1

CO2 Site Screening, Selection and Characterization,

and Canada’s CCS Activities

Dr. Stefan Bachu Principal Scientist, CO2 Storage

Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures Stefan.Bachu@albertainnovates.ca

Associate Editor (Storage)

RECS 2011 Birmingham, AL

June 7, 2011

Outline

§ Site Screening, Selection and Characterization

o  CO2 storage assessment scales

o  Basin and regional scale screening criteria

o  Local and site-scale screening criteria § Canada’s CCS Activities

2

Operational Stages of CO2 Storage

Site characterization is a continuous, iterative process during all operational stages of a CO2 storage project

CO2 Storage Assessment Scales

3

Ø Site selection criteria are the criteria by which a site is assessed, evaluated, judged, and, in the case of multiple possible sites, ranked for final selection and qualification

Ø  Site characterization represents a collection of types of data and information needed to reach the necessary understanding and confidence that the proposed storage site is safe and acceptable

Ø  Site selection and characterization depend on the scale of the assessment

Basic Principles – 1

Assessment Scales and Resolution §  Country: high level, minimal data

§  Basin: identify and quantify storage potential

§  Regional: increased level of detail, identify prospects

§  Local: very detailed, pre-engineering site selection

§  Site: engineering level for permitting, design and implementation

Note: Depending on the size of a country in relation to its sedimentary basin(s), the order of the top two or three may interchange

4

Relationship Between Assessment Scale and Level of Detail and Resolution

Primary Characteristics of Geological Media Suitable for CO2 Storage

Ø  Capacity: to store the intended CO2 volume Ø  Injectivity: to receive the CO2 at the supply rate Ø  Containment: to prevent, avoid or minimize CO2 leakage However, if capacity and/or injectivity are insufficient, some measures can be taken (e.g., use multiple and/or horizontal wells, use several storage sites, store less CO2) If containment is defective, then the prospective site is disqualified!

5

Basic Principles – 2 Ø  Site characterization is an iterative, non-linear process running through all the operational stages of CO2 storage

Ø  Monitoring is a key element in site operation, closure and post-closure, likely to be a permitting requirement

Ø  Storage safety and security is a common thread throughout all the stages of the operational chain and has to be demonstrated when applying for tenure of the storage unit and permit to operate, during operations, and after cessation of injection to complete site abandonment

Basin and/or Regional Scale Screening

6

Flow of Formation Waters in Sedimentary Basins

Driven by sediment compaction on marine shelves

Driven by tectonic compression in orogenic belts

Driven by erosional and/or glacial rebound in foreland and intra-cratonic basins

Driven by topography in intra-montane, foreland and intra-cratonic basins

Driven by hydrocarbon generation and other internal overpressuring processes

Types of Fluid Flow in Sedimentary Basins

7

Risk of Leakage in Sedimentary Basins

(Hitchon et al., 1999)

Preferred Flow Systems

Deep, regional scale, driven by topography or erosional rebound

8

Geothermal Regime in Sedimentary Basins

Basin type, age and tectonism

Proximity to crustal heat sources

Basement heat flow

Depends on:

Temperature at the surface

Thermal conductivity and heat production of rocks

Plate Tectonics and Earth’s Heat Flow

9

Preferred Sedimentary Basins

Intra-cratonic, foreland and passive-margin basins

Surface Temperature for Sedimentary Basins

Marine basins: 3-4 oC at the bottom of the sea/ocean

Continental (sub) Arctic and (sub) Antarctic basins: -2 oC below the permafrost

Continental temperate basins: 4-10 oC depending on latitude and altitude

Continental tropical basins: 10-25 oC depending on latitude and altitude

10

Variation with Depth and Geothermal Regime of Carbon Dioxide Density

Sedimentary Basins by Geothermal Regime

Low surface temperature and/or geothermal gradients - more favorable (higher CO2 density, at shallower depths)

High surface temperature and geothermal gradients - less favorable (lower CO2 density, larger depths needed)

Cold basins:

Warm basins:

11

Heat Flow in Pacific and North American Plates

Basin Maturity

Defined by fossil-energy potential (oil and gas, coals) and degree of exploration and production

Rich in energy resources, advanced production

Rich in resources, in exploration & early production stage

No or poor in hydrocarbon resources

Mature:

Immature:

Poor:

12

Industry Maturity and Infrastructure

Access roads, pipelines, wells (e.g., Texas, Alberta)

Drilling and production platforms (e.g., North Sea)

Developed continental basins:

Developed marine basins:

Eliminatory Criteria for Sedimentary Basins Criterion Unsuitable Suitable

1 Depth < 1000 m >1000 m

2 Aquifer-seal pairs Poor (few, discontinuous)

Intermediate, excellent

3 Pressure regime Overpressured Hydrostatic

4 Seismicity High and very high Very low to moderate

5 Faulting and fracturing Extensive Limited to moderate

6 Hydrogeology Shallow, short flow systems

Intermediate, regional-scale flow systems

7 Areal size <2500 km2 >2500 km2

8 “Legal accessibility” Forbidden Allowed

13

Desirable Characteristics of Sedimentary Basins Criterion Undesirable Desirable

1 Within fold belts Yes No 2 Significant diagenesis Present Absent 3 Geothermal regime Warm basin Cold basin 4 Evaporites Absent Present 5 Hydrocarbon potential Absent/small Medium/giant 6 Industry maturity Immature Mature 7 Coal seams Absent, shallow or

very deep Between 400 m and 800 m depth

8 Coal rank Lignite/Anthracite (sub) Bituminous 9 Coal value Economic Uneconomic 10 On/offshore Deep offshore Onshore, shallow 11 Climate Harsh Moderate 12 Accessibility No or difficult Good 13 Infrastructure Absent/undeveloped Developed 14 CO2 sources <500 km Absent Present

Cross Sectional Representation of Sedimentary Basins across North America

14

Seismicity in Canada

Canada’s Sedimentary Basins

15

Local and Site-Scale Screening Criteria

Basic Principles – 3 Ø  Sites must pass the basin-scale eliminatory criteria, and should broadly possess basin-scale desirable characteristics

Ø  In addition, sites must pass and/or meet additional criteria that fall broadly into five categories:

§  Capacity and injectivity §  Confinement, i.e., safety, security and environmental acceptability §  Legal and regulatory restrictions §  Economic §  Societal (public acceptance)

Ø The same criteria can be organized into: §  Eliminatory criteria: sites are eliminated if they don’t meet these criteria §  Selection criteria: sites are selected if they meet most or the preferred of these criteria, depending on local circumstances

16

Eliminatory Site Selection Criteria - 1 1.  Legally inaccessible (in protected areas)

2.  Legally unreachable (right of access cannot be secured)

3.  Legally unavailable (e.g., equity interest held by third parties)

4.  Physically unavailable (e.g., a hydrocarbon reservoir in production, an aquifer used for geothermal energy or for natural gas storage)

5.  Located in high-density population areas – ‘flexible’

6.  Potentially affecting other natural, energy and mineral resources and equity

Eliminatory Site Selection Criteria - 2 7.  Within the depth of protected groundwater

8.  In hydraulic communication or contact with protected groundwater

9.  Located at shallow depth (<750-800 m) - debatable!

10.  Lacking at least one major, extensive, competent barrier to upward CO2 migration

11.  Located in an area of very high seismicity

12.  Located in over-pressured strata

13.  Lacking monitoring potential

17

Site Selection Criteria - 1

For efficacy of storage: 1.  Sufficient capacity and injectivity: they are not independent,

injectivity may limit capacity!

2.  Sufficient thickness

3.  Low temperature

4.  Favorable pressure and hydrodynamic regime

Site Selection Criteria - 2

For safety and security of storage:

5.  Low number of penetrating wells

6.  Presence of multi-layered overlying system of aquifers and aquitards (secondary barriers to upward CO2 migration)

7.  Potential for attenuation of leaked CO2 near and at surface

18

Site Selection Criteria - 3

For cost: 8.  Accessibility and infrastructure (location, terrain, climate,

right of access, avoidance of populated/protected areas)

9.  Transportation economics (distance from source, pipelines of shipping facilities, compression and site delivery)

10.  Storage economics (site facilities, wells and compression, operational and environmental monitoring)

Additional Site Selection Criteria? •  Depth •  Thickness •  Porosity •  Permeability •  Water salinity These have been suggested in the past, but they are implicit in the criteria of capacity, injectivity, and protection of groundwater and/or mineral resources They still can be used as selection criteria, but they are not completely independent and changes in one may affect another

19

Critical Site Qualification Criteria Criterion Eliminatory

Condition Acceptable Condition

1 Sealing Poor, faulted, breached,

Multi-layered system

2 Pressure gradients >14 kPa/m < 12 kPa/m

3 Monitoring potential Absent Present

4 Affecting groundwater Yes No

A site must pass all these criteria to be considered for CO2 storage

Essential Site Qualification Criteria Criterion Eliminatory

Condition Acceptable Condition

1 Seismicity High Moderate and less

2 Faulting and fracturing intensity

Extensive/high Limited to moderate

3 Flow systems Short and/or in communication with protected groundwater

Intermediate and regional scale

A site should pass all these criteria to be considered for CO2 storage, but exceptions can be made

