PVT Modelling Report for CO2 in Goldeneye Project

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of PVT Modelling Report for CO2 in Goldeneye Project

  • PETERHEAD CCS PROJECT FRONT MATTER

    Doc. no.: PCCS-05-PT-ZP-9025-00004 Geomechanics Report Revision:K02

    The information contained on this page is subject to the disclosure on the front page of this document. i

    Peterhead CCS Project Doc Title: Geomechanics Report

    Doc No. PCCS-05-PT-ZP-9025-00004 Date of issue: Revision:

    12/09/2014 K02

    DECC Ref No: 11.115 Knowledge Cat: KKD-Subsurface

    KEYWORDS Goldeneye, CCS, CO2, Geomechanics, tensile failure, shear failure, fault reactivation, caprock integrity, temperature, wellbore.

    Produced by Shell U.K. Limited ECCN: EAR 99 Deminimus

    Shell U.K. Limited 2014. Any recipient of this document is hereby licensed under Shell UK Limited's copyright to use, modify, reproduce, publish, adapt and enhance this document.

    IMPORTANT NOTICE

    Information provided further to UK CCS Commercialisation Programme (the Competition)

    The information set out herein (the Information) has been prepared by Shell U.K. Limited and its sub-contractors (the Consortium) solely for the Department of Energy & Climate Change in connection with the Competition. The Information does not amount to advice on CCS technology or any CCS engineering, commercial, financial, regulatory, legal or other solutions on which any reliance should be placed. Accordingly, no member of the Consortium makes (and the UK Government does not make) any representation, warranty or undertaking, express or implied, as to the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of any of the Information and no reliance may be placed on the Information. Insofar as permitted by law, no member of the Consortium or any company in the same group as any member of the Consortium or their respective officers, employees or agents accepts (and the UK Government does not accept) any responsibility or liability of any kind, whether for negligence or any other reason, for any damage or loss arising from any use of or any reliance placed on the Information or any subsequent communication of the Information. Each person to whom the Information is made available must make their own independent assessment of the Information after making such investigation and taking professional technical, engineering, commercial, regulatory, financial, legal or other advice, as they deem necessary.

  • PETERHEAD CCS PROJECT FRONT MATTER

    Doc. no.: PCCS-05-PT-ZP-9025-00004 Geomechanics Report Revision: K01

    The information contained on this page is subject to the disclosure on the front page of this document. ii

    Table of Contents 2.1. Loss of containment: migration and leakage scenarios 7 2.1.1. The effect of CO2/brine/rock interactions on hydrological and mechanical properties 8 2.1.2. Caprock seepage through diffusive processes and/or enhanced caprock permeability 9 2.1.3. Caprock leakage resulting from changes in effective stress state 10 2.1.4. Spill leakage resulting from induced fracturing 12 2.1.5. Potential for thermally-induced fracturing 13 2.1.6. Well bore leakage along legacy and injection wells 13 2.1.7. Fault leakage, movement and induced seismicity 13 2.2. Overview of geomechanical threats 14 3.1. Geology and structural model 15 3.2. In-situ stress state and pore pressures 19 3.2.1. Vertical stress 19 3.2.2. Horizontal stresses 19 3.2.3. Pore pressure in the over- and underburden formations 21 3.2.4. Pore pressure changes in the reservoir 21 3.3. Rock mechanical properties of the formations 23 3.3.1. Rock mechanical properties of the over- and underburden formations 23 3.3.2. Failure parameters of the Rdby shale caprock 26 3.3.3. Rock mechanical properties of the Captain Sandstone reservoir 27 4.1. Stress changes in the reservoir and definition of failure criteria 33 4.2. Initialisation of the simulation 35 4.3. Production phase 36 4.3.1. Stress changes during gas production 36 4.3.2. Production-related reservoir compaction and sea-floor subsidence 41 4.4. Injection phase 42 4.4.1. Stress changes during CO2 injection 42 4.4.2. Injection-related inflation and sea-floor uplift 44 4.5. Stress changes in the caprock during production and injection 45 4.6. Tensile failure potential of the reservoir during production and injection 49 4.7. Summary of findings 51 5.1. Case B: Poissons ratio + 0.05 54 5.2. Case C: Poissons ratio - 0.05 55 5.3. Case D: Youngs Modulus value divided by half for the over- and underburden

    formations 56 5.4. Case E: worst case scenario rock failure parameters for reservoir and caprock 57 5.4.1. Reservoir formation (Captain E&D) 58 5.4.2. Caprock (Rdby Shale) 61 5.5. Case F: worst case scenario failure parameters (case e) plus different stress path

    during the injection phase 63 5.6. Case G: pressure support from the aquifer, plus worst case scenario rock failure

    parameters for reservoir and caprock 65 5.7. Case H: injection pressure > hydrostatic pressure, plus worst case scenario rock

    failure parameters for reservoir and caprock 70 5.8. Case I: pressure at the end of depletion is assumed to be 13.8 MPa [2000 psia],

    plus worst case scenario rock failure parameters for reservoir and caprock 73 6.1. Introduction 75 6.2. Condition #1: effect of thermal changes on the state of stress 78 6.2.1. The near wellbore area 78

