A strategy for baseline surveys for environmental ... · QICS is led by Plymouth Marine Laboraory...
2
www.qics.co.uk 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 Primary monitoring of the robustness of geological storage will involve seismic monitoring of the deep geological storage complex, but this cannot ‘see’ small leakage pathways through the cap rock and overburden. Real-time monitoring at the sea bed (or land surface) during and after injection will provide added assurance. If a leak from geological storage or carbon dioxide transportation occurs, model predictions suggest that whilst the epicentre of leakage may be easily detectable, successful monitoring will depend on the ability to distinguish less distinct leak signals away from the epicenter. However, as marine systems are very dynamic, physically, chemically and biologically (see figure below), these signals will be difficult to recognise. Further, assessment of impacts can only be meaningful if the seasonality and heterogeneity of the system are understood. QICS has demonstrated that leaks of CO 2 gas can be detected by monitoring the geophysical, acoustic, geochemical and biological properties in a marine system; however, the complexity of response suggests that there are no absolute indicators of leakage or impact that can unequivocally and universally be used for all storage sites. It is essential that any environmental monitoring programme is supported by a sufficient temporal (tidal, seasonal and annual) and spatial baseline of data from which changes can be accurately identified. In this fact sheet we outline the recommended components of a sufficient baseline survey. Further technical detail is given in fact sheet 4 of this series. The best monitoring tools and strategies that should be deployed for environmental monitoring of a geological storage site are identified in fact sheets 7 and 8. Model projections of: left - the average variability in pH (a proxy for CO 2 ) across a typical seasonal cycle; right - the largest day-to-day change in pH experienced. These natural dynamics are due to a combination of biological activity and physical processes and emphasize the complexity of the natural system against which any CCS leakage must be detected. A strategy for baseline surveys for environmental monitoring of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) sites Fact Sheet 3 Quantifying and monitoring potential ecosystem impacts of geological carbon storage
Transcript of A strategy for baseline surveys for environmental ... · QICS is led by Plymouth Marine Laboraory...
www.qics.co.uk
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Primary monitoring of the robustness of geological storage will involve seismic monitoring of the deep geological storage complex, but this cannot ‘see’ small leakage pathways through the cap rock and overburden. Real-time monitoring at the sea bed (or land surface) during and after injection will provide added assurance. If a leak from geological storage or carbon dioxide transportation occurs, model predictions suggest that whilst the epicentre of leakage may be easily detectable, successful monitoring will depend on the ability to distinguish less distinct leak signals away from the epicenter. However, as marine systems are very dynamic, physically, chemically and biologically (see figure below), these signals will be difficult to recognise. Further, assessment of impacts can only be meaningful if the seasonality and heterogeneity of the system are understood.
QICS has demonstrated that leaks of CO2 gas can be detected by monitoring the geophysical, acoustic, geochemical and biological properties in a marine system; however, the complexity of response suggests that there are no absolute indicators of leakage or impact that can unequivocally and universally be used for all storage sites. It is essential that any environmental monitoring programme is supported by a sufficient temporal (tidal, seasonal and annual) and spatial baseline of data from which changes can be accurately identified. In this fact sheet we outline the recommended components of a sufficient baseline survey. Further technical detail is given in fact sheet 4 of this series. The best monitoring tools and strategies that should be deployed for environmental monitoring of a geological storage site are identified in fact sheets 7 and 8.
Model projections of: left - the average variability in pH (a proxy for CO2) across a typical seasonal cycle; right - the largest day-to-day change in pH experienced. These natural dynamics are due to a combination of biological activity and physical processes and emphasize the complexity of the natural system against which any CCS leakage must be detected.
A strategy for baseline surveys for environmental monitoring of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) sites
Fact Sheet 3
Quantifying and monitoring potential ecosystem impacts of geological carbon storage
www.bgs.ac.uk/qics/QICS is led by Plymouth Marine Laboraory in the UK, contact Jerry Blackford | [email protected] further information
www.qics.co.uk
Major CO2 point sources
UK Sedimentary Basins
Hydrocarbon fields centre points (after NSBTF)
Gas fieldsOil fieldsOil and gas fieldsExample baseline sites
QICS Project Office Plymouth Marine Laboratory, UKProject Leader: Jerry Blackford Contact: [email protected]
CCS operational
Spatial organisation of a baseline
Given the limitations that inevitably restrict the extent of a baseline survey, careful planning and collaboration will lead to the most efficient strategy. Considering a region like the North Sea, an internationally co-ordinated baseline could reveal the majority of marine system heterogeneity with relatively few primary baseline study sites (see map). The key will be to locate monitoring sites such that the major biogeochemical trends (North-South and Coastal-Open Shelf) are described as a minimum, as depicted here. However increasing baseline information and sites will directly improve monitoring accuracy.
Currently there is a dearth of high frequency data for marine systems and so it is likely that the baseline data proposed here will provide a resource of wide benefit to the marine community, beyond its utility for CCS. Repeat surveys should be acquired on common 2D or 3D grids to ensure surveys are comparable. However, geophysical characterisation would be of most benefit if applied to the footprint of each storage complex.
Temporal organisation of a baselineEach property of the marine system varies with different temporal scales.
Although some biological events can be measured in days, the dominant timescale is the seasonal evolution of communities. Chemical properties vary over the diurnal cycle as well as seasonally. Acoustics are often random, depending on shipping traffic, while geophysical properties may have little temporal variability. Inter-annual variability and decadal scale trends should also be considered.
Sampling frequency Duration Measurement
Hourly Few days during main growing season
Carbonate chemistryOxygen, TemperaturePressure, Salinity
Weekly During main growing season
Carbonate chemistryOxygen, TemperaturePressure, Salinity
Monthly 18 month period encompassing two summers
Carbonate chemistryOxygen, TemperaturePressure, SalinityAcousticsGeophysicsImagingBiological coring
Initial intensive baseline Less intensive baseline Decadal repeat baseline
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Quantifying and monitoring potential ecosystem impacts of geological carbon storage
