A review of continuous soil gas monitoring related to CCS – Technical advances and lessons learned |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin, University Station, Box X, Austin, TX 78713, USA;2. ERDC International Research Office, 86-88 Blenheim Crescent, Ruislip HA4 7HB, UK;3. U.S Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA 94205, USA;1. GeoZentrum Nordbayern, Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg (FAU), Schloßgarten 5, 91054 Erlangen, Germany;2. Max Planck Institute für Biogeochemistry, PF 10 01 64, 07701 Jena, Germany;3. GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Telegrafenberg, 14473 Potsdam, Germany;1. British Geological Survey, Environmental Science Centre, Keyworth, Nottingham NG12 5GG, UK;2. Bureau de Recherche Géologique et Minière, 3 Avenue Claude Guillemin, BP 36009, 45060 Orleans, Cedex 2, France;3. Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, Dip. Scienze della Terra, P.le A. Moro 5, 00185 Roma, Italy;1. University of Bergen, Department of Mathematics, Allegaten 41, 5008 Bergen, Norway;2. Uni Research Computing, Bergen, Norway;3. University of Bergen, Geophysical Institute, Bergen, Norway;4. Uni Research Climate, Bergen, Norway;5. Uni Research CIPR, Bergen, Norway;1. Shell Global Solutions International B.V., Kessler Park 1, 2288 GS Rijswijk, The Netherlands;2. Shell International Exploration and Production, Carel van Bylandtlaan 30, 2596 HR The Hague, The Netherlands;3. Shell Canada Limited, 400 4th Avenue S.W., P.O. Box 100, Station M, Calgary, Alberta T2P 2H6, Canada;1. British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham NG12 5GG, UK;2. Sapienza Università di Roma, Dip. Scienze della Terra, P.le A. Moro 5, 00185 Roma, Italy;3. Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Prospect Place, West Hoe, Plymouth PL1 3DH, UK;4. IMARES Wageningen UR, Postbus 57, 1780AB Den Helder, The Netherlands;5. BRGM (Bureau de Recherche Géologique et Minière), 3 Avenue Claude Guillemin, BP 36009, 45060 ORLEANS Cedex 2, France;6. OGS (Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale) Oceanography Section, Via A. Piccard 54, 34151 S. Croce, Trieste, Italy;7. Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton, National Oceanography Centre Southampton, European Way, Southampton SO14 3ZH, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | One of the most vigorously discussed issues related to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in the public and scientific community is the development of adequate monitoring strategies. Geological monitoring is mostly related to large scale migration of the injected CO2 in the storage formations. However, public interest (or fear as that) is more related to massive CO2 discharge at the surface and possible affects on human health and the environment. Public acceptance of CO2 sequestration will only be achieved if secure and comprehensible monitoring methods for the natural habitat exist. For this reason the compulsory directive 2009/31/EG of the European Union as well as other international regulations demand a monitoring strategy for CO2 at the surface. The variation of CO2 emissions of different soil types and vegetation is extremely large. Hence, reliable statements on actual CO2 emissions can only be made using continuous long-term gas-concentration measurements. Here the lessons learned from the (to the authors’ knowledge) first world-wide continuous gas concentration monitoring program applied on a selected site in the Altmark area (Germany), are described.This paper focuses on the authors’ technical experiences and recommendations for further extensive monitoring programs related to CCS. Although many of the individual statements and suggestions have been addressed in the literature, a comprehensive overview is presented of the main technical and scientific issues. The most important topics are the reliability of the single stations as well as range of the measured parameters. Each selected site needs a thorough pre-investigation with respect to the depth of the biologically active zone and potential free water level. For the site installation and interface the application of small drill holes is recommended for quantifying the soil gas by means of a closed circuit design. This configuration allows for the effective drying of the soil gas and avoids pressure disturbance in the soil gas. Standard soil parameters (humidity, temperature) as well as local weather data are crucial for site specific interpretation of the data. The complexity, time and effort to handle a dozen (or even more) single stations in a large case study should not be underestimated. Management and control of data, automatic data handling and presentation must be considered right from the beginning of the monitoring. Quality control is a pre-condition for reproducible measurements, correct interpretation and subsequently for public acceptance. From the experience with the recent monitoring program it is strongly recommended that baseline measurements should start at least 3 a before any gas injection to the reservoir. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
