Released March 31, 2023 | SUGAR LAND
en
Written by Paul Wiseman for Industrial Info Resources (Sugar Land, Texas)--With billions of dollars in government funding allocated to testing and expanding carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) projects nationwide, there are mixed reactions to the prospect of such entities coming soon to a community near you. Business leaders, especially in oil producing communities, laud the idea as both creating new jobs and preserving existing fossil fuel jobs. But environmentalists are wary of the process for the latter reason. And in some locations slotted for CCS destinations there are protests based on safety worries.
Are they right to be concerned? It depends on what they're worried about.
What Is CCS and Why Is It Popular?
There are two main categories of carbon capture: grabbing CO2 from industrial smokestacks or collecting it from the air (direct air capture, or DAC). From either type of facility, it may be pipelined or chilled to a liquid form and trucked for storage in underground spaces such as salt domes, retired oil and gas formations or other spaces.
CCS is popular now because the U.S. government is offering billions for its development. The most recent offering involves $2.52 billion for two carbon management programs to encourage investments in carbon capture systems, and carbon transport and storage technologies. It is funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
Resistance Due to Safety Concerns
Previously in this space, we've discussed protests and even local government laws against state-approved carbon storage projects planned in Louisiana, the acknowledged leader in CCS. Some of the background for safety questions comes from lack of history. This hasn't been done on a large scale or for a long time, so there is little information yet on long-term storage.
Yet, says Ganesh Dasari of Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM) (Irving, Texas), there are guidelines under which the risk of leakage can be minimized. "Any formation chosen for CO2 storage will typically be at least a half mile underground," he was quoted as saying on the company's website. "This is far enough beneath the surface to prevent interaction with the water table, which is in the top 500 feet."
The storage formation should also be capped by impermeable rock, the site notes. Once underground, the CO2 is held in place by a thick seal rock and gradually transforms into solid minerals. One project testing this option began in 2017 in Iceland, under the aegis of ENOS (Enabling Onshore CO2 Storage in Europe). The project, named CarbFix2, dissolved the CO2 in water before injecting it into a formation with basaltic rock. This rock reacts with carbon to form calcite, minimizing the chance of any escape into the atmosphere.
What About Earthquakes?
In oil and gas regions of west Texas and Oklahoma, industry observers have seen tremors induced apparently by excessive injection of produced water or saltwater disposal (SWD), which comes to the surface alongside the oil. Regulatory bodies in both states have ordered curtailment of these injections pending further study.
So what does this tell us about CO2 injection? Dr. Katie Smye is co-principal investigator at the University of Texas' Center for Integrated Seismicity Research in the school's Bureau of Economic Geology. Having studied induced seismicity in the oil field for years, Smye says she's now getting more questions about earthquake risks associated with CCS.
She said, "Injection of fluid, whether CO2 or oilfield wastewater, can result in increases in pore pressure in the rock formations used for injection." That extra pressure can disturb rock and reactivate dormant faults. In studying large-scale injections in the Permian Basin of Texas, involving more than 60 billion barrels of produced water, Smye and her associates have learned several things.
"We've observed cases of proximal inducement of earthquakes caused by injection into just a few wells, and other cases of induced earthquakes tens of kilometers away from injection wells, likely caused by regional pressure buildup," she said. Smye quoted a recent Stanford University study linking wastewater injection to earthquakes in regions other than the Permian.
So, "this poses a particular challenge for proposed future CO2 injection projects in those areas." In short, if there's already been a lot of SWD injection, adding CCUS might exacerbate the issue or earthquakes.
Since the Gulf Coast areas of Texas and Louisiana--already areas of decades-long oil and gas production--are ramping up as CCS destinations, the possibility of it adding to induced earthquakes may indeed be a situation that requires ongoing observation.
