Trevino, Ramon H.

English

Texas ScholarWorks

Can carbon capture and geologic storage mitigate greenhouse gases?     GCCC Digital Publication Series #10-03     Ramon H. Trevino                        Cited as:  Trevino, R.H., Can carbon capture and geologic storage mitigate greenhouse gases?: presented at the Biennial Alberta-Texas Global Climate Forum, Austin, TX, April 7, 2010. GCCC Digital Publication Series #10-03.  Keywords: Overview Can Carbon Capture and Geologic Storage Mitigate Greenhouse Gases?Gulf Coast Carbon Center, Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin  Presented  at  Biennial Alberta-Texas Global Climate Forum Austin, Texas April 7, 2010 After Copenhagen: Collaborative Responses to Climate ChangeBureau of Economic Geology -100 Years of Scientific Impact• First organized research unit of The University of Texas at Austin• State Geological Survey of Texas• One of three units of the Jackson School of Geosciences • Staff—140, includes 80 researchers– Fossil energy– Environment– Outreach• Advising state and federal government– Maintaining collections for researchResearch SponsorsGulf Coast Carbon Center SponsorsSouthern States Energy BoardKen Nemeth Dir, Jerry Hill PMBruce Brown NETL managerSECARB teamOther SECARB projectsSWPBES - UT Center for Energy FrontiersEPA projectsCCPTexas Offshore Study - FOA 33 Industry sponsored projects - FOA 15Parallel projects GCCC involvementCO2 Increasing in the AtmosphereCO2• Produced by burning fossil fuels• Atmospheric accumulation during industrial revolution• Improving global living standards =  increased atmospheric CO2Recent increase in CO2concentrationUS Risks from Greenhouse Gas Emissions -Contribution to the Solution• US is vulnerable to damage resulting from climate change– Hurricane landfall around Gulf of Mexico– Risk of tropical species invasion– Much of US low relief coastline – inundation by sea level riseHigh sequestration potential – Energy industry center (refinery and oil production)– Very well  known, thick wedge of high permeability sandstones, excellent seals– Initiated by CO2 EORAnthropogenic sourcesoverlie thick subsurfaceFlooded by 50 ft sea level riseFire ant Invasion, USDAOptions to Reduce CO2 in the Atmosphere• Conservation and energy efficiency• Fuel switching—e.g., natural gas for coal • Renewable energy—e.g., wind, solar, nuclear• Terrestrial sequestration—e.g., rainforest preservation, tree farms, no-till farming.• Ocean disposal• Geologic  storage “sequestration”• “Novel concepts”Which Is Best?To reduce the large volumes of CO2 that are now and will be in the future released to the atmosphere, multiple options must be brought to maturation.What is Geologic Sequestration?To reduce CO2 emissionsto air from point sources..Carbon extractedfrom a coal or otherfossil fuel…is currently burned and emitted to airCO2 is captured as concentratedhigh pressure fluid by one of severalmethods..CO2 is shipped as supercritical fluid via pipeline to a selected, permitted injection siteCO2 injected at pressure intopore space at depths below and isolated (sequestered)from potable water.CO2 stored in pore space over geologicallysignificant time frames.To reduce CO2 emissionsto air from point sources..Carbon extractedfrom a coal or otherfossil fuel…is currently burned and emitted to airCaptured - concentratedhigh pressure fluidShipped - pipelineInjected & isolated potable waterStored (pore space)  Geologically significant timeWhat is Geologic Sequestration?Geologic Sequestration - Ready?• Subsurface volumes adequate?• Storage security adequate? • System mature enough?Capacity = Volume of Assured Permanent SequestrationCapture Land surface> 800 mUnderground Sources of Drinking WaterInjection ZoneSeal = capillary or pressure barrier to flowCO2Seal limits CO2 rise under buoyancyUS CO2 Sources and SinksPower PlantsPure CO2 sourcesOil and Gas (USGS)Coal (USGS)Brine Aquifer> 1000mCompiled from USGS data Assessing Adequacy of Subsurface  Storage Volumes• CO2 non-ideal gas: at depths >800 m dense phase  0.6g/cc and compressibility decreases• Subsurface pore volumeV= A x H x phi• Efficiency of volume occupied– Residual water– Sweep efficiency– Pressure limits– Water displacement • Economic and risk factors– Resources –water - & gas– Unacceptable risks– Other “no-go” areas– CostAdequacy of Storage Security -Perceived RisksSpeculation about risks from geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO2) has been dominated by concerns such as:• Escape leading to asphyxiation • Escape leading to toxicity of drinking water• Induced earthquakes Perceived risk:  CO2 escape leading to asphyxiation “CO2 releases are deadly for communities:”“….If the gases leak out they are deadly to all living creatures since CO2 is lighter than air, and displaces air. When the gases are released they stay close to the ground, displace oxygen, and suffocate everything in its path. Two events in the relative recent history of CO2 emissions from natural sources underscore the community health hazard created if CO2 were to escape from sequestration:The largest recent disaster caused by a large CO2 release from a lake occurred in 1986, in Cameroon, central Africa. A volcanic crater-lake known as Nyos belched bubbles of CO2into the still night air and the gas settled around the lake's shore, where it killed 1800 people and countless thousands of animals.The 15 August 1984 gas release at Lake Monoun that killed 37 people (Sigurdsson and others, 1987) was attributed to a rapid overturn of lake water with CO2 that had been at the bottom coming to the surface, triggered by an earthquake and landslide. The emission of around 1 cubic kilometer of CO2 devastated a local village and killed animals for miles.Carbon sequestration would most likely be in oil fields in California, many of California’s oil fields are in our largest, most populous cities. As well, California has oil fields in poor, rural communities. Carbon sequestration in both of these cases will have a huge effect on environmental justice communities.”Environmental Justice objection to CA AB 705Letter* to Assembly member Hancock, April, 2008(emphasis mine)Risk Myth Explained: escape leading to asphyxiation • CO2 is a well known confined space risk –CO2 is 1/3 denser than air (N2 and O2) therefore will effectively displace air from a tank, mine, cave, or crater.• Air and CO2 are miscible with no viscosity contrast, so CO2 rapidly disperses in an open setting, on a slope, with breeze or circulation.  Topography or wind will cause CO2 to spread and mixOldenburg and Unger, 2004, Vadose Zone Journal 3:848-857No dangerCool CO2 pooling on the ground in the still night air but at low concentrations Frio brine pilot, Houston, TX –No DangerCrystal Geyser, Utah• Natural CO2 drives fresh water through a1930’s well that was improperly plugged – forms an off-road tourist destination and swimming hole.  Open setting- no asphyxiation risk. Other CO2 geysers through wells:Source Intermittente de Vesse, France, Boiling Fount, Germany, Herlany Geyser, Slovakia, Natural setting – Salton Sea, CaliforniaPerceived Risk: escape leading to toxicity of drinking water• “Carbon Sequestration….– Will require transformation of CO2 gas to CO2 liquid which is acidic– CO2 liquid’s acid nature is corrosive to the underground environment, contaminating the ground and would eventually leach to the surface.– When CO2 leaches up to the surface, it will contaminate underground fresh drinking water aquifers, lakes, rivers, and the ocean”Excerpts from “Carbon Sequestration  Public Health and Environmental Dangers”Researched by Coalition For a Safe EnvironmentRisk Myth Explained: CO2dissolved in aquifers could damage water qualityCO2 dissolves in water = dissolution trappingCO2(g) + H2O ↔ H2CO3(aq) H2CO3(aq) ↔ HCO3(aq)– + H+HCO3(aq)–↔ CO3(aq)-– + H+(aq) Acid= tang in carbonated waterAcid is buffered by rocksincrease Ca, Mg, Fe, Na, Si, CO3, SO4, etc. in solutionWhat could the etc. be?Mn, As, Pb, Sr, Ni, Zn, Ag, U, Ni, Cd……So would leaked CO2 be a risk to drinking water?Carbonated water…Otherwise known as sparkling water. Has variable mineral content but is potableIncreasing concern in sequestration community about “metals”EPA  geologic sequestration draft ruleJohn Apps et al. EPA contract reportPress coverage of Kharaka Frio results0.010.101.0010.00100.001000.0010000.00100000.001000000.0020-Mar 22-Mar 24-Mar 26-Mar 28-Mar 30-Mar 1-Apr 3-Apr 5-Apr 7-Apr 9-Apr 11-Apr 13-Apr 15-Apr 17-AprppbAlBBaCaKMgSiSrMnNaRbCsFeLiMoNiSeU VLaboratory Experiments-Adding CO2 to aquifer rock-water system• Add CO2 to typical aquifer rocks + fresh water – increase in dissolved minerals –proportional to constituents already in water.• Unless aquifer is already marginal, CO2–rock-water reaction poses little riskNormal water Add CO2GCCC staff Corrine Wong, Jud PartinJiemin Lu, Changbing YangPerceived Risk: Injection causing earthquakes• In the first Superman movie, supervillain Lex Luthor plans to trigger a massive, California-detaching earthquake by detonating a couple of nuclear weapons in the San Andreas Fault. • Crazy Lex! That scheme never would have worked, geologists will tell you. But, if he'd been serious about creating an earthquake, there are ways he could have actually done it. He would just have to inject some liquid (as some carbon-sequestration schemes propose) deep into the Earth's crust, or bore a few hundred thousand tons of coal out of a mountain. • "In the past, people never thought that human activity could have such a big impact, but it can," said Christian Klose, a geohazards researcher at Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.• It turns out, actually, that the human production of earthquakes is hardly supervillain-worthy. It's downright commonplace: Klose estimates that 25 percent of Britain's recorded seismic events were caused by people.• Most of these human-caused quakes are tiny, registering less than four on geologist's seismic scales. These window-rattlers don't occur along natural faults, and wouldn't have happened without human activity -- like mining tons of coal or potash. They occur when a mine's roof collapses, for example, as in the Crandall Canyon collapse in Utah that killed a half-dozen miners last year.http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/top-5-ways-that.htmlEmphasis added by meRisk Myth Explained: Limiting injection pressure to avoid earthquakes• Injection is used to cause “frac jobs” – microseismic events for reservoir stimulation. The pressure requirements are calculated, testable, and well documented.• MASIP = Maximum Allowable Surface Injection Pressure is a main regulation of current EPA underground injection control program.• Risk of accidental earthquake can be avoided by regulations in place.Pressure (psi)0 1,000Depth (ft)010,000Lithostatic gradientHydrostatic gradientMaximum pressure increaseSubstantive Risk - Damage to Fresh Water resulting from brine (salt water) leakageInjection wellPlume of injected CO2Footprint of area  over CO2Footprint of area of elevated pressure 12Damage to fresh water through salinization by water expelled during injection.Managed in Underground Injection Control by assuring that well are plugged in area of reviewSubstantive RisksCurrent GCCC work onPrediction of AoR andfar field pressure• Damage to surface freshwater (lakes) by increased acidity should CO2 leak – e.g. fish kills when volcanogenic CO2 leaked at Mammoth Lakes, CA. Conclusion• Geotechnical and environmental risks from sequestration are modest and well known• Policy, regulatory, and legal frameworks can guard against risky geotechnical activities by requiring proper characterization and preventative measures. 

Can carbon capture and geologic storage mitigate greenhouse gases?

https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/2152/66008/2/GCCCDigPub10-03.pdf

Can carbon capture and geologic storage mitigate greenhouse gases?

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Texas ScholarWorks