Comparison of three options for geologic sequestration of 2CO -: A case study for California

被引:0
|
作者
Benson, SM [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Berkeley, Earth Sci Div, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Options for sequestration Of CO2 are best viewed in light of the regional distribution Of CO2 sources and potential sequestration sites. This study examines the distribution of carbon emissions from fossil fuel power plants in California and their proximity to three types of reservoirs that may be suitable for sequestration: (1) active or depleted oil fields, (2) active or depleted gas fields, and (3) brine formations. This paper also presents a preliminary assessment of the feasibility of sequestering CO2 generated from large fossil-fuel fired power plants in California and discusses the comparative advantages of three different types of reservoirs for this purpose. Based on a volumetric analysis of sequestration capacity and current CO2 emission rates from oil/gas fired power plants, this analysis suggests that oil reservoirs, gas fields and brine formations can all contribute significantly to sequestration in California. Together they could offer the opportunity to meet both short and long term needs. In the near term, oil and gas reservoirs are the most promising because the trapping structures have already stood the test of time and opportunities for offsetting the cost of sequestration with revenues from enhanced oil and gas production. In the long term, if the trapping mechanisms are adequately understood and deemed adequate, brine formations may provide an even larger capacity for geologic sequestration over much of California.
引用
收藏
页码:299 / 304
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Geologic CO2 sequestration may benefit upstream industry
    Stevens, SH
    Gale, J
    OIL & GAS JOURNAL, 2000, 98 (20) : 40 - 44
  • [22] Geologic sequestration of CO2 in a depleted oil reservoir.
    Pawar, RJ
    Warpinski, NR
    Stubbs, B
    Grigg, RB
    Lorenz, JC
    Cooper, SP
    Krumhansl, JL
    Benson, RD
    Rutledge, JT
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 2003, 226 : U605 - U605
  • [23] An overview of CO2 mitigation options for global warming -: Emphasizing CO2 sequestration options
    Yamasaki, A
    JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING OF JAPAN, 2003, 36 (04) : 361 - 375
  • [24] EVALUATION OF TRAPPING MECHANISMS IN GEOLOGIC CO2 SEQUESTRATION: CASE STUDY OF SACROC NORTHERN PLATFORM, A 35-YEAR CO2 INJECTION SITE
    Han, Weon Shik
    McPherson, Brian J.
    Lichtner, Peter C.
    Wang, Fred P.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, 2010, 310 (04) : 282 - 324
  • [25] Dissolution Potential of SO2 Co-Injected with CO2 in Geologic Sequestration
    Crandell, Lauren E.
    Ellis, Brian R.
    Peters, Catherine A.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2010, 44 (01) : 349 - 355
  • [26] Numerous studies analyze CO2 sequestration options
    Moritis, G
    OIL & GAS JOURNAL, 2005, 103 (33) : 42 - 47
  • [27] Energy industry examining CO2 sequestration options
    Ball, Dave
    Gupta, Neeraj
    Metzger, Bernhard
    OIL & GAS JOURNAL, 2007, 105 (18) : 20 - +
  • [28] Logistics of CO2 sequestration -: Options for CO2 transport.
    Mayer-Spohn, O
    Blesl, M
    Fahl, U
    Voss, A
    CHEMIE INGENIEUR TECHNIK, 2006, 78 (04) : 435 - 444
  • [29] Investigation of gridding effects for numerical simulations of CO2 geologic sequestration
    Yamamoto, Hajime
    Doughty, Christine
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2011, 5 (04) : 975 - 985
  • [30] Geologic CO2 sequestration and permeability uncertainty in a highly heterogeneous reservoir
    Jayne, Richard S.
    Wu, Hao
    Pollyea, Ryan M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL, 2019, 83 : 128 - 139