SECARB Phase II – Cranfield, MS

GCCC Digital Publication Series #09-03

Susan D. Hovorka Timothy A. Meckel Ramón H. Treviño

J. –P. Nicot Jong-Won Choi

Jiemin Lu Hongliu Zeng

Katherine Romanak Changbing Yang Masoumeh Kordi

Fred P. Wang

Cited as: Hovorka, S. D., Meckel, T. A., Treviño, R. H., Nicot, J. –P., Choi, J. –W., Lu, J., Zeng, H., Romanak, K., Yang, C., Kordi, M., and Wang, P., SECARB Phase II – Cranfield, MS: presented at the Southern States Energy Board Stakeholders’ Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia, March 3, 2009. GCCC Digital Publication #09-03.

Keywords: Field study-Cranfield-MS; Monitoring-downhole pressure

SECARB PHASE IICRANFIELD, MS

Susan D. Hovorka, Timothy A. Meckel, Ramon H. Trevino, J.P. Nicot, Jong-Won ChoiJiemin Lu, Hongliu Zeng, Katherine Romanak

Changbing Yang, Masoumeh Kordi, Fred P. Wang

Gulf Coast Carbon Center, Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences,

The University of Texas at Austin

Management of SECARBManagement of SECARB Phase IIPhase II Gulf Coast Gulf Coast Carbon CenterCarbon Center

Denbury Resources, Inc

University of Texasat Austin

DRI

Schlumberger Carbon Services

Sandia Technologies LLC

SECARB coal seam testsGeological Survey of AlabamaVirginia Tech

SECARB Power Plant testsEPRISouthern CoARI

Other SECARB tests

Overview

• Background

• Problem / Goal

• Interim Results

Cranfield

Source of large volumes ofCO2 via pipeline

Source: Dutton and others 1993

Upper Cretaceous TuscaloosaUpper Cretaceous Tuscaloosa--Woodbine Trend Woodbine Trend ––Cranfield in Mississippi Salt BasinCranfield in Mississippi Salt Basin

Phase 2: $4.4 million Dedicated observation well + logging campaign

Gulf Coast Stacked Storage Field Test

Tuscaloosa Formation:Cranfield, MS

Natchez, MS

MS River

~3-5 MMCFD Injection ratesPhase II : ~½ Million Tons/yrPhase III : 1-1.5 Mt/yr

Problem: Many wells- How Good is Cement?

Drill through freshwaterCase and cement to seal off freshwater 2000 ft in Gulf Coast

Production casing and cement above production zone

Remaining open annulus between rock and casing=Potential leakage path for CO2 or displaced brine?

Add CO2 for Tertiary production of hydrocarbon resource

surface

Pressure history

Most EOR– Perturbed by

extraction + injection

– Poor Pressure analog for brine reservoir

Cranfield– Discovered 1945

– Depleted, P&A 1965

– 40+ years Pressure recovery by water drive

– Similar to brine reservoir until production dominates

Seismic facies vs thickness (Hongliu Zeng)

Petrel modelGEM / Eclipse simulation in Q1-2 09

5 10 15

res

Ohm-m-150-100 -50 09,700

9,800

9,900

10,000

10,100

10,200

10,300

sp

mVD

EPTH

(ft)

10-3/4" casing set @ 1,825'

16" casing set @ 222'

Tuscaloosaperforation

7" casing set @ 10,305'

Monitoring Zone

CO2 Injection Zone

Monitoring well

Satellitetransmission

Injection well

Re-entry of 60 year oldProduction well for continuous monitoring

Jul.03 Jul.04 Jul.05 Jul.06 Jul.07 Jul.08 Jul.09 Jul.10 Jul.11 Jul.12 Jul.13 Jul.14 Jul.15 Jul.16 Jul.17 Jul.18 Jul.19 Jul.20 Jul.21 Jul.22 Jul.23 Jul.24 Jul.25-10

-5

0

Tubi

ng P

ress

ure

(psi

g)

Date

Tubing data

50

100

150

Tubi

ng T

empe

ratu

re (F

)

Surface & downhole data collected every minute and uploaded every 10 minutes to website.

Jul.01 Jul.15 Jul.29 Aug.12 Aug.26 Sep.09 Sep.23 Oct.07 Oct.21 Nov.04 Nov.18 Dec.02 Dec.16 Dec.30 Jan.13 Jan.27 Feb.10

4400

4600

4800

5000

5200

5400

5600

Continuous Pressure Data from EGL #7 Monitor Well

Bot

tom

Hol

e Pr

essu

re (p

si)

Date

Jul.01 Jul.15 Jul.29 Aug.12 Aug.26 Sep.09 Sep.23 Oct.07 Oct.21 Nov.04 Nov.18 Dec.02 Dec.16 Dec.30 Jan.13 Jan.27 Feb.100

5

10x 104

Dai

ly m

scf

CO2 Injection Data for Cranfield, MS

Date0

500,000

1,000,000

Cum

ulat

ive

Met

ric T

onesDaily Injection Rate (mcf)

Cumulative Injection

Injection Zone Pressure

Overlying Monitor Zone Pressure

500,000 metric tonsinjected around15 Feb 2009

~1200 psi difference

Continuous field data from dedicated monitoring well

5-20% daily rate

880 m

Continuous field data from dedicated monitoring well

Large perturbations obvious

Even small perturbations observable

Injection and monitoringSite

developmentCharacterization

Progress2007

Site

sel

ectio

n

2008 2009

NEPACX

Firstcored well,brine samples

Received seismic data

Startworkover

Soil gasbaseline

Instrument-ation

Increasing number of injectorsand rate per well

End

phas

e II

Start Phase III injection

2006

Phase IIIWells May

Phase II EORPhase III Brine

Phase II Interim Results– Old Wells Reasonable Integrity

• No above-zone pressure communication • ~ 40 wells - 1 mile radius OBS well

– Small leaks detectable• Small pressure changes observable • Could locate out of zone migration

– Monitoring design implication• Pressure is change - sensitive • Detectable change in 100’s ton/day @ 1Km • <5% gain/loss of contemporaneous total field rate

– RST results forthcomingOBSINJ

P&A

Could use variable responses at different OBS to triangulate on problem area.