CO 2 Field Lab Public presentation May 2010

Transcription

1 CO 2 Field Lab Public presentation May 2010

2 Partners France Norway Great Brittain

3 Background From demonstration projects to industrial deployment: Storage considered as an acceptable option for mitigation of climate change. Regulatory framework: EU legislation (CCS directive) passed December 2008, to be derived state by state Monitoring, Reporting and Accounting protocols are under development. Source: Emerging Energy Research A well-chosen and well-engineered site is not expected to leak. However, the issue of leakage must be well addressed : Safety: Minimize the Health, Safety & Environmental risk Mitigation and early remediation Public acceptance: credibility of geological storage challenged Accounting: if leakage occurs, emission credits must be surrendered and the site stabilized (EU) Crucially needed: validated monitoring system for leakage Currently: no means to assess such technologies.

4 Project Objectives CONTROLLED LEAKAGE EXPERIMENT : Unique Very shallow Injection of CO 2 : seepage at surface Shallow injection of CO 2 : Migration in the subsurface & seepage at surface Determine the sensitivity of monitoring systems to detect shallow CO 2 subsurface migration & surface leakage Surface detection: Geophysical & Geochemical technologies for shallow subsurface monitoring Upscale these results to assess monitoring systems and requirements that will ensure safe CO 2 storage Combination of appropriate technologies Definition of a monitoring protocol, tool for certification Test and calibrate migration models in well controlled conditions Inform the public about the safety of CO 2 storage by showing the performance of monitoring systems.

5 Methodology A field Laboratory, where CO 2 can be injected in permeable rocks in a well-controlled and well-characterised geological environment. CO 2 will be injected to obtain underground CO 2 distributions that resemble leakages. Brumunddal Gardermoen Svalbard Svelvik

6 What makes this project unique? Main focus on detection limits: For each monitoring technology, what is the detection limit (threshold) Combination/integration of monitoring tools and technologies Test of existing and novel technologies Focus on repeatability and permanent networks A better option than natural analogues We have a controlled source of CO2 and a well known geological environment

7 What is EUROGIA+ Cluster of EUREKA, a decentralized intergovernmental initiative started in 1985, dedicated to energy technologies. EUROGIA+ promotes and facilitates partnerships between industrials and researchers across EUREKA member countries. The internationally-recognized EUROGIA+ label granted to projects demonstrating technical innovation, and show strong market and exploitation commitment. Label is a proof of quality to access national funding granted by a multidisciplinary, transnational committee. Financial support is provided by individual participating countries programs > Website: > E mail: contact@eurogia.com

8 Consortium Partner name Type Cost (M ) Main role in the project SINTEF Petroleum Research I Management and technology provider WesternGeco (SSR) LE 4D seismic survey Norwegian Geotechnical Institute I Technical site coordination, permit compliance BRGM I Monitoring, modelling, dissemination Schlumberger Carbon Services LE Technology provider for storage site management Bureau Veritas LE Monitoring protocol and certification Géosciences Montpellier U Lab and in-situ measurements, data analysis imageau SME Downhole electrical monitoring array British Geological Survey I Monitoring and dissemination 11.03

9 Status Project approved by EUROGIA+ board (June 2009) Project approved by French Ministry (July 2009) Project approved by Gassnova board (September 2009) Phase 1 (appraisal, Sep. 09 Sep. 10) approved Phase 2 (CO 2 injection, Oct. 10 Oct. 13) approved, in case 9% missing funding is found Project start 1 September 2009 Go/no-go decision at the end of Phase 1 based on Suitability of the site Risk analysis

10 Project structure

11 SP1: Coordination and Infrastructure Technical Site Coordination External Scope Contracting Engineering & Drilling Environments & Permits Abandonment Rotary drilling rig Drilling contract Drilled wells Cores Permit compliance CO2 tank used in a CO2 injection project

12 SP2: Site appraisal Site investigation to reduce uncertainties concerning Geology Suitability for CO 2 injection Suitability for monitoring Other risks Go / No Go decision alternative site Receives Drilled well Geological model Initial CO 2 flow model Risk analysis

13 Determine sensitivity & performance of the best available monitoring methods to detect CO 2 Surface Sub-surface SP3: Monitoring Baselines measurements for all methods Monitoring measurements 4D seismics

14 SP4: Integrated modelling Sensor response modelling CO2 flow & chemistry modelling Upscale these results to assess monitoring systems and requirements that will ensure safe CO2 storage Test and calibrate migration models in well controlled conditions Reservoir fluid flow model Processed & analysed data Integrated site model

15 SP5: Shallow experiment Decrease technology deployment risk Assured surface leakage Opportunity to detect and/or quantify the injected CO2 enabling more accurate calibration of tool measurement accuracy Testing of tool sensitivity and deployment strategies prior to deeper injection experiment Baselines measurements for all methods Monitoring measurements

16 What? SP6: Monitoring Protocol and Certification A Monitoring Protocol is an agreed standardized method of preparing equipment, performing measurements and interpreting the results. It must be repeatable and reproducible. The Certification is a document that verifies that the Monitoring Protocol has been applied correctly. Why? To provide a key component of quality assurance To ensure that the changes detected through monitoring are actual and not the result of differing equipment calibration, methods or skills To consistently detect and quantify CO 2 leakage or lack thereof

17 Protocol & Certification DESCRIPTION The Protocol Description provides the rationale For the Monitoring Protocol Standard Operating Procedures These are written in the form of instructions, with step-by-step details. It includes a SOP for Making revisions to the Monitoring Protocol Accompanying Materials This includes all the organized CO2FieldLab information to illustrate the Monitoring Protocol CERTIFICATION

