Mixing of stably stratified gases in subsurface reservoirs: A comparison of diffusion models
Numerical simulations of the mixing of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) in a gravitationally stable configuration have been carried out using the multicomponent flow and transport simulator TOUGH2/EOS7C. The purpose of the simulations is to compare and test the appropriateness of the advective...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transport in porous media 2004-03, Vol.54 (3), p.323-334 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 334 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 323 |
container_title | Transport in porous media |
container_volume | 54 |
creator | OLDENBURG, C. M WEBB, S. W PRUESS, K MORIDIS, G. J |
description | Numerical simulations of the mixing of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) in a gravitationally stable configuration have been carried out using the multicomponent flow and transport simulator TOUGH2/EOS7C. The purpose of the simulations is to compare and test the appropriateness of the advective–diffusive model (ADM) relative to the more accurate dusty-gas model (DGM). The configuration is relevant to carbon sequestration in depleted natural gas reservoirs, where injected CO2 will migrate to low levels of the reservoir by buoyancy flow. Once a gravitationally stable configuration is attained, mixing will continue on a longer time scale by molecular diffusion. However, diffusive mixing of real gas components CO2 and CH4 can give rise to pressure gradients that can induce pressurization and flow that may affect the mixing process. Understanding this coupled response of diffusion and flow to concentration gradients is important for predicting mixing times in stratified gas reservoirs used for carbon sequestration. Motivated by prior studies that have shown that the ADM and DGM deviate from one another in low permeability systems, we have compared the ADM and DGM for the case of permeability equal to 10−15 m2 and 10−18 m2. At representative reservoir conditions of 40 bar and 40°C, gas transport by advection and diffusion using the ADM is slightly overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−15 m2, and substantially overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−18 m2 compared to DGM predictions. This result suggests that gas reservoirs with permeabilities larger than approximately 10−15 m2 can be adequately simulated using the ADM. For simulations of gas transport in the cap rock, or other very low permeability layers, the DGM is recommended. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1023/B:TIPM.0000003748.74155.48 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2259333826</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2259333826</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a342t-e74f2a506240025b0570fb9a4f5cacbb48b82b5c7a92d6a2f5e6652e888dbe73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkFtLwzAYhoMoOKf_oShetubYprvbhofBhl7sUghJm4yMrpn5VnH_3u4A-25ePngP8CD0SHBGMGUvk9Fy9rXI8PFYwWVWcCJExuUVGhBRsJTkjF-jASZ5mbKSsFt0B7DGmGAs-QB9L_yfb1dJcAnstGn2vUS9887bOllpsJD4NoHOQBedrmwSLdj4G3yEUTJOqrDZ6ughtIeG2jvXge-fTahtA_foxukG7MNZh2j59rqcfqTzz_fZdDxPNeN0l9qCO6oFzinHmAqDRYGdKTV3otKVMVwaSY2oCl3SOtfUCZvnglopZW1swYbo6VS7jeGns7BT69DFtl9UlIqSMSZp3rtGJ1cVA0C0Tm2j3-i4VwSrA0w1UQeY6gJTHWEqLvvw83lCQ6UbF3Vbebg0CE4KknP2D7r6dm8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2259333826</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Mixing of stably stratified gases in subsurface reservoirs: A comparison of diffusion models</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>OLDENBURG, C. M ; WEBB, S. W ; PRUESS, K ; MORIDIS, G. J</creator><creatorcontrib>OLDENBURG, C. M ; WEBB, S. W ; PRUESS, K ; MORIDIS, G. J</creatorcontrib><description>Numerical simulations of the mixing of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) in a gravitationally stable configuration have been carried out using the multicomponent flow and transport simulator TOUGH2/EOS7C. The purpose of the simulations is to compare and test the appropriateness of the advective–diffusive model (ADM) relative to the more accurate dusty-gas model (DGM). The configuration is relevant to carbon sequestration in depleted natural gas reservoirs, where injected CO2 will migrate to low levels of the reservoir by buoyancy flow. Once a gravitationally stable configuration is attained, mixing will continue on a longer time scale by molecular diffusion. However, diffusive mixing of real gas components CO2 and CH4 can give rise to pressure gradients that can induce pressurization and flow that may affect the mixing process. Understanding this coupled response of diffusion and flow to concentration gradients is important for predicting mixing times in stratified gas reservoirs used for carbon sequestration. Motivated by prior studies that have shown that the ADM and DGM deviate from one another in low permeability systems, we have compared the ADM and DGM for the case of permeability equal to 10−15 m2 and 10−18 m2. At representative reservoir conditions of 40 bar and 40°C, gas transport by advection and diffusion using the ADM is slightly overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−15 m2, and substantially overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−18 m2 compared to DGM predictions. This result suggests that gas reservoirs with permeabilities larger than approximately 10−15 m2 can be adequately simulated using the ADM. For simulations of gas transport in the cap rock, or other very low permeability layers, the DGM is recommended.