Update on Results of SECARB Test of Monitoring Large Volume Injection at Cranfield

Natchez Mississippi

Mississippi River

3,000 m depth Gas cap, oil ring, downdip water leg Shut in since 1965 Strong water drive Returned to near initial pressure

Illustration by Tip Meckel

Cranfield “Early” Field Test Collaboration

Gulf Coast Carbon Center Industrial Associates

Denbury Onshore LLC

LBNL LLBL USGS ORNL NETL

Schlumberger Carbon Services

QEA BP

U Mississippi Miss State

UTPGE UT DoG

University Tennessee Princeton Stanford

University Edinburgh

Gulf Coast Carbon Center Staff Susan Hovorka Ramon Trevino Tip Meckel Changbing Yang Jiemin Liu Katherine Romanak Rebecca Smyth Sigrid Clift Masoumeh Kordi Stuart Coleman Yihua Cai Hamid Lashgari

BEG staff Tongwei Zhang Jeff Paine Bob Reedy Robert Reed Kitty Millikan

Overview – Cranfield • 1 million tonne/year rate achieved Dec 20, 2009

• 2 Million tonnes monitored since July 2008

• Rate to be maintained >15 months

• Monitored with standard and novel approaches

– History match pressure response – Fluid flow measured/monitored – multiple tools / complex flow field – First US use of Electrical Resistance Tomography (ERT) for

sequestration (deepest to-date worldwide) – Quantification of CO2 dissolution

• Export to commercial EOR/sequestration projects

May 1 million tonnes injected P II + III

Pha

se II

Site

de

velo

pmen

t

Cha

ract

eriz

atio

n Cranfield Progress

2007

Phas

e II

Site

sel

ectio

n

2008 2009

First cored well, brine samples

baseline seismic S

oil g

as b

asel

ine

2006

Phase II Phase III

2010 2011 2012

Pha

se II

I NE

PA

Phase III injection

Phase II injection

1 million tonnes Phase III injection 8/10

End

SE

CA

RB

Ear

ly

December 20, 2009 Achieved 1 million tonnes/year rate

Drill Phase III 3 DAS wells Monitoring

Repeat geophysical monitoring 10/10

Injector

Producer (monitoring point) Observation Well

HiVIT

DAS GMT

Phase II

Psite

Five Study Areas

Pipeline head& Separation facility

5

GIS base Tip Meckel

DAS

A B

3D Denbury - interpretation Tip Meckel BEG

Reservoir Characterization Tu

scal

oosa

Fm

Tuscaloosa D-E reservoir

Oil-water contact Based on: •Well logs and •Side-wall cores

Tuscaloosa confining system

Phase II

Reservoir Heterogeneity from Surface 3D Seismic

• Stratal slicing for facies

• 90-degree phase

• AVF for thickness/fluid

• AVO for fluid/OWC

Denbury 3-D survey interpretation Hongliu Zeng, BEG

Channel

erosion

Channel erosion

Channel erosion

Channel erosion

Point bar

Point bar

Upward fining fluvial sandstone and conglomerates of the lower Tuscaloosa Fm

Jiemin Lu BEG

Confining zone Reservoir

Baseline Cross Well tomogram

Z-Seis & Tom Daley Jonathan Franklin in review at LBNL

F1 F2 F3 West East

112 m

Probabilistic Realization Permeability

Jong-won Choi and J.-P Nicot BEG

First Breakthrough (time) Predictions F2 Well (for each of 10 permeability fields)

Breakthrough time at F2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

12/1/09

12/3/09

12/5/09

12/7/09

12/9/09

12/11/09

12/13/09

12/15/09

12/17/09

12/19/09

12/21/09

12/23/09

12/25/09

12/27/09

12/29/09

12/31/09

1/2/10

1/4/10

1/6/10

Date

Gas

sat

urat

ion

Set #1 at Ly14 (12/16/2009)

Set #2 at Ly17(12/20/2009)

Set #3 at Ly17(12/8/2009)

Set #4 at Ly10(12/15/2009)

Set #5 at Ly19(12/29/2009)

Set #6 at Ly10(12/23/2009)

Set #7 at Ly10(12/23/2009)

Set #8 at Ly10(12/7/2009)

Set #9 at Ly7(12/7/2009)

Set #10 at Ly10(12/11/2009)

Jong-won Choi and JP Nicot BEG

Start injection at DAS Dec 1, 2009 175 kg/min step up to 520 kg/min

Bot

tom

hol

e pr

essu

re

Elapsed time

Dec 1

400

bar

340

psi

Injector BHP Observation well BHP

It’s all about pressure

DAS Monitoring Injector CFU 31F1

Obs CFU 31 F2

Obs CFU 31 F3

Above-zone monitoring F1 F2 F3

Injection Zone

Above Zone Monitoring

10,500 feet BSL

Closely spaced well array to examine flow in complex reservoir

68m

112 m Petrel model Tip Meckel

Phase III Research Observation Wells’ Construction

Fiberglass non-conductive casing

Tuscaloosa DE

ERT – 14 & 7 electrodes

Casing-conveyed pressure sensor

100’

