Submitted:
24 July 2023
Posted:
25 July 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
- Sufficient capacity and injectivity to accommodate the CO2 being injected.
- An effective sealing caprock, or confining unit, to prevent CO2 leakage.
- A geologically stable environment that ensures the long-term integrity of the storage site, minimizing the risk of any potential compromise [6].
2. Case Study
3. Geomechanical Study
4. Dynamic Modelling

5. Results
- Vertical permeability: in all models, the vertical permeability (Ky) was assumed to be 0.1 times the horizontal permeability (KH).
- Chemical reactions: none of the simulation cases accounted for chemical reactions between rock and fluids. It is necessary to conduct precise laboratory tests to evaluate such reactions accurately.
- Wellbore diameter: in all simulation cases it was assumed equal to19 cm, which is the default value in the software.
- Simulation area: all simulations were conducted in the upper Surmeh reservoir, due to its higher porosity value, which is a crucial factor for accurate modeling.
6. Ideal Reservoir
- Depth range: 4016-4150 m
- Net Pay: Approximately 125 m
- Typical porosity of the injection zone: 15-23%
- Typical permeability of the injection zone: 10-600 mD
- Proposed injection rate: 80 MMSCFD
7. Main uncertainties
- Porosity and permeability: they play a significant role in controlling fluid flow and pressure behavior. Accurate analysis of these properties is crucial and can be obtained through coring and laboratory testing.
- Formation temperature: it affects the solubility of gas in water and impacts the behavior of fluids within the reservoir. Understanding the formation temperature is important for accurate modeling and prediction.
- Injectivity and fall-off test: conducting injectivity tests and fall-off tests provide valuable information about the reservoir's ability to accept injected fluids and the behavior of pressure response. These tests help to determine the formation injectivity and generate Vertical Flow Performance (VFP) curves, necessary for compressor design and calculation of well-head pressure.
- Relative permeability and capillary pressure curves: understanding relative permeability and capillary pressure relationships is essential for accurate reservoir modeling and simulation. These curves provide insights on multiphase flow behavior and fluid displacement within the reservoir.
- Fracture pressure: Determining the fracture pressure of the reservoir is important for well design and drilling operations. It helps to ensure that the pressure exerted during the injection or production operations does not exceed the integrity of the reservoir.
- Cap rock integrity: it acts as a seal for the reservoir and is crucial to prevent fluid migration and to maintain the reservoir pressure. Analyzing the cap rock's integrity helps assess the risk of potential leaks or breaches.
- Gas solubility in water: the temperature of the reservoir influences the solubility of gas in water. Understanding the gas solubility is vital for accurately modeling gas-water interactions and predicting fluid behavior during injection and production processes.
8. Conclusions
References
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Global Warming of 1.5° C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 ° C above Pre‐Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2018.
- Shu, D.Y.; Deutz, S.; Winter, B.A.; Baumgärtner, N.; Leenders, L.; Bardow, A. The Role of Carbon Capture and Storage to Achieve Net-Zero Energy Systems: Trade-Offs between Economics and the Environment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2023, 178, 113246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olabi, A.G.; Obaideen, K.; Elsaid, K.; Wilberforce, T.; Sayed, E.T.; Maghrabie, H.M.; Abdelkareem, M.A. Assessment of the Pre-Combustion Carbon Capture Contribution into Sustainable Development Goals SDGs Using Novel Indicators. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 153, 111710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carroll, J.J. ACID GAS INJECTION – THE NEXT GENERATION.; 2009.
- Gale, S.; Heidug, W.; Zarlenga, F. Capter 5 - Underground Geological Storage. In; 2005; pp. 195–265, ISBN-13 978-0-521-86643-9.
