A Small CO2 Leakage May Induce Seismicity on a Sub‐Seismic Fault in a Good‐Porosity Clastic Saline Aquifer
Despite public concerns, only a few CO2 injections into saline aquifers have reported microseismicity. We analyze passive seismic monitoring of a small (15,000 tonnes and 0.15 MPa pressure) injection of supercritical CO2‐rich mixture for Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), wh...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Geophysical research letters 2022-06, Vol.49 (12), p.n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | n/a |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Geophysical research letters |
container_volume | 49 |
creator | Glubokovskikh, Stanislav Saygin, Erdinc Shapiro, Serge Gurevich, Boris Isaenkov, Roman Lumley, David Nakata, Rie Drew, Julian Pevzner, Roman |
description | Despite public concerns, only a few CO2 injections into saline aquifers have reported microseismicity. We analyze passive seismic monitoring of a small (15,000 tonnes and 0.15 MPa pressure) injection of supercritical CO2‐rich mixture for Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), which induced 19 detectable events with maximum moment magnitude MW‐0.5. The locations and dynamic parameters of the triggered events indicate a reactivation of a small fault patch where CO2 flowed through the fault. Time‐lapse seismic images of the plume and reservoir simulations show that the reactivation occurred when the CO2 plume reached this fault. This might be indicative of a fault weakening by the plume that enabled subsequent reactivation by pressure variations. Our observations suggest that a leakage from a commercial‐scale storage may trigger felt seismicity in the overburden without strong overpressure, thus, the de‐risking workflows should involve a detailed study of small faults.
Plain Language Summary
Geological carbon storage is one of the key technologies for reducing the greenhouse gas effects. The storage projects may reactivate subsurface faults and lead to felt earthquakes and even surface deformations. We present a new case study, Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), where a small leakage‐like injection triggered seismicity that could be detected by high‐sensitivity sensors but is way below the “felt” levels. Typically, pre‐existing faults and fractures are triggered by pressure build‐up from an injection. Timing and locations of the triggered micro‐earthquakes at the Otway Project may suggest that the injected gas might have weakened the rocks filling the fault gouge thus making the fault more prone to reactivation. Our study implies that even a small leakage into such a reservoir, driven mainly by buoyancy, has seismogenic potential and thus this risk should be carefully considered by site operators for geological carbon storage projects.
Key Points
A low‐pressure injection of 3,000 tonnes of supercritical CO2 into a high‐quality sandstone aquifer induced detectable seismicity
All of the seismic events are located on a small fault undetected in the seismic images prior to the injection
The seismic monitoring data suggest that a fluid‐rock interaction enabled the fault's reactivation by the increased pore pressure |
doi_str_mv | 10.1029/2022GL098062 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2681791824</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2681791824</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p2647-443dc10771476e82ead4940b79338c6ba8a9ea094b736f37f0633afc7ad83fa13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkM1Kw1AQhS-iYK3ufIALrqNzf7w_yxJsLEQqRtdhktzIrWnS5gfJzkfwGX0SU-rC1QxzPs5hDiHXDG4ZcHvHgfMoBmtA8RMyY1bKwADoUzIDsNPOtTonF123AQABgs1IvaDJFquKhmtOY4cf-O7oE450VRdD7mjifLf1ue9H2tQUaTJkP1_ff1e6xKHqqT8IUdMUk_LctE13oMMKu35CEqx87ehiP_jStZfkrMSqc1d_c07elg-v4WMQr6NVuIiDHVdSB1KKImegNZNaOcMdFtJKyLQVwuQqQ4PW4fRSpoUqhS5BCYFlrrEwokQm5uTm6Ltrm_3guj7dNENbT5EpV4ZpywyXE8WP1Kev3JjuWr_FdkwZpIc60_91ptFLrKS41-IX70ZpVw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2681791824</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Small CO2 Leakage May Induce Seismicity on a Sub‐Seismic Fault in a Good‐Porosity Clastic Saline Aquifer</title><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Glubokovskikh, Stanislav ; Saygin, Erdinc ; Shapiro, Serge ; Gurevich, Boris ; Isaenkov, Roman ; Lumley, David ; Nakata, Rie ; Drew, Julian ; Pevzner, Roman</creator><creatorcontrib>Glubokovskikh, Stanislav ; Saygin, Erdinc ; Shapiro, Serge ; Gurevich, Boris ; Isaenkov, Roman ; Lumley, David ; Nakata, Rie ; Drew, Julian ; Pevzner, Roman</creatorcontrib><description>Despite public concerns, only a few CO2 injections into saline aquifers have reported microseismicity. We analyze passive seismic monitoring of a small (15,000 tonnes and 0.15 MPa pressure) injection of supercritical CO2‐rich mixture for Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), which induced 19 detectable events with maximum moment magnitude MW‐0.5. The locations and dynamic parameters of the triggered events indicate a reactivation of a small fault patch where CO2 flowed through the fault. Time‐lapse seismic images of the plume and reservoir simulations show that the reactivation occurred when the CO2 plume reached this fault. This might be indicative of a fault weakening by the plume that enabled subsequent reactivation by pressure variations. Our observations suggest that a leakage from a commercial‐scale storage may trigger felt seismicity in the overburden without strong overpressure, thus, the de‐risking workflows should involve a detailed study of small faults.