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0169-3913</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1634</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1023/B:TIPM.0000003748.74155.48</identifier><identifier>CODEN: TPMEEI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Carbon dioxide ; Carbon sequestration ; Computer simulation ; Concentration gradient ; Configurations ; Earth sciences ; Earth, ocean, space ; Engineering and environment geology. Geothermics ; Exact sciences and technology ; Gas transport ; Gases ; Hydrocarbons ; Methane ; Molecular diffusion ; Natural gas ; Permeability ; Pollution, environment geology ; Predictions ; Pressure gradients ; Pressurization ; Real gases ; Reservoirs ; Sedimentary rocks</subject><ispartof>Transport in porous media, 2004-03, Vol.54 (3), p.323-334</ispartof><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Transport in Porous Media is a copyright of Springer, (2004). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a342t-e74f2a506240025b0570fb9a4f5cacbb48b82b5c7a92d6a2f5e6652e888dbe73</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=15417164$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>OLDENBURG, C. M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WEBB, S. W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PRUESS, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORIDIS, G. J</creatorcontrib><title>Mixing of stably stratified gases in subsurface reservoirs: A comparison of diffusion models</title><title>Transport in porous media</title><description>Numerical simulations of the mixing of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) in a gravitationally stable configuration have been carried out using the multicomponent flow and transport simulator TOUGH2/EOS7C. The purpose of the simulations is to compare and test the appropriateness of the advective–diffusive model (ADM) relative to the more accurate dusty-gas model (DGM). The configuration is relevant to carbon sequestration in depleted natural gas reservoirs, where injected CO2 will migrate to low levels of the reservoir by buoyancy flow. Once a gravitationally stable configuration is attained, mixing will continue on a longer time scale by molecular diffusion. However, diffusive mixing of real gas components CO2 and CH4 can give rise to pressure gradients that can induce pressurization and flow that may affect the mixing process. Understanding this coupled response of diffusion and flow to concentration gradients is important for predicting mixing times in stratified gas reservoirs used for carbon sequestration. Motivated by prior studies that have shown that the ADM and DGM deviate from one another in low permeability systems, we have compared the ADM and DGM for the case of permeability equal to 10−15 m2 and 10−18 m2. At representative reservoir conditions of 40 bar and 40°C, gas transport by advection and diffusion using the ADM is slightly overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−15 m2, and substantially overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−18 m2 compared to DGM predictions. This result suggests that gas reservoirs with permeabilities larger than approximately 10−15 m2 can be adequately simulated using the ADM. For simulations of gas transport in the cap rock, or other very low permeability layers, the DGM is recommended.</description><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Carbon sequestration</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Concentration gradient</subject><subject>Configurations</subject><subject>Earth sciences</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Engineering and environment geology. Geothermics</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Gas transport</subject><subject>Gases</subject><subject>Hydrocarbons</subject><subject>Methane</subject><subject>Molecular diffusion</subject><subject>Natural gas</subject><subject>Permeability</subject><subject>Pollution, environment geology</subject><subject>Predictions</subject><subject>Pressure gradients</subject><subject>Pressurization</subject><subject>Real gases</subject><subject>Reservoirs</subject><subject>Sedimentary rocks</subject><issn>0169-3913</issn><issn>1573-1634</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkFtLwzAYhoMoOKf_oShetubYprvbhofBhl7sUghJm4yMrpn5VnH_3u4A-25ePngP8CD0SHBGMGUvk9Fy9rXI8PFYwWVWcCJExuUVGhBRsJTkjF-jASZ5mbKSsFt0B7DGmGAs-QB9L_yfb1dJcAnstGn2vUS9887bOllpsJD4NoHOQBedrmwSLdj4G3yEUTJOqrDZ6ughtIeG2jvXge-fTahtA_foxukG7MNZh2j59rqcfqTzz_fZdDxPNeN0l9qCO6oFzinHmAqDRYGdKTV3otKVMVwaSY2oCl3SOtfUCZvnglopZW1swYbo6VS7jeGns7BT69DFtl9UlIqSMSZp3rtGJ1cVA0C0Tm2j3-i4VwSrA0w1UQeY6gJTHWEqLvvw83lCQ6UbF3Vbebg0CE4KknP2D7r6dm8</recordid><startdate>20040301</startdate><enddate>20040301</enddate><creator>OLDENBURG, C. M</creator><creator>WEBB, S. W</creator><creator>PRUESS, K</creator><creator>MORIDIS, G. J</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040301</creationdate><title>Mixing