18 SP7 Dissemination SP7 main objectives are to: Coordinate & facilitate internal and external communication within the CO 2 Field Lab project. Set standards for future storage projects through communication guidelines Active partners: SINTEF (Coordinator) Bureau Veritas BGS SSR UiO (Com. consultant)

19 SP7: Dissemination External Communications Exposure in media Newspaper articles Norwegian national TV: Oil & energy minister s site visit Personal contact Public hearings (SINTEF, UiO) Direct mail about first survey Future exposure Press book (BV) Scientific publications Press releases

20 Scientific CONTENT Economic Financial Environmental SP7: Dissemination Sub-project: 7 Duration: GOALS full project Wide public Side residents Green community Scientific community Companies Convince Informe Join in PRO PUBLICS Investors Contribute PRIVATE Events Mailing Newsletter Web Print (Displays) Gov-Int Org Free Call Number Lobbying Networking VECTORS

21 Funding Institutional funding 13 % Industrial funding 25 % National funding 62 %

22 Funding UK 5 % International 9 % Missing 9% funding France 26 % Norway 60 %

23 Project participation Industrial project partner Party in the Project Consortium Agreement Possibility for technology contribution Contribution in cash (and in-kind) 1 vote in the Project Coordination Committee (PCC) Member of the Industrial Contact Group (ICG) Arm-length group supporting the project Allowed as observers in the Project Coordination Committee Access to a defined quantity of project results Contribution in cash (not in-kind)

24 Norway Feasibility and site selection (Gassnova, 290 k ) Aug 2006 Jan 2007 Phase Zero: critical activities before site activities (Gassnova and StatoilHydro, 210 k ) Dec 2007 Apr 2008 Permits, site leases, communications with public and authorities, external contracting, planning and risk analysis Why Norway? Pre-projects Advanced in CCS demonstration (Sleipner, Snøhvit, Mongstad) Key priority area of Norway mandated to Gassnova High public acceptance Permit

25 Involvement of France in the CO2 programs Willingness to contribute to the international R&D effort on Global Climate change, including in CCS Ambitious national GHG reduction goal (80% by 2050) From 2005 to 2008, the National Research Agency has launched 4 calls for pluri-annual projects on CO2 (total 27 projects selected with a total ANR funding of 22.5 M ) MtCO 2 / y MtCO Eliminate 120 MtCO 2 / y in 2050 (partly by CCS) 120MtCO 2 Role of the CO2FieldLab project in the French CO2 agenda Strengthen competitiveness of French companies in the emerging economic market of CCS Complementary with current ADEME (Agency for Energy Economy) 2009 call for CO2 pilots in France (100 M / 4 y): studying CO2 leaks is not included

26 Project Risk Analysis & Remediation Geology Feasibility during Phase 1 followed by a go/no-go decision; CO 2 injection; Risk analysis during Phase 1 followed by a go/no-go decision; Site lease agreement; Close contact with the site owners; sufficient insurance coverage; Residual liabilities for SINTEF; Shared with partners, insurance and post-project liability transfer to the Norwegian State; Community acceptance of the project; Pre-project hearings and communications sub-project; website; Drilling; Project drilling expert; contingency fund; Financing Phase 2; Marketing during Phase 1.

27 Drilling risks ISSUE Risk description Consequence Remedy Risk assessment CORESTONES STABILITY Occasional dropstones embedded in a loose glaciofluvial matrix may become dislodged and rotate. The glaciofluvial deposits have never experienced ice load and is consequently relatively loosely packed. Problem may preclude further drilling progress Hole collapse & abandonment Move rig 2 m and retry Move rig 2 m and retry, use denser mud and/or higher viscosity and/or raise rig elevation. Reconsider (telescoping) casing programme. Dropstones are rare in visible sections, low risk. Problem will be reduced with depth as packing due to increased load becomes denser. Experience from similar deposits in the region show that quick operations normally provide trouble free results. SAMPLING Sampling activities causes extensive drilling operations delays which may lead to problems, ultimately cave ins. Hole collapse & abandonment Use dedicated hole for sampling only (wireline coring) Try avoid in hole sampling. Reverse circulation drilling may provide relatively representative disturbed flowline sampling. MUD GRADIENT MORAINE Rig is positioned close to the water table, no weighted mud is allowed. Poorly sorted low permability deposit Hole collapse & abandonment Difficult drilling by any standards. Low permeability for liquid and gas migration. Ensure adequate mud pressure gradient, rig must be >10 m above water table, and/or useweighted mud Adequate positioning of rig is feasible. No remedy No visible signs of moraine on available seismic documentation

28 Drilling risk mitigation Drilling consultant Fridtjov Ruden Principal hydrogeologist, certified driller, researcher Countries of work experience: Palestine, Chad, Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Malawi, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Uganda, Kenya, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Laos PDR, Nicaragua, Canada, USA, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Belize, Hungary, China, (Inner Mongolia) and Russia. (plus Scandinavia) Awards: - Innovation Norway: Development of submarine groundwater (2008) ( NOK) - DnB Nor: National Innovation Contest 2008, winner of category: Sustainable development ( NOK) - DnB Nor National Innovation Contest 2008: All classes, First prize ( NOK ) Investigated drilling in Phase 0 Budget based on price quotes from drillers Contingency budget

29 Project Organisation

30 Acknowledgements Financial support: CLIMIT via Gassnova SF (NO) DGCIS, Direction générale de la compétitivité, de l'industrie et des services (FR)