- Bachu, S.; Haug, K. Chapter 12 - In Situ Characteristics of Acid-Gas Injection Operations in the Alberta Basin, Western Canada: Demonstration of CO2 Geological Storage. In Carbon Dioxide Capture for Storage in Deep Geologic Formations; Thomas, D.C., Ed.; Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, 2005; pp. 867–876. ISBN 978-0-08-044570-0. [Google Scholar]
- Khatibi, S.; Aghajanpour, A.; Ostadhassan, M.; Farzay, O. Evaluating Single-Parameter Parabolic Failure Criterion in Wellbore Stability Analysis. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2018, 50, 166–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Metz, B.; Davidson, O.; de Coninck, H.; Loos, M.; Meyer, L. IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Policy Stud. 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Ito, T.; Nakajima, T.; Xue, Z. Geological Reservoir Characterization and Modelling of a CO2 Storage Aquifer: A Case Study of the Nagaoka Site, Japan. Energy Procedia 2017, 114, 2792–2798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farzay, O.; Khatibi, S.; Aghajanpour, A.; Shakhouri, A.; Al-Ajmi, A.M. A Numerical Method for Potential Implementation of Underbalanced Drilling in High Pore Pressure Reservoirs. Int. J. Oil Gas Coal Technol. 2022, 30, 283–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farzay, O.; Shakhouri, A.; Gholami, R.; Al-Ajmi, A.M. Optimum Directional Well Path Design Considering Collapse and Fracture Pressures. Int. J. Oil Gas Coal Technol. 2022, 30, 388–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khatibi, S.; Ostadhassan, M.; Farzay, O.; Aghajanpour, A. Seismic Driven Geomechanical Studies: A Case Study in an Offshore Gas Field.; June 23 2019; p. ARMA-2019-0093.
- Khatibi, S.; Farzay, O.; Aghajanpour, A. A Method to Find Optimum Mud Weight in Zones With No Safe Mud Weight Windows.; June 17 2018; p. ARMA-2018-011.
- Shakouri, A.; Farzay, O.; Masihi, M.; Ghazanfari, M.H.; Al-Ajmi, A.M. An Experimental Investigation of Dynamic Elastic Moduli and Acoustic Velocities in Heterogeneous Carbonate Oil Reservoirs. SN Appl. Sci. 2019, 1, 1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gershenzon, N.I.; Soltanian, M.; Ritzi Jr, R.W.; Dominic, D.F. Influence of Small Scale Heterogeneity on CO2 Trapping Processes in Deep Saline Aquifers. Energy Procedia 2014, 59, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corey, A.T. The Interrelation between Gas and Oil Relative Permeabilities. Prod. Mon. 1954, 38–41. [Google Scholar]
- Dullien, F.A. Porous Media: Fluid Transport and Pore Structure; Academic press, 2012; ISBN 0-323-13933-7.
- Raza, A.; Rezaee, R.; Gholami, R.; Rasouli, V.; Bing, C.H.; Nagarajan, R.; Hamid, M.A. Injectivity and Quantification of Capillary Trapping for CO2 Storage: A Review of Influencing Parameters. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2015, 26, 510–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, B. Local Capillary Trapping in Carbon Sequestration: Parametric Study and Implications for Leakage Assessment. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control. 2018, 78, 135–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ülker, E.B. Investigation of the CO2 Storage Capacity of Aquifer Struktures: CO2 Storage in a Buntsandstein Prototype Aquifer. 2009.
- Bachu, S.; Gunter, W. Overview of Acid-Gas Injection Operations in Western Canada. Greenh. Gas Control. Technol. 2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eigestad, G.T.; Dahle, H.K.; Hellevang, B.; Riis, F.; Johansen, W.T.; Øian, E. Geological Modeling and Simulation of CO 2 Injection in the Johansen Formation. Comput. Geosci. 2009, 13, 435–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahimi, N.; Griffin, P.; Eng, P. Potential for Acid Gas Injection at Kharg Island. Doha: SOGAT 2004, E6.

















| Property | Description |
|---|---|
| Reservoir Formation | Surmeh Formation (corresponds to Arab Formation) |
| Porosity (%) | Range: 2.5 - 6 |
| Permeability (mD) | Range: 0.1 - 100 |
| Formation Water | Fully saturated with brine (220,000 ppm salinity) |
| Temperature (°C) | 80 |
| Pore Pressure (psi) | 3,800 |
| Fracture Pressure (psi) | 6,100 |
| Components | Reservoir Fluid Composition (Dry Basis) |
|
|---|---|---|
| Mole % | Mass % | |
| Nitrogen | 11.797 | 15.657 |
| CO2 | 6.795 | 14.167 |
| H2S | 3.908 | 6.309 |
| Methane | 73.861 | 56.139 |
| Ethane | 2.330 | 3.319 |
| Propane | 0.526 | 1.100 |
| Upper Surmeh | Porosity | Irreducible Water Saturation | Gas Saturation | Minimum pressure | Gas relative permeability |
| (%) | Swi (%) | Sgc (%) | Pe (psi) | Krg | |
| 6 | 22 | 4 | 660 | 0.65 |
| Simulator | Differences | Time of BHP limit (400 bars) |
| Black Oil | CO2 solubility was considered | 24 years |
| Black Oil | CO2 solubility was ignored | 23 years |
| Compositional | interaction between various hydrocarbon phases considered | 17 years |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).