20

Desirable Site Qualification Criteria - 1 Criterion Unfavorable Favorable

1 Within fold belts Yes No

2 Adverse diagenesis

Significant Low to moderate

3 Geothermal regime

G ≥ 35 ºC/km and/or high Ts

G < 35 ºC/km and low Ts

4 Temperature < 35 ºC ≥ 35 ºC

5 Pressure < 7.5 MPa ≥ 7.5 MPa

A site should meet as many as possible of these criteria; if too few are being met, then maybe it should be rejected

Desirable Site Qualification Criteria - 2 Criterion Unfavorable Favorable

6 Thickness < 20 m ≥ 20 m

7 Porosity < 10% ≥ 10%

8 Permeability < 20 mD ≥ 20 mD

9 Caprock thickness

< 10 m ≥ 10 m

10 Well density High Low to moderate

21

Site Characterization Objectives - 1

1.  3-D structure of the sedimentary succession from the storage unit to ground surface

2.  Geology of the sedimentary succession from the storage unit to ground surface

3.  Rock properties

4.  Mineralogical, chemical and mechanical characteristics of all system components

5.  Hydrogeology and geothermics

Broad Site Characterization - 2

7.  Planar discontinuities such as faults and fractures

8.  Fault and fracture characteristics

9.  In-situ conditions of P, T and stress

10.  Fluid compositions and PVT behaviour

11.  Linear features such as wells

12.  Reservoir and wells history

22

Concluding Remarks Regarding Site Selection

Ø  CO2 storage sites should be selected based on the safety and security of storage, their capacity and injectivity, ability to meet regulatory requirements including monitoring, accessibility and economics

Ø  Any assessment of CO2 storage capacity should carefully consider the processes involved, their spatial and temporal scales, the resolution of the assessment, and the available data and their quality

Ø  Sites should be properly characterized to meet regulatory and stakeholders requirements, particularly in regard to safety and security of storage

References Regarding Site Selection

1.  Screening and ranking of sedimentary basins for sequestration of CO2 in geological media in response to climate change. Bachu. S., Environmental Geology, v. 44, no. 3, p. 277-289, doi: 10.1007/s00254-003-0762-9

2.  Screening and selection criteria, and characterisation for CO2 geological storage. Bachu, S. In: Developments and Innovation in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Capture and Storage Technology, Vol. 2 (M. Maroto-Valer, ed.), Woodhead Energy Series No. 16, Woodhead Publishing Ltd., p. 27-56, 2010.

23

References Regarding Storage Capacity Estimation

1. CO2 storage capacity estimation: Methodology and gaps. Bachu, S., J. Bradshaw, D. Bonijoly, R. Burruss, S. Holloway, N.P. Christensen and O-M. Mathiassen. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, v. 1, no. 4, p. 430-443, doi: 10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00086-2, 2007.

2. U.S. DOE methodology for the development of geologic storage potential for carbon dioxide at the national and regional scale. Angela Goodman, Alexandra Hakala, Grant Bromhal, Dawn Deel, Traci Rodosta, Scott Frailey, Mitchell Small, Doug Allen, Vyacheslav Romanov, Jim Fazio, Nicolas Huerta, Dustin McIntyre, Barbara Kutchko and George Guthrie. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, v. 5, doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.03.010.

CCS Activities In Canada

24

Canada’s Conditions Canada’s economy is a resource-based economy located in a cold climate, hence the need for energy for resource production, power generation and heating, and with large distances between population centers, hence the need for energy for transportation Energy production is a critical component of Canada’s economy Canada is ranked 9th in the world in terms of its greenhouse gas emissions, however with only ~ 1.6% of world emissions compared with ~25% and ~23% respectively for #1 and #2: China and US Canada’s emissions grew since 1990 by >35% Canada’s economy is similar only to those of Australia and Norway, but, unlike them, is closely linked with the economy of the US, hence the solution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions has to be unique to Canada’s conditions

Fossil Fuels Remain Key in Canada’s Energy Portfolio

Crude oil

Natural gas

Coal

Hydro & nuclear electricity

Energy Usage (2008) Energy Exports (2008)

38% net

exports

62% domestic

use

25

Canada’s Specific Conditions Asymmetry in: -  Jurisdictions -  Population distribution -  Geology -  Industrial Base -  Greenhouse gas emissions profile

Asymmetrical solution to reducing CO2 emissions

Canada’s Sedimentary

Basins

26

Canada’s CO2 Emissions 223

66

0.5

2

62 21

91

9 20

22

2

207

2004 GHG Emissions

2020 GHG Emissions

305

87

88

168

85

24

48

25

2 6

0.4

1.6

Distribution of Large

Stationary CO2 Sources

in Canada

27

Canada’s Sedimentary Basins

Targeted for CCS CCS activities are focused in: •  Alberta •  Saskatchewan •  NE British Columbia •  Nova Scotia

Canada’s Approach •  Federal focus on legislation for reduction of GHG emissions without

affecting economic recovery and development Canada’s resources

•  Provincial and federal focus on large-scale, integrated demonstration projects that will prove the technology