Industrial Info Resources (IIR) is the leading provider of industrial market intelligence. Since 1983, IIR has provided comprehensive research, news and analysis on the industrial process, manufacturing and energy related industries. IIR's Global Market Intelligence (GMI) helps companies identify and pursue trends across multiple markets with access to real, qualified and validated plant and project opportunities. Across the world, IIR is tracking over 200,000 current and future projects worth $17.8 Trillion (USD).
Are they right to be concerned? It depends on what they're worried about.
What Is CCS and Why Is It Popular?
There are two main categories of carbon capture: grabbing CO2 from industrial smokestacks or collecting it from the air (direct air capture, or DAC). From either type of facility, it may be pipelined or chilled to a liquid form and trucked for storage in underground spaces such as salt domes, retired oil and gas formations or other spaces.
CCS is popular now because the U.S. government is offering billions for its development. The most recent offering involves $2.52 billion for two carbon management programs to encourage investments in carbon capture systems, and carbon transport and storage technologies. It is funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
Resistance Due to Safety Concerns
Previously in this space, we've discussed protests and even local government laws against state-approved carbon storage projects planned in Louisiana, the acknowledged leader in CCS. Some of the background for safety questions comes from lack of history. This hasn't been done on a large scale or for a long time, so there is little information yet on long-term storage.
Yet, says Ganesh Dasari of Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE:XOM) (Irving, Texas), there are guidelines under which the risk of leakage can be minimized. "Any formation chosen for CO2 storage will typically be at least a half mile underground," he was quoted as saying on the company's website. "This is far enough beneath the surface to prevent interaction with the water table, which is in the top 500 feet."
The storage formation should also be capped by impermeable rock, the site notes. Once underground, the CO2 is held in place by a thick seal rock and gradually transforms into solid minerals. One project testing this option began in 2017 in Iceland, under the aegis of ENOS (Enabling Onshore CO2 Storage in Europe). The project, named CarbFix2, dissolved the CO2 in water before injecting it into a formation with basaltic rock. This rock reacts with carbon to form calcite, minimizing the chance of any escape into the atmosphere.
What About Earthquakes?
In oil and gas regions of west Texas and Oklahoma, industry observers have seen tremors induced apparently by excessive injection of produced water or saltwater disposal (SWD), which comes to the surface alongside the oil. Regulatory bodies in both states have ordered curtailment of these injections pending further study.
So what does this tell us about CO2 injection? Dr. Katie Smye is co-principal investigator at the University of Texas' Center for Integrated Seismicity Research in the school's Bureau of Economic Geology. Having studied induced seismicity in the oil field for years, Smye says she's now getting more questions about earthquake risks associated with CCS.
She said, "Injection of fluid, whether CO2 or oilfield wastewater, can result in increases in pore pressure in the rock formations used for injection." That extra pressure can disturb rock and reactivate dormant faults. In studying large-scale injections in the Permian Basin of Texas, involving more than 60 billion barrels of produced water, Smye and her associates have learned several things.
"We've observed cases of proximal inducement of earthquakes caused by injection into just a few wells, and other cases of induced earthquakes tens of kilometers away from injection wells, likely caused by regional pressure buildup," she said. Smye quoted a recent Stanford University study linking wastewater injection to earthquakes in regions other than the Permian.
So, "this poses a particular challenge for proposed future CO2 injection projects in those areas." In short, if there's already been a lot of SWD injection, adding CCUS might exacerbate the issue or earthquakes.
Since the Gulf Coast areas of Texas and Louisiana--already areas of decades-long oil and gas production--are ramping up as CCS destinations, the possibility of it adding to induced earthquakes may indeed be a situation that requires ongoing observation.
Industrial Info Resources (IIR) is the leading provider of industrial market intelligence. Since 1983, IIR has provided comprehensive research, news and analysis on the industrial process, manufacturing and energy related industries. IIR's Global Market Intelligence (GMI) helps companies identify and pursue trends across multiple markets with access to real, qualified and validated plant and project opportunities. Across the world, IIR is tracking over 200,000 current and future projects worth $17.8 Trillion (USD).