of stably stratified gases in subsurface reservoirs: A comparison of diffusion models</title><author>OLDENBURG, C. M ; WEBB, S. W ; PRUESS, K ; MORIDIS, G. J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a342t-e74f2a506240025b0570fb9a4f5cacbb48b82b5c7a92d6a2f5e6652e888dbe73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Carbon sequestration</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Concentration gradient</topic><topic>Configurations</topic><topic>Earth sciences</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Engineering and environment geology. Geothermics</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Gas transport</topic><topic>Gases</topic><topic>Hydrocarbons</topic><topic>Methane</topic><topic>Molecular diffusion</topic><topic>Natural gas</topic><topic>Permeability</topic><topic>Pollution, environment geology</topic><topic>Predictions</topic><topic>Pressure gradients</topic><topic>Pressurization</topic><topic>Real gases</topic><topic>Reservoirs</topic><topic>Sedimentary rocks</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>OLDENBURG, C. M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WEBB, S. W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PRUESS, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MORIDIS, G. J</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><jtitle>Transport in porous media</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>OLDENBURG, C. M</au><au>WEBB, S. W</au><au>PRUESS, K</au><au>MORIDIS, G. J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Mixing of stably stratified gases in subsurface reservoirs: A comparison of diffusion models</atitle><jtitle>Transport in porous media</jtitle><date>2004-03-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>323</spage><epage>334</epage><pages>323-334</pages><issn>0169-3913</issn><eissn>1573-1634</eissn><coden>TPMEEI</coden><abstract>Numerical simulations of the mixing of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) in a gravitationally stable configuration have been carried out using the multicomponent flow and transport simulator TOUGH2/EOS7C. The purpose of the simulations is to compare and test the appropriateness of the advective–diffusive model (ADM) relative to the more accurate dusty-gas model (DGM). The configuration is relevant to carbon sequestration in depleted natural gas reservoirs, where injected CO2 will migrate to low levels of the reservoir by buoyancy flow. Once a gravitationally stable configuration is attained, mixing will continue on a longer time scale by molecular diffusion. However, diffusive mixing of real gas components CO2 and CH4 can give rise to pressure gradients that can induce pressurization and flow that may affect the mixing process. Understanding this coupled response of diffusion and flow to concentration gradients is important for predicting mixing times in stratified gas reservoirs used for carbon sequestration. Motivated by prior studies that have shown that the ADM and DGM deviate from one another in low permeability systems, we have compared the ADM and DGM for the case of permeability equal to 10−15 m2 and 10−18 m2. At representative reservoir conditions of 40 bar and 40°C, gas transport by advection and diffusion using the ADM is slightly overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−15 m2, and substantially overpredicted for permeability equal to 10−18 m2 compared to DGM predictions. This result suggests that gas reservoirs with permeabilities larger than approximately 10−15 m2 can be adequately simulated using the ADM. For simulations of gas transport in the cap rock, or other very low permeability layers, the DGM is recommended.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1023/B:TIPM.0000003748.74155.48</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0169-3913 |
ispartof | Transport in porous media, 2004-03, Vol.54 (3), p.323-334 |
issn | 0169-3913 1573-1634 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2259333826 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Carbon dioxide Carbon sequestration Computer simulation Concentration gradient Configurations Earth sciences Earth, ocean, space Engineering and environment geology. Geothermics Exact sciences and technology Gas transport Gases Hydrocarbons Methane Molecular diffusion Natural gas Permeability Pollution, environment geology Predictions Pressure gradients Pressurization Real gases Reservoirs Sedimentary rocks |
title | Mixing of stably stratified gases in subsurface reservoirs: A comparison of diffusion models |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T18%3A58%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Mixing%20of%20stably%20stratified%20gases%20in%20subsurface%20reservoirs:%20A%20comparison%20of%20diffusion%20models&rft.jtitle=Transport%20in%20porous%20media&rft.au=OLDENBURG,%20C.%20M&rft.date=2004-03-01&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=323&rft.epage=334&rft.pages=323-334&rft.issn=0169-3913&rft.eissn=1573-1634&rft.coden=TPMEEI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1023/B:TIPM.0000003748.74155.48&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2259333826%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2259333826&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |