1. Susan Hovorka * Christine Doughty** and Mark Holtz* *Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences University of Texas at Austin ** Lawrence Berkeley National Lab TESTING EFFICIENCY OF STORAGE IN THE SUBSURFACE: FRIO BRINE PILOT EXPERIMENT Texas Gulf Coast

2. Frio Brine Pilot Research Team Funded by US DOE National Energy Technology Lab: Karen Cohen/Charles Byrer Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School, The University of Texas at Austin: Susan Hovorka, Mark Holtz, Shinichi Sakurai, Seay Nance, Joseph Yeh, Paul Knox, Khaled Faoud Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, (Geo-Seq): Larry Myer, Tom Daley, Barry Freifeld, Rob Trautz, Christine Doughty, Sally Benson, Karsten Pruess, Curt Oldenburg, Jennifer Lewicki, Ernie Major, Mike Hoversten, Mac Kennedy; Don Lippert Oak Ridge National Lab: Dave Cole, Tommy Phelps Lawrence Livermore National Lab: Kevin Knauss, Jim Johnson Alberta Research Council: Bill Gunter, John Robinson Texas American Resources: Don Charbula, David Hargiss Sandia Technologies: Dan Collins, “Spud” Miller, David Freeman; Phil Papadeau BP: Charles Christopher, Mike Chambers Schlumberger: T. S. Ramakrishna and others SEQUIRE – National Energy Technology Lab: Curt White, Rod Diehl, Grant Bromhall, Brian Stratizar, Art Wells University of West Virginia: Henry Rausch USGS: Yousif Kharaka, Bill Evans, Evangelos Kakauros, Jim Thorsen Praxair: Joe Shine, Dan Dalton Australian CO2CRC (CSRIO): Kevin Dodds Core Labs: Paul Martin and others

3. Demonstrate that CO 2 can be injected into a brine formation without adverse health, safety, or environmental effects Determine the subsurface distribution of injected CO 2 using a diverse monitoring technologies Demonstrate validity of conceptual and numerical models Develop experience necessary for success of large-scale CO 2 injection experiments How can we demonstrate that geologic storage is an effective method of reducing emissions of CO 2 to the atmosphere?

4. Saline Formations Focus on the Gulf Coast Ozone non attainment Sources (dot size =release) Refineries and chemical plants Electric power plants Selected oil field that could benefit from EOR Existing CO 2 pipeline Future CO 2 pipeline Frio Brine Pilot

5. Status of Frio Brine Pilot 1) site selection, with general characterization and scoping modeling; (2) geologic characterization; (3) modeling and experimental-design refinement; (4) permitting; (5) site preparation; (6) detailed site characterization; (7) baseline monitoring; (8) injection and syninjection monitoring; 9/27 (9) postinjection monitoring: 10/04 to 3/05

6. Site Setting

7. Photo: SDH BEG

8. Observation Well Injection Well

9. Frio Brine Pilot Injection interval: 24-m-thick, mineralogically complex Oligocene reworked fluvial sandstone, porosity 24%, Permeability 2-3 Darcys Seals  numerous thick shales, small fault block Depth 1,500 m Brine-rock system, no hydrocarbons 190 bar Injection interval Oil production

10. Porosity Fault planes Monitoring injection and monitoring Monitoring well Injection well Reservoir Model 500 m 100m

11. Core has been slabbed while still frozen, and samples cut for petrophysical, petrographic, and geochemical analysis

12. Photo: S.D. Hovorka, BEG

13. Open Hole logs Injection well Observation well Top A ss Top B ss Top C ss Proposed injection zone

14. Log Permeability Calibrated with Plug Permeability Log Interpretation, Shinichi Sakurai Injection Zone

16. Frio Pre-Injection Geophysics VSP - Designed for monitoring and imaging - 8 Explosive Shot Points (100 – 1500 m offsets) - 80 – 240 3C Sensors (1.5 – 7.5 m spacing) Cross Well - Designed for monitoring and CO 2 saturation estimation - P and S Seismic and EM - > 75 m coverage @ 1.5 m Spacing (orbital-vibrator seismic source, 3C geophone sensor) - Dual Frequency E.M. P-Wave S-wave P-Wave Denser spacing in reservoir interval Reflection From Tom Daley, LBNL

17. How Modeling and Monitoring will Assess CO 2 Performance Modeling has identified variables which appear to control CO 2 injection and post injection migration. Measurements made over a short time frame and small distance will confirm the correct value for these variables Better conceptualized and calibrated models will be used to develop larger scale longer time frame injections Residual gas saturation of 5% Residual gas saturation of 30% TOUGH2 simulations C. Doughty LBNL

18. Capillary Character Demonstrates Residual Saturation 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0102030405060708090100 Wetting-phase “water” saturation (percent) Capillary pressure (psi) Drainage, wetting phase being replaced by non wetting phase Imbibition, wetting phase replacing nonwetting phase Swirr Sgrm All porous media

19. Pore-Scale Gas Trapping Snap-off Oh and Slattery, 1976 –Snap-off model Capillary force cause non- wetting phase to snap-off into pore Aspect ratio = Pore radius Pore throat radius

20. Residual Saturation - key parameter

22. Case 1Case 2 Impact of Residual Saturation on CO 2 Distribution

23. Frio Brine Pilot Summary MMV demonstration in high permeability sandstone Comparison of diverse MMV technologies Better understanding of CO 2 behavior though model matching Invitation for participation Updates: www.gulfcoastcarbon.org