  • PETERHEAD CCS PROJECT FRONT MATTER

    Doc. no.: PCCS-05-PT-ZP-9025-00004 Geomechanics Report Revision: K01

    The information contained on this page is subject to the disclosure on the front page of this document. iii

    6.2.2. The farther field reservoir and base of the caprock 88 6.3. Condition #2: continuous replenishing of cold CO2 at the fracture tip 96 6.4. Condition #3: propagation of the fracture across an interface 98 6.5. Condition #4: sufficient permeability increase within the created fracture 101 6.6. Conclusions 102 6.6.1. Near wellbore, within the cemented region and within the open hole 102 6.6.2. Farther field reservoir and at the base of the caprock 102 7.1. Principle of fault stability 104 7.2. Fault interpretation for the Goldeneye field 105 7.3. Deterministic assessment: results and uncertainty 108 7.3.1. SVS case I: typical failure parameters for Rdby Shale 109 7.3.2. SVS case II: typical failure parameters for Captain E&D reservoir 111 7.3.3. SVS case III: worst case scenario failure parameters for Rdby Shale 112 7.4. Uncertainty analysis: distribution of elastic fault properties 113 7.5. Conclusions 114 8.1. Geological barrier: geology of the field 116 8.2. Geological barrier: structural trapping 116 8.3. Operational barrier: bottom hole pressure 116 8.4. Operational barrier: tracking wellbore leakage 117 8.5. Geomechanical barrier: fracturing of the caprock by thermal effects 117 8.6. Geomechanical barrier: fracture propagation across interface 117 9.1. General conclusions from the geomechanical modelling efforts 118

  • PETERHEAD CCS PROJECT FRONT MATTER

    Doc. no.: PCCS-05-PT-ZP-9025-00004 Geomechanics Report Revision: K01

    The information contained on this page is subject to the disclosure on the front page of this document. iv

    Tables Table 0-1Assessment of geomechanical threats assessed for the Peterhead CCS project 2 Table 2-1Overview of the geomechanical threats and risks discussed, with references to

    the Chapters in which they will be addressed. 14 Table 3-1Data inventory for geomechanical model construction 15 Table 3-2k-values for both depletion and injection modelling as used in the different

    formations. Total horizontal stress is taken the same in all directions. 21 Table 3-3Dynamic elastic rock properties for five overburden and two underburden

    formations 24 Table 3-4Key findings from literature for failure parameters of the caprock. 26 Table 3-5Results from triaxial tests on Goldeneye reservoir core samples of the Captain

    D Sandstone. Sample 1 broke during the second cycle. 28 Table 3-6Results from triaxial tests on Goldeneye reservoir core samples of the Captain

    D Sandstone, employing fluid flow with brine and subsequently with CO2-saturated brine. 29

    Table 3-7Base case values for the mechanical properties of the Captain Sandstone. 31 Table 3-8Results from literature and experiments of failure parameters of reservoir rock 32 Table 5-1Cases that were modelled to investigate the effect of different rock properties

    and pressures in the integrity of the reservoir and caprock 53 Table 5-2Base case results 54 Table 5-3Key results for Case B 54 Table 5-4Key results for Case C 55 Table 5-5Key results for Case D 56 Table 5-6Key results for Case E 57 Table 5-7Key results for Case F 63 Table 5-8Key results for Case G 67 Table 5-9Key results for Case H 71 Table 5-10Key results for Case I 73 Table 6-1Thermal stresses due to 60C cooling of the Goldeneye reservoir and caprock. 77 Table 6-2Overview of the four key conditions for the different cooling area: 1) near

    wellbore area, within the cemented region of the caprock ; 2) near wellbore area, within the open hole section of the caprock; and 3) in the farther field of the reservoir and at the base of the caprock. References indicate the sections where each condition will be discussed. 78

    Table 6-3Undrained material parameters for the Rdby Shale used in the near wellbore stress analysis 82

    Table 6-4Drained material parameters for the Rdby Shale used in the near wellbore stress analysis. 83

    Table 6-5Base and low case parameters used in the PBore model 84 Table 6-6Details of the model versions for the PWRI-Frac simulations. 91 Table 6-7Results of the different model versions for the PWRI-Frac simulations. 91 Table 6-8Notation and values for the calculation of the change of in-situ stress for an

    elliptical cooled zone. 94 Table 6-9Input parameters for the calculation of the CCC (76) 99

  • PETERHEAD CCS PROJECT FRONT