Upload
dinhtruc
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Source: IPCC (2007): Climate Change - Mitigation
Hydrate technologies may contribute to the reduction of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel power plants
Global Methane Hydrate Distribution
0 200 500 kg C/m2
Source: Modeling study by Burwicz, Rüpke & Wallmann (GCA, 2011)
Hydrates formed by microbial methane production within the GHSZ: 990 Gt C
Global Methane Hydrate Distribution
Hydrates formed by microbial methane production and upward fluid flow: 3500 Gt C
Wallmann, Pinero et al. (2011)
Global Methane Hydrate Inventory in the Seabed
Kven. (1999)
Mil. (2004)
Buff. (2004)
Klau. (2005)
Best estimate 3000 2000
Gt C
Global Methane Hydrate Inventory
Coal Oil Gas Hydrate
Source: Energy Outlook 2007, Buffett & Archer (2004) Coal, oil, gas: reserves economically exploitable at current market prices Gas Hydrates: total marine inventory
Hydrate Exploitation
Methane gas may be produced from hydrate deposits via:
• Pressure reduction
• Temperature increase
• Addition of chemicals (incl. CO2)
Hydrate Exploitation
Energy balance for gas production via heat addition at Blake Ridge (Makogon et al. 2007) 2000 m water depth, two ~3 m thick hydrate layers ~40 % of the potential energy can be used for energy production while ~60 % of the potential energy is lost during development, gas production, and transport Japanese Hydrate Exploitation Program Hydrate exploitation via pressure reduction has a much better energy balance and may be economically feasible at an oil price of ~54 $/barrel.
CH4(g)-Recovery from Hydrates Exposed to CO2
after 200 h in sandstone CO2(l) Kvamme et al. (2007)
CO2(l) Hiromata et al. (1996) after 400 h
CO2(g)/N2(g) Park et al. (2006)
CO2(g) Lee et al. (2003) after 5 h
after 15 h
Spontaneous exothermic reaction !
Field production tests (USA, Japan, South Korea)
On-shore Alaska (Prudhoe Bay, below permafrost) 2012 (DOE, ConocoPhillips, Japan): CO2 injection (short-term) 2012 – 2014 (DOE, BP, Korea): Pressure reduction (long-term) Off-shore Japan (~1000 m water depth) 2012 (MH 21): Pressure reduction (short-term) 2014 (MH 21): Pressure reduction (long-term) Off-shore South Korea (~2000 m water depth) 2014: Pressure reduction and CO2 (short-term)
The SUGAR Project
• Funded by German Federal Ministries (BMWi, BMBF)
• First funding period: July 2008 – June 2011
• Total funding: ~13 Mio € (incl. support by industries)
A: Exploration
A1: Hydro-acoustics
A2: Geophysics
A3: Autoclave-Drilling
A4: Basin Modeling
B: Exploitation and Transport
B1: Reservoir Modeling
B2: Laboratory Experiments
B3: Gas Transport
Prospection
Exploration
Quantification
Exploitation/ CO2 Storage
Pellet Transport
The SUGAR Project
Project Academia Industries A1 IFM-GEOMAR L3 Communications ELAC Nautik
GmbH
A2 IFM-GEOMAR, BGR Hannover K.U.M. Umwelt- und Meerestechnik GmbH, Magson GmbH, SEND Offshore GmbH
A3 University of Bremen, TU Clausthal
Bauer PRAKLA Bohrtechnik GmbH
A4 IFM-GEOMAR Schlumberger-IES
B1 Fraunhofer UMSICHT, GFZ Potsdam, IFM-GEOMAR
Wintershall, Aker-Wirth GmbH
B2 FH Kiel, GFZ Potsdam, Fraunhofer UMSICHT, IFM-GEOMAR, Uni Göttingen
BASF, CONTROS GmbH, R&D Center at FH Kiel, 24sieben Stadtwerke Kiel AG, RWE Dea, Wintershall, E.ON Ruhrgas AG
B3 IOW, FH Kiel Linde AG, Meyer Yards, Germanischer Lloyd, BASF
SUGAR Partners
- Hydrate deposits are often formed by gas bubble ascent while some gas escapes into the water column
- Multi-beam echo-sounder systems have been developed and equipped with software-based automatic bubble detection AOD) system
- Field tests: Dec. 2010 (Black Sea) and March 2011 (off New Zealand)
A1: Hydro-acoustic detection of hydrate deposits
Detection of gas bubbles and flares by AOD, Danube area, Black Sea
A2: Geophysical imaging of hydrate deposits - Improved deep-towed seismic and electromagnetic systems, 3-D seismic
system (P-cable) and stationary CSEM system for 3-D application have been built.
- Field tests: Dec. 2009 (Med.), Dec. 2010 (Black Sea) and March 2011 (off New Zealand)
Set-up of deep-towed streamer and raw data acquired off New Zealand with improved resolution of blanking zones by undershooting
A2: Joint inversion of seismic and CSEM data
Location of gas-bearing layer and quantification of gas content by joint inversion at a mud volcano off Egypt
A3: Autoclave-drilling technology
- Autoclave-systems for MeBo and formation-independent deep-sea drilling (SUGO) have been built.
- Field tests: Aug. 2010 (SUGO, off Korea), March 2011 (MeBo, Black Sea)
Set-up of SUGO Deployment of MeBo
A4: Basin Modeling - New version of PetroMod3D simulating the temporal evolution of the
Hydrate Stability Zone during basin formation has been developed and is now available for the customers.
- Simulation of hydrate accumulation at the Alaska North Slope is underway (in cooperation with US-GS)
B1: Reservoir modeling
- Extended versions of the STARS reservoir model and an in-house code have been developed and successfully applied to simulate natural gas production from hydrates via CO2 addition.
- Generic hydrate reservoir model applied for the simulations.
- Similar hydrate reservoirs occur off China, India, Japan and in the Gulf of Mexico
B1: CO2- and CH4 hydrate stability in seawater
Source: Duan & Sun (2006)
The reservoir pressure is reduced to 50 - 60 bar at the production well. Under these conditions (P = 50 – 60 bar, T = 8 – 8.6°C), methane hydrate is decomposed into gas and water while the injected CO2 forms CO2 hydrate.
(Huff‘n‘Puff) (Huff‘n‘Puff)
(2-Hole-Approach) (2-Hole-Approach)
Saturation CH4 hydrate after production
Saturation CO2 hydrate after production
t = 2880 days t = 2880 days
t = 1826 days t = 1826 days
Phase 1: CO2 injection (1yr.) Phase 2: Closed well (0,5yrs.) Phase 3: production (6,5yrs.)
B1: Gas production via CO2 injection and pressure reduction
240 m
20 m
B1: Gas production via CO2 injection and pressure reduction
Time (d)
Gas
pro
duct
ion
rate
(x10
³ Nm
³/d)
Gas
pro
duct
ion
(cum
. x10
³ Nm
³)
2-Hole
Huff‘n Puff
Composition of produced gas: ~99% CH4, ~1% CO2
B1: Methane gas recovery after 5 years
Pressure reduction
Pressure reduction and CO2 injection (2 Hole, liquid CO2)
Pressure reduction and CO2 injection (Huff‘n Puff)
20 %
15 %
27 %
B2: Laboratory experiments
- High-pressure labs were set-up at GFZ-Potsdam, IFM-GEOMAR, Univ. Göttingen, and Fraunhofer UMSICHT.
- In-situ composition of methane has been tested successfully at GFZ-Potsdam with 10% Pd-ZrO as most robust and efficient catalyst.
- Polymers accelerate methane hydrate decomposition and CH4-CO2 gas exchange in hydrates significantly (BASF, Univ. Göttingen)
- Methane hydrates are exposed to supercritical CO2 to accelerate methane gas production from hydrates (IFM-GEOMAR). First results indicate rapid and efficient methane release from hydrates exposed to super-critical CO2.
- Mechanisms of gas exchange in hydrates have been studied using Raman microscopy and XRD (IFM-GEOMAR, GFZ Potsdam, Univ. Göttingen)
B2: Mechanisms of gas exchange
With liquid and gaseous CO2, the exchange reaction proceeds in 2 steps: a faster surface reaction at beginning followed by a slower permeation-controlled gas exchange, max. 50 % gas recovery due to formation of mixed CO2-CH4 hydrates (W. Kuhs, Univ. Göttingen)
Phase diagram for Black sea conditions
Bottom water temperature too high for CO2 production method. Method of choice: Pressure reduction
B3: Gas transport - Optimized production process for methane hydrate pellets has been
developed (Linde). Only ~3 % of the methane energy content is lost during this process.
- Self-preservation mechanisms have been studied. Pellets are stabilized by a thin ice skin.
- Carrier vessel concepts have been assessed (Meyer Yards).
gas
Gas Hydrate
Ice
July 2011 – June 2014 (funded by BMWi, BMBF and RWE Dea)
A: Exploration
A1: Hydroacoustics & Sensors ELAC Nautik, CONTROS, IFM-GEOMAR A2: Geophysics & Drilling TEEC, CORSYDE, CONTROS, IFM-GEOMAR, BGR, MARUM A3: Basin Modeling Schlumberger AaTC, IFM-GEOMAR B: Exploitation B1: Reservoir Modeling Wintershall, EON Ruhrgas, Fraunhofer UMSICHT, GFZ, IFM-GEOMAR B2: Laboratory Experiments RWE Dea, BASF, CONTROS, Fraunhofer UMSICHT, GFZ, Univ. Göttingen, IFM-GEOMAR B3: Drilling technologies Bauer, Aker-Wirth, TU Clausthal, TUB Freiberg, Univ. Bochum
SUGAR Phase II
Major aims: - develop gas hydrates as an environmentally sound natural gas resource and medium for CO2 sequestration
- quantify gas hydrate masses and distributions in the sub- surface via enhanced geophysical exploration, data analysis, and basin modeling
- enhance methane hydrate dissociation, methane gas release and CO2 sequestration via a suitable combination of super- critical CO2 and polymer injection, in-situ combustion, and depressurization
- reduce development and production costs and environmental risks by improved drilling and production technologies
SUGAR Phase II
Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania, Russia, Turkey, Ukraine (Black Sea): Joint exploration cruises, joint workshop (March 27th – 28th, 2012) New Zealand: Joint exploration cruises (2011) US: Numerical basin simulation Alaska North Slope (2011 - 2014) France (Total): Joint exploration cruise off West Africa (2012) Taiwan: Joint exploration cruises (2013) India: Joint workshops, CLIENT proposal, pending Brazil (Petrobras): CONEGAS project, joint exploration cruise (pending) Japan, China, South Korea: Joint workshops and meetings UNEP: Report on gas hydrates (2012) EU: Coordinated program on environmental risks of sub-seabed CO2 storage (ECO2: 2011 - 2015) International off-shore field production test with CO2 injection (~2015)
International contacts and cooperations