Plain Language Summary
Geological carbon storage is one of the key technologies for reducing the greenhouse gas effects. The storage projects may reactivate subsurface faults and lead to felt earthquakes and even surface deformations. We present a new case study, Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), where a small leakage‐like injection triggered seismicity that could be detected by high‐sensitivity sensors but is way below the “felt” levels. Typically, pre‐existing faults and fractures are triggered by pressure build‐up from an injection. Timing and locations of the triggered micro‐earthquakes at the Otway Project may suggest that the injected gas might have weakened the rocks filling the fault gouge thus making the fault more prone to reactivation. Our study implies that even a small leakage into such a reservoir, driven mainly by buoyancy, has seismogenic potential and thus this risk should be carefully considered by site operators for geological carbon storage projects.
Key Points
A low‐pressure injection of 3,000 tonnes of supercritical CO2 into a high‐quality sandstone aquifer induced detectable seismicity
All of the seismic events are located on a small fault undetected in the seismic images prior to the injection
The seismic monitoring data suggest that a fluid‐rock interaction enabled the fault's reactivation by the increased pore pressure</description><identifier>ISSN: 0094-8276</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-8007</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1029/2022GL098062</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Aquifers ; Carbon capture and storage ; Carbon dioxide ; Carbon sequestration ; Earthquakes ; Fault lines ; Faults ; Fractures ; Geological faults ; Geology ; Greenhouse effect ; Greenhouse gases ; Injection ; Leakage ; Overburden ; Overpressure ; Porosity ; Pressure ; Pressure variations ; Reservoirs ; Seismic activity ; Seismicity</subject><ispartof>Geophysical research letters, 2022-06, Vol.49 (12), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2022. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0003-4342-4551 ; 0000-0002-2555-6860 ; 0000-0002-5741-8091 ; 0000-0002-2752-3528 ; 0000-0002-5062-2698 ; 0000-0001-8815-8918 ; 0000-0002-9188-9030 ; 0000-0003-4666-0955</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029%2F2022GL098062$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029%2F2022GL098062$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,1427,11494,27903,27904,45553,45554,46387,46446,46811,46870</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Glubokovskikh, Stanislav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saygin, Erdinc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shapiro, Serge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gurevich, Boris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Isaenkov, Roman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lumley, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakata, Rie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drew, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pevzner, Roman</creatorcontrib><title>A Small CO2 Leakage May Induce Seismicity on a Sub‐Seismic Fault in a Good‐Porosity Clastic Saline Aquifer</title><title>Geophysical research letters</title><description>Despite public concerns, only a few CO2 injections into saline aquifers have reported microseismicity. We analyze passive seismic monitoring of a small (15,000 tonnes and 0.15 MPa pressure) injection of supercritical CO2‐rich mixture for Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), which induced 19 detectable events with maximum moment magnitude MW‐0.5. The locations and dynamic parameters of the triggered events indicate a reactivation of a small fault patch where CO2 flowed through the fault. Time‐lapse seismic images of the plume and reservoir simulations show that the reactivation occurred when the CO2 plume reached this fault. This might be indicative of a fault weakening by the plume that enabled subsequent reactivation by pressure variations. Our observations suggest that a leakage from a commercial‐scale storage may trigger felt seismicity in the overburden without strong overpressure, thus, the de‐risking workflows should involve a detailed study of small faults.
Plain Language Summary
Geological carbon storage is one of the key technologies for reducing the greenhouse gas effects. The storage projects may reactivate subsurface faults and lead to felt earthquakes and even surface deformations. We present a new case study, Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), where a small leakage‐like injection triggered seismicity that could be detected by high‐sensitivity sensors but is way below the “felt” levels. Typically, pre‐existing faults and fractures are triggered by pressure build‐up from an injection. Timing and locations of the triggered micro‐earthquakes at the Otway Project may suggest that the injected gas might have weakened the rocks filling the fault gouge thus making the fault more prone to reactivation. Our study implies that even a small leakage into such a reservoir, driven mainly by buoyancy, has seismogenic potential and thus this risk should be carefully considered by site operators for geological carbon storage projects.
Key Points
A low‐pressure injection of 3,000 tonnes of supercritical CO2 into a high‐quality sandstone aquifer induced detectable seismicity
All of the seismic events are located on a small fault undetected in the seismic images prior to the injection
The seismic monitoring data suggest that a fluid‐rock interaction enabled the fault's reactivation by the increased pore pressure</description><subject>Aquifers</subject