity of about 402.6 Mt. CO2 emissions from three countries, including bio-emissions, could be captured, transported, used and stored in geological structures during more than 50 years. The regulatory process to permit CO2 storage in Latvia has been started, initiated by Latvian largest CO2 producers. Considering that 14% of the reported emissions are of biological origin, carbon neutrality could be reached in the Baltic States. Hydrogen production and storage and geothermal energy recovery using CO2 could be combined in the proposed CCUS clusters, using for H2 storage small E6-B compartment of the E6 structure offshore and Blidene structure onshore

Implementation of the EU CCS Directive in Europe: results and development in 2013

Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament on the geological storage of carbon dioxide, entered into force on June 25th 2009. By the end 2013 the CCS Directive has been fully transposed into national law to the satisfaction of the EC in 20 out of 28 EU Member States, while six EU countries (Austria, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Sweden and Slovenia) had to complete transposing measures. In July 2014 the European Commission closed infringement procedures against Cyprus, Hungary and Ireland, which have notified the EC that they have taken measures to incorporate the CCS Directive into national law. Among other three countries Sweden has updated its legislation and published a new law in their country in March 2014, permitting CO2 storage offshore. The evaluation of the national laws in Poland, which were accepted at national level in November 2013, and Croatia, which entered the EU on 7 July 2013 and simultaneously transposed the CCS directive, is still ongoing in 2014. The first storage permit under the Directive (for the ROAD Project in the offshore Netherlands) has been approved by the EC. While CO2 storage is permitted in a number of European countries, temporary restrictions were applied in Czech Republic, Denmark and Poland. CO2 storage is prohibited except for research and development in Estonia, Finland, Luxembourg, two regions in Belgium and Slovenia due to their geological conditions, but also forbidden in Austraia, Ireland and Latvia. The size of exploration areas for CO2 storage sites is limited in Bulgaria and Hungary. In Germany, only limited CO2 storage will be permitted until 2018 (up to 4 Mt CO2 annually)

CCS Directive Transposition into National Laws in Europe: Progress and Problems by the End of 2011

AbstractThe EU CCS Directive transposition process and related issues in 26 European countries, comprising 24 EU member states, Norway and Croatia were studied in the EU FP7 project: “CGS Europe” in 2011–2012. By the end of 2011 the transposition of the Directive into national law had been approved by the European Commission (EC) in Spain only, but had been approved at national/jurisdictional level in 12 other countries (Austria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Slovakia and Sweden) and two regions of Belgium. By January 2012, the European Commission had assessed and approved national submissions of CCS legal acts transposing the Directive in Denmark, France, Italy, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands and Slovenia. Implementation in the UK was completed in February 2012 and by end March 2012, implementation at national level was also complete in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Portugal and Romania.Belgium, Croatia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Norway and Poland had not finished the transposition of the CCS Directive by end March 2012. The process had been complicated by ongoing political debates in Norway, public opposition in Germany and ministerial elections in Poland. More than 20 operating, developing and planned CCS pilot and demonstration projects have been identified in nine European countries. Storage capacity was estimated by CGS Europe project partners as “sufficient at national level” in 17 countries

Study of Local Seismic Events in Lithuania and Adjacent Areas Using Data from the PASSEQ Experiment

