COULD BE STORED IN COAL BEDS
The goal of the deliverable D20 was calculation of amount of CO2 that could be stored in coal
beds during possible future CO2-ECBMR (Enhanced Coal-Bed Methane Recovery with the use
of CO2 storage) operations in GeoCapacity WP3.2 partner countries.
These countries were divided into three groups:
− North East group: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia
− Central East Group: Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary (Albania & FYROM)
− South Group: Spain, Italy, Slovenia, Croatia (Bosnia & Herzegovina)
Basing on results of both deliverables the following conclusions can be drawn for these listed above countries:
− Slovakia and Croatia have some coal fields but either not of suitable depth range or rank and/or size; some minor potential might exist in Bosnia & Herzegovina (after RGN, Croatia)
− Slovenia and Romania might have some ECBM potential
− Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Spain, and likely Italy and Bulgaria, have significant
ECBM potential
In D20, results of D18 were detalized and verified. PGIP and storage capacities were recalculated in a number of cases for smaller areas of coal fields and basins, likely more suitable for ECBM (Table 4.1). For two countries – Bulgaria and Italy, studies on storage capacities for coal fields were included, for these data were not available previously.
In case of Czech Republic and Poland the coal fields (mining areas of known methane resources, yet not mined, at least within the depth range in question) most promising from the viewpoint of CO2-ECBMR were selected, more site specific reservoir data collected and storage capacities
reassessed. Bulgaria country information was updated with storage capacity information, did not present previously. For Italy both geological characterization of coal measures and storage capacity assessment for the recently studied Sulcis coal field in Sardinia were added. Regarding Hungary, storage capacities were recalculated for smaller areas and depth ranges of the coal fields in question, for these constraints define best CO2-ECBMR prospects.
As a result, a quite conservative figure of 671.5 Mt of storage capacity associated with a possible ECBM operations (methane production phase only) in case of fields and basins likely most suitable for CO2-ECBMR.
Also an update on a number of GESTCO countries was collected, but storage capacity values obtained for these countries are rather comparable with results of D18 than D20 (they refer to a depth range often wider than 1-2 km we generally assumed in WP3.2 and for areas of entire big coal basins).
Simultaneously, analyses with the use of CoalSeq ECBM screening simulator by ARI (Davis52 et al. - 2004) were carried out. This makes it possible to present general CO2-ECBMR
production scenarios, particularly assessing the amount of methane production after injecting a certain amount of carbon dioxide. Information on coal permeabilities, coal rank, depth of coal beds in question, estimations of injection rate and spacing between an injection and an production well were collected for a number of scenarios, relevant to particular coal fields in WP3.2 countries.
After analyzing CoalSeq options (see previous chapter) it followed the highest methane 'production' occurs when the project area (spacing) is the smallest, i.e. respective injection and production wells are at a distance not greater than 40 m. The 'production' means a difference between a base case (no injection) and a continuous injection timing for a period of 15 years (production due to ECBMR application only, within a given period).
The result we got is low rank coals ('brown' and lignite) could produce relatively low amount of methane per a tonne of CO2 stored (Table 4.1). Low rank coals are known of far higher sorption
capacity of CO2 than CH4 and include relatively small amount of pure coal substance.
Medium rank coals (high to medium volatile or steam coals) have the ratio far higher than low rank coals. This is the case of Kaniów. At this moment we know from RECOPOL/MOVECBM (Skiba53, 2007) that the field experiment on injection of 700 tons of CO2 gave likely in the
injection period the methane production of 6400 m3 which means the rate of less than 10 m3(CH4)/t(CO2). However, the injection experiment lasted for one year only, so this is rather an
underestimation of capacities of Kaniów site, because the shortest timeframe of injection which is analyzed in CoalSeq simulator (and recommended for ECBM/sequestration projects) is 7.5 year and recommended - for 15 years.
High rank coals (low volatile or coking coals to anthracite) have the ratio even higher, but perhaps CO2 injection into anthracite seams will likely not be feasible.
Putting all things together, it seems from CoalSeq simulations that medium to low volatile coals might be more interesting from the economic viewpoint of CO2-ECBMR than others, provided
they have sufficient reservoir properties – not a very low permeability. These simulations suggest also rather more conservative recovery ratios for CO2-ECBMR (up to 0.4 in case of
medium to low volatile coals).
Table 4.1: D20 results - summary of CO2-ECBMR prospects in EU GeoCapacity countries.
Country Coal Basin/Field PGIP [Bcm]
Storage capacity [Mt]
Coal rank Permeability [mD]
Max. CH4/CO2 ratio (m3/t)
Bulgaria Bobov Dol Dobrudja 0.205 5.225 1.2 26.2 low medium 1 1 4 70 Czech Republic Czech SCB (selected) 14.125 53.5 medium high 1 1 70 167
Hungary Mecsek 3.725 14.9 medium very low n/a
Hungary BLF TLF 4.022 39.4 33 low 1(3) 1(3) 4 4
Italy Sulcis 20.256 71 low to
medium 1 4 70 Poland Polish SCB (selected) 47.825 239.2 medium high 1 1 70 167 Spain North West and
other basins 40.4 193.1 medium high 1 1 70 167 TOTAL 671.5
REFERENCES
1
S. Bachu, D. Bonijoly, J. Bradshaw, R. Burruss, N.P. Christensen, S. Holloway and O.M. Mathiassen. Estimation of CO2 Storage Capacity in Geological Media, Phase 2. Prepared for the Task Force on CO2 Storage Capacity Estimation for the Technical Group of the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, 2007
2
Atanasov A., Bokov P., Georgiev G., Monahov I. 1984. Main Features in Geological Structure of Northern Bulgaria – in regard to Oil and Gas Prospects. - In: Problems of Mineral Resources
Exploration in Bulgaria. – Proceedings of NIPI, 1, Sofia, Теchnika, 29 - 41. (in Bulgarian). 3
Georgiev G., Dabovski V. 1997. Alpine structure and Petroleum geology of Bulgaria. -
Geology and mineral resources, 8-9, 3 – 7 (in Bulgarian). 4
Georgiev G., Milanov, Y. 2005. Bulgaria – CASTOR WP1.2 Report
5
Antić Lj., Blagec K. et al. 1993: A Concise Atlas of the Republic of Croatia & the Republic of Bosnia and Hercegovina.- The Miroslav Krleža Lexicographic Institute, Zagreb, 159 pgs.
6
Saftić B., Velić J., Sztanó O., Juhász Gy. & Ivković Ž. 2003: Tertiary subsurface facies, source rocks and hydrocarbon reservoirs in the SW part of the Pannonian Basin (northern Croatia and south-western Hungary), Geologia Croatica 56/1, pp. 102-122
7
Lučić D., Saftić B., Krizmanić K., Prelogović E., Britvić V., Mesić I. & Tadej J. 2001: The Neogene evolution and hydrocarbon potential of the Pannonian Basin in Croatia, Marine and Petroleum Geology 18, pp. 133-147
8
Prelogović E. & Kranjec V. 1983: Geološki razvitak područja Jadranskog mora (in Croatian), Pomorski zbornik 21, pp. 387-405, Rijeka.
9
Albrechtsen, T., Andersen, S.J., Dons, T., Engstrøm, F., Jørgensen, O. and Sørensen, F.W. 2001: Halfdan: Developing Non-Structurally Trapped Oil in North Sea Chalk. SPE Paper
71322. 10
Vejbæk, O.V. and Kristensen, L. 2000: Downflank hydrocarbon potential identified using seismic inversion and geostatistics: Upper Maastrichtian reservoir unit, Dan Field, Danish Centra Graben. Petroleum Geoscience, Vol. 6, pp. 1-13.
11
Megson, J.B.: The North Sea Chalk Play: examples from the Danish Central Graben. In Hardman, R.F.P. (ed.) 1992. Exploration Britan: Geological insights for the next decade.
Geological Soc. Special Publication No. 67. pp. 247-282. 12
Andersen, P.R. 2003: A survey of CO2 storage capacity of Danish oil and gas fields, A
GESTCO contribution. GEUS Report 2003/42. Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland.
13
Schuppers, J.D., Holloway, S., May, F., Gerling, P., Bøe, R., Magnus, C., Riis, F., Osmundsen, P.T., Larsen, M., Andersen, P.R. and Hatzyannis, G. 2003. Storage capacity and quality of the hydrocarbon structures in the North Sea and the Aegean region. TNO-report NITG 02-020-B.
14
Bandlowa, T. 1998: Erdgasführung im Karbon-Perm-Trias-Komplex der Mitteleuropäischen Senke: Regionalgeologische Analyse und Kriterien der Lagerstättenführung. In: Geologisches Jahrbuch. Reihe A, Allgemeine und regionale Geologie Bundesrepublik Deutschland und Nachbargebiete, Tektonik, Stratigraphie, Paläontologie, Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, No. 151, pp. 1 - 65
15
Georgakopoulos A. N., Papakonstantinou C. M. & Papaioannou Ch. A. (1995), “Natural gas storage in the South Kavala Field: geological and seismological characteristics”, Petroleum
Geoscience, Vol. 1, pp. 129-133 16
Kiss,B. Tóth,J. (1985). Well Log Interpretation of Metamorphic Hydrocarbon-Bearing Formations. EAEG Conf. Issue, First Break, Vol.3, No.5, May, pp.24-31.
17
Bíró Z., Pápay J., Gombos Z. Practical results of CO2 flooding in Hungary Kőolaj és földgáz.
1999. április pp.65-71.
18
Bertello, F., Fantoni, R., Franciosi, R., 2008. Overview of the Italy’s petroleum systems and related oil and gas occurrences. 70th EAGE Conference and Exhibition-Rome, Italy, 9-12 June 2008, abstract n. A018.
19
Stirpeika, A. 1999. Tectonic Evolution of the Baltic Syneclise and Local Structures in the South Baltic Region with Respect to their Petroleum Potential. - Vilnius.
20
SEQ, 2006. http://www.seqnederland.nl/
21
Over, J.A., De Vries, J.E., Stork, J. 1999. Removal of CO2 by storage in the deep
underground, chemical utilization and biofixation. Options for the Netherlands. NOVEM.
22
Stupnicka E., 1997. Geologia regionalna Polski, Wyd. Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warszawa.
23
Ziegler P.A. (ed.), 1990. Geological Atlas of Western and Central Europe, Shell I. P. M. B.V.
24
Karnkowski P., 1993, Złoża ropy i gazu w Polsce, Towarzystwo Geosynoptyków "GEOS", Kraków.
25
Karnkowski P., 1999, Oil and Gas deposits in Poland, "GEOS", Kraków.
26
Przeniosło S. (ed.), 2000. Mineral Resources of Poland, Report prepared by Polish Geological Institute in order of Geology Department of Ministry of Environment, Polish Geological Institute, Warsaw.
27
Wójcicki A. 2005 - Possibilities on geological sequestration of CO2 in Poland - CASTOR
WP1.2 Geological storage options for CO2 reduction strategy (CASTOR WP1.2 final report for
28
Scholtz P., Falus G., Georgiev G., Saftic B., Goricnik B., Hladik V., Larsen M., Christensen N. P., Bentham M., Smith N., Wójcicki A., Sava C. S., Kucharic L., Car M. 2006 - Integration of CO2 emission and geological storage data from Eastern Europe – CASTOR WP1.2. GHGT-8 [8th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies], Trondheim, 19-22th June 2006.
29
Christensen N. P. & S. Holloway S., 2003. The GESTCO project – summary report to the European Commission.
30
Several authors, 1956 - 2005; internal reports on various structural geological, hydrogeological, geothermal and geophysical investigations in Slovenia. GZL- IGGG, Geological Survey of Slovenia, Geoinzeniring, Ljubljana.
31
Several authors, 1986; Plan in program raziskav lezisc lafte in plina v SR Sloveniji za obdobje 1986-90. GZL- IGGG, Ljubljana and INA Projekt, Zagreb.
32
Plenicar, M., 1970: Basic geological map SFRJ 1:100.000, Sheet Goricko with explanatory text. Zvezni geoloski zavod, 39 p. (in Slovenian).
33
Mioc, P., Markovic, S.,1998: Basic Geological Map of Rep. of Slovenia and of Rep. Croatia 1:100.000 – sheet: Cakovec (L 33-57); map (1) and guidebook (84 p.).
34
Buser, S., Draksler, V., 1993: Geological map of Slovenia 1:500.000. GZL-IGGG. Geodetic Survey of Ljubljana.
35
Znidarcic, M., Mioc, P., 1989: Basic geological map SFRJ 1:100.000, Sheet Maribor and Leibnitz with explanatory text. Zvezni geoloski zavod, 60 p.(in Slovenian).
36
Kranjec, V., 1994; Atlas naftnih, naftnoplinskih i plinskih polja u juznim predjelima Panonskog bazena (starija polja). P.48 – 55.Rudarsko - geolosko – naftni fakultet, Zagreb.
37
Kirk, K.L. 2006. Storing carbon dioxide in the rocks beneath the East Irish sea: In: 8th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies CD, Trondheim, Norway: Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Elsevier press, 2006.
38
Tongeren van P.C.H., Laenen B. (2001): Coalbed methane potential of the Campine Basin (N. Belgium) and related CO2-sequestration possibilities - GESTCO WP Report, VITO.
39
May, F. (2002): CO2 storage capacity of unminable coal beds in Germany (GESTCO Project
report) – Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, Hannover, 11pp.
40
Bergen van, F., Wildenborg T. (2002): Inventory of storage potential of Carboniferous coal layers in the Netherlands - TNO Report NITG 02-031-B (GESTCO), Utrecht.
41
RECOPOL workshop (2005): Reduction of CO2 emission by means of CO2 storage in coal seams in the Silesian Coal Basin in Poland - Workshop Szczyrk, Poland, March 2005 (abstract book).
42
Koval, E. J. “A method for predicting the Performance of Unstable Miscible Displacement in Heterogeneous Media” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. , June 1963
43 Claridge, E. L. “Prediction of Recovery in Unstable Miscible Flooding” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. ,
April 1972
44
Hawthorne, R. G. “Two-Phase Flow in Two Dimensional Systems – Effects of Rate, Viscosity and Density of Fluid Distribution in Porous Media” Trans. AIME 1960
45
Dykstra, H. and Parsons, R. L. “Secondary Recovery of Oil in United States”, API, Washington 1950
46
Goodyear, S. Hawkyard, Ian, Masters J. & Woods C. "Subsurface issues for CO2 flooding of UKCS reservoirs" -DTI's Improved Oil recovery Research Dissemination Seminar, 25 June 2005.
47
Hadlow, R. E. “Update of Industry Experience with CO2 Injection”, SPE 24928, p 10, 1992
48Raimondi, P. and Torcaso, M. A. “Distribution of the Oil Phase Obtained upon Imbibition of
Water” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. , March 1964
49
Shaw J.C. and Bachu S. “Screening and ranking Alberta oil pools for CO2 flooding and sequestration” Paper 2001-157, Canadian International Petroleum Conference, Calgary, June 12- 14, 2001
50
Fenghour, A., Wakeham, W;A.., & Vesovic, V. “The Viscosity of Carbon Dioxide”, Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp 31-44, 1998
51
Span, P. and Wagner, W., “A new equation for Carbon Dioxide Covering the Fluid Region from the Triple-Point Temperature to 1100 K at Pressures up to 800 Mpa”, Journal of Chemical Reference Data, Vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 1509-1596
52
Davis D., Oudinot A., Sultana A., Reeves S. (2004): CoalSeq 2.2: A Screening Model for ECBM Recovery and CO2 Sequestration in Coal – Topical Report and Users Manual – ARI and US Department of Energy (www.coal-seq.com).
53
Skiba J. (2007): RECOPOL and MOVECBM projects, opprtunities and challenges - CO2NET Seminar, 6-7th November 2008, Lisbon, Portugal.