•  Basic research provided by universities under Carbon Management Canada (CMC) Network

•  Provincial focus on development of legislative and regulatory framework for CO2 storage

•  National effort led by the federal government (Geological Survey of Canada) to map and inventory the CO2 storage capacity in the sedimentary basins that will be the focus of CCS activities in the short-to-medium term, as part of the Atlas of CO2 Storage Capacity in North America (coordinated effort with US and Mexico)

28

Canada’s Federal Government •  Awarded CAD 140M in 2009 to 7 CCS projects in western Canada

•  Awarded CAD 240M to SaskPower to for CO2 capture at Unit #3 of its Boundary Dam coal-fired power plant

•  Awarded CAD 5M to CCS Nova Scotia for identification of a CO2 storage site in Nova Scotia and develop front end engineering design (FEED) for CO2 capture and storage from one of the 5 power plants of Nova Scotia Power

•  New 5-years, CAD 1B Clean Energy Fund announced in 2010 for: large scale CCS demonstration projects (650M), R&D, including CCS (150M) and alternative energy (200M) Currently developing regulations for new coal-fired power plants and for plants reaching the end of their economic life to meet GHG emission intensity performance standards equivalent to those of high-efficiency natural-gas power generation

Alberta’s Government Legislative Actions

•  Legislated in 2007 reduction in 2020 of GHG emission intensity ratio to GDP by 50%, with an immediate reduction of 12%, through:

•  Actual emission reduction •  Purchase of Alberta accredited offsets •  Payment of $15/t CO2 into Technology Fund

•  By 2050 CO2 emissions should be 50% of those in a Business as Usual (BAU) scenario, of which 70% would be by application of CCS (~140 Mt/yr)

•  Passed “CO2 Capture and Storage Statutes Amendment Act” by which: •  The pore space is owned by the Crown •  Designated the Energy Resources Conservation Board as the regulatory agency for

CO2 storage •  Stated that the Province will assume long-term liability of stored CO2 •  Established that CO2 storage sites must be at least 1 km deep

•  Established a Regulatory Framework Assessment process to review regulations as they pertain to CCS

29

Alberta’s Government Project Support

•  Established a Climate Change and Emission Management Fund into which industry pays CAD 15/t CO2 emitted over target, to be used for technology development and diffusion (the fund stood last year at > CAD170M and projects have been funded this year)

•  Established a CAD 2B fund for supporting four CCS projects in the province that will inject at least 1 Mt CO2/year each by 2015:

•  Shell’s Quest: CO2 storage in a deep saline aquifer •  TransAlta’s Pioneer: capture from a coal-fired power plant and storage in EOR and

deep saline aquifer •  Enhance Energy’s “Trunkline”: capture from fertilizer plant, transportation by 280

km pipeline and storage in EOR •  Swan Hills Synfuels: coal underground gasification, CO2 capture and storage in

EOR

British Columbia’s Government Initiatives

•  Established a Carbon tax on gasoline of 1 c/L

•  Is supporting Spectra’s Fort Nelson CCS project (CSLF recognized) that will capture CO2 from a gas plant and store between 1.2 and 2 Mt CO2/year in a deep saline aquifer

•  Is reviewing its legal and regulatory framework to facilitate CCS projects

30

Saskatchewan’s Government Initiatives

•  Supports through royalty rebates the Weyburn-Midale EOR project

•  Supports, with the federal and Alberta governments, the IEA-GHG Weyburn-Midale Monitoring and Verification project

•  Provides support to SaskPower for retrofitting its Unit #3 at the Boundary Dam coal-fired power plant in southeast Saskatchewan for capture of 1 Mt CO2/year and storage in EOR

•  Is amending its Oil and Gas Conservation Act to accommodate CCS development

Other Projects Partially Supported by the Federal Government

•  Husky’s project in Saskatchewan for CO2 capture from a heavy oil upgrader and a bioethanol plant and storage in heavy oil reservoirs

•  Aquistore project in Saskatchewan for CO2 storage in a deep saline aquifer

31

Current CCS Projects in Western Canada

Concluding Remarks Regarding Canada’s CCS Activities

Ø  Governments in Canada are focusing on the deployment of integrated large-scale demonstration projects and developing the proper legal and regulatory framework for CCS implementation

Ø  Currently there are between 7 CCS projects in western Canada in various phases of planning and implementation, likely to be operational by 2015 and injecting upwards of 10 M tCO2/year

Ø  If a storage site is found, Nova Scotia will be another province in Canada where CCS will be deployed

Ø  CCS may be applicable on a small scale on other provinces, but the main impact will be in the western provinces

32

Contact

Dr. Stefan Bachu Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures

stefan.bachu@albertainnovates.ca