U-tube sampler 1/4 “SS

2 7/8” tubing

BHP+ T

Seismic sources/receivers

Distributed temperature and heater loop

BEG, LBNL, LLNL, USGS, ORNL, Sandia Technologies LLC

Cross well array in two wells High injection volumes Far-field monitoring microseismic, P&T, chemistry, surface seismic

200’

Measuring CO2 Distribution in Reservoir

• Well-based methods – Wireline logs in time lapse – RST (Schlumberger) – Temperature

• Cross well methods

– Time – lapse ERT – Time – lapse acoustic (seismic)

Wireline Formation Evaluation (ELAN – RST) CFU 31 – F3

GR Washouts

Resistivity OH Porosity Sigma

RST Porosity

Perm

CO2 Volume

CO2 Saturation

RST 12/12/09

RST 12/15/09

RST 12/31/09

Bob Butch

What happened at the wells?

Obs

erva

tion

wel

l F2

packer

Inje

ctio

n W

ell F

1

Obs

erva

tion

wel

l F3

Dec

1 C

O2

flow

s in

to fo

rmat

ion

packer

Dec 1 pressure changes right away, but no CO2

Day 9

Obs

erva

tion

wel

l F2

packer

Inje

ctio

n W

ell F

1

Obs

erva

tion

wel

l F3

Dec

1 C

O2

flow

s in

to fo

rmat

ion

packer

Dec 9 CO2 detected in top of well interval

Day 13

Obs

erva

tion

wel

l F2

packer

Inje

ctio

n W

ell F

1

O

bser

vatio

n w

ell F

3

Dec

1 C

O2

flow

s in

to fo

rmat

ion

packer

Dec 13 still minor amounts of CO2 detected in top of well interval and maybe some thin zones

Dec 13 CO2 detected in top of well interval and maybe some thin zones

Day 31

wel

l F2

packer

Inje

ctio

n W

ell F

1

wel

l F3

may

inje

ctio

n lo

g la

rge

flow

in

uppe

r par

t

packer

Dec 30 large amounts of CO2 detected in well interval and some thick zones in lower part of formation

Dec 31 large amounts of CO2 detected in well interval upper part of formation

Injector

Direction of CO2 plume

x

x x

x

x x

Cross Well ERT tells us how flow occurred

Charles Carrigan, LLNL

50ft

Obs

erva

tion

wel

l F3

elec

trode

s

Obs

erva

tion

wel

l F2

elec

trode

s

Conductive plume= workover fluids?

Resistive plume = CO2 in reservoir

Second Resistive plume out of section migration

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

11/29/09 0:00 12/4/09 0:00 12/9/09 0:00 12/14/09 0:00 12/19/09 0:00 12/24/09 0:00 12/29/09 0:00 1/3/10 0:00

SAMPLING TIME

CO

NC

ENTR

ATI

ON

CH4

CO2

High frequency fluid sampling via U-tube

yields data on flow processes

BEG, LBNL, USGS, ORNL, UTDoG, data compiled by Changbing Yang BEG

Breakthrough of of CO2

Additional flow paths – more methane extracted

Double injection rate

Small diameter sampler with N2 drive brings fluids quickly to surface with tracers intact CO2 dissolution into brine liberates dissolved CH4

Originally brine methane saturated

Injector

Producer (monitoring point) Observation Well

HiVIT

P Site

GMT

Phase II

Is it possible to find leakage at surface? P-Site

tests

Pipeline head& Separation facility

5

DAS

1-BG

1-00

4-02

1-01 1-02

1-03

1-04 1-05

2-01

2-02

3-02

3-01

4-01

Trans 1

Trans 2 Trans 3

Trans 4

1950’s pit

road

Assessment of near surface techniques “P Site”

AW

Pit Pad Plants P&A well

Phase III Current Status • Injection since April, 2009 • Injection through 23 wells cumulative

volume of 1,067,339 metric tonnes

• Rates 0.8 to 1 million tonnes/year

• Currently Task 11: Repeat Geophysics – cross well seismic – VSP, AIT, acoustic logging, RST – repeat surface 3-D seismic

Interim Conclusions (Cranfield)

• Phase III 1 million tonne/year rate achieved Dec 20, 2009, 2 Million tonnes monitored since July 2008

• Rate to be maintained >15 months • Monitored with standard and novel approaches

– History match pressure response – Fluid flow measured/monitored with multiple tools in complex

flow field – First US use of Electrical Resistance Tomography (ERT) for

sequestration – Quantification of CO2 dissolution

• Export to commercial EOR/sequestration projects