The territory of Lithuania and adjacent areas of the East European Craton have always been considered a region of low seismicity. Two recent earthquakes with magnitudes of more than 5 in the Kaliningrad District (Russian Federation) on 21 September 2004 motivated re-evaluation of the seismic hazard in Lithuania and adjacent territories. A new opportunity to study seismicity in the region is provided by the PASSEQ (Pasive Seismic Experiment) project that aimed to study the lithosphere–asthenosphere structure around the Trans-European Suture Zone. Twenty-six seismic stations of the PASSEQ temporary seismic array were installed in the territory of Lithuania. The stations recorded a number of local and regional seismic events originating from Lithuania and adjacent areas. This data can be used to answer the question of whether there exist seismically active tectonic zones in Lithuania that could be potentially hazardous for critical industrial facilities. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to find any natural tectonic seismic events in Lithuania and to obtain more general view of seismicity in the region. In order to do this, we make a manual review of the continuous data recorded by the PASSEQ seismic stations in Lithuania. From the good quality data, we select and relocate 45 local seismic events using the well-known LocSAT and VELEST location algortithms. In order to discriminate between possible natural events, underwater explosions and on-shore blasts, we analyse spatial distribution of epicenters and temporal distribution of origin times and perform both visual analysis of waveforms and spectral analysis of recordings. We show that the relocated seismic events can be grouped into five clusters (groups) according to their epicenter coordinates and origin and that several seismic events might be of tectonic origin. We also show that several events from the off-shore region in the Baltic Sea (at the coasts of the Kaliningrad District of the Russian Federation) are non-volcanic tremors, although the origin of these tremor-type events is not clear

Local Seismic Events in the Area of Poland Based on Data from the PASSEQ 2006-2008 Experiment

PASSEQ 2006-2008 (Passive Seismic Experiment in TESZ; Wilde-Piórko et al. 2008) was the biggest passive seismic experiment carried out so far in the area of Central Europe (Poland, Germany, the Czech Republic and Lithuania). 196 seismic stations (including 49 broadband seismometers) worked simultaneously for over two years. During the experiment, multiple types of data recorders and seismometers were used, making the analysis more complex and time consuming. The dataset was unified and repaired to start the detection of local seismic events. Two different approaches for detection were applied for stations located in Poland. The first one used standard STA/LTA triggers (Carl Johnson’s STA/LTA algorithm) and grid search to classify and locate the events. The result was manually verified. The second approach used Real Time Recurrent Network (RTRN) detection (Wiszniowski et al. 2014). Both methods gave similar results, showing four previously unknown seismic events located in the Gulf of Gdansk area, situated in the southern Baltic Sea. In this paper we discuss both detection methods with their pros and cons (accuracy, efficiency, manual work required, scalability). We also show details of all detected and previously unknown events in the discussed area

Upper mantle structure around the Trans-European Suture Zone obtained by teleseismic tomography

The presented study aims to resolve the upper mantle structure around the Trans-European Suture Zone (TESZ), which is the major tectonic boundary in Europe. The data of 183 temporary and permanent seismic stations operated during the period of the PASsive Seismic Experiment (PASSEQ) 2006–2008 within the study area from Germany to Lithuania was used to compile the data set of manually picked 6008 top-quality arrivals of P waves from teleseismic earthquakes. We used the TELINV nonlinear teleseismic tomography algorithm to perform the inversions. As a result, we obtain a model of P wave velocity variations up to about �3% with respect to the IASP91 velocity model in the upper mantle around the TESZ. The higher velocities to the east of the TESZ correspond to the older East European Craton (EEC), while the lower velocities to the west of the TESZ correspond to younger western Europe.We find that the seismic lithosphere–asthenosphere boundary (LAB) is more distinct beneath the Phanerozoic part of Europe than beneath the Precambrian part. To the west of the TESZ beneath the eastern part of the Bohemian Massif, the Sudetes Mountains and the Eger Rift, the negative anomalies are observed from a depth of at least 70 km, while under the Variscides the average depth of the seismic LAB is about 100 km.We do not observe the seismic LAB beneath the EEC, but beneath Lithuania we find the thickest lithosphere of about 300 km or more. Beneath the TESZ, the asthenosphere is at a depth of 150– 180 km, which is an intermediate value between that of the EEC and western Europe. The results imply that the seismic LAB in the northern part of the TESZ is in the shape of a ramp dipping to the northeasterly direction. In the southern part of the TESZ, the LAB is shallower, most probably due to younger tectonic settings. In the northern part of the TESZ we do not recognize any clear contact between Phanerozoic and Proterozoic Europe, but further to the south we may refer to a sharp and steep contact on the eastern edge of the TESZ. Moreover, beneath Lithuania at depths of 120–150 km, we observe the lower velocity area following the boundary of the proposed paleosubduction zone