This report assesses the differences between monitoring technology requirements for CO2 storage in a saline or depleted hydrocarbon reservoir and in a hydrocarbon reservoir, when CO2 injection is used for enhanced oil recovery (EOR).
First order factors dictating technology choice including geological and geographic parameters are assessed before addressing differences introduced by the choice of process (EOR or storage). A brief review of the most common monitoring technologies suitable for use in either CO2 storage operations or in CO2-EOR projects are found to not vary significantly, however the measurements and analysis do. Specific differences are highlighted, however, it is found that the largest differences in monitoring technology usage is not process related, rather it is controlled by site specific geology and geography. Where differences do exist due to process choice it is shown to be largely related to the level of characterization, baseline assessment, likely infrastructure in place and pressure management during operations.
No specific different technologies or monitoring strategies are recommended for EOR over CO2 storage in either saline or depleted oil and gas reservoirs. Rather, it is recommended to assess the local site- specific conditions of any CO2 injection project including the geology, geography and the level of knowledge and understanding of the reservoir and then to build a risk based approach to selecting the appropriate monitoring technologies and deployment strategies.This report assesses the differences between monitoring technology requirements for CO2 storage in a saline or depleted hydrocarbon reservoir and in a hydrocarbon reservoir, when CO2 injection is used for enhanced oil recovery (EOR).
First order factors dictating technology choice including geological and geographic parameters are assessed before addressing differences introduced by the choice of process (EOR or storage). A brief review of the most common monitoring technologies suitable for use in either CO2 storage operations or in CO2-EOR projects are found to not vary significantly, however the measurements and analysis do. Specific differences are highlighted, however, it is found that the largest differences in monitoring technology usage is not process related, rather it is controlled by site specific geology and geography. Where differences do exist due to process choice it is shown to be largely related to the level of characterization, baseline assessment, likely infrastructure in place and pressure management during operations.
No specific different technologies or monitoring strategies are recommended for EOR over CO2 storage in either saline or depleted oil and gas reservoirs. Rather, it is recommended to assess the local site- specific conditions of any CO2 injection project including the geology, geography and the level of knowledge and understanding of the reservoir and then to build a risk based approach to selecting the appropriate monitoring technologies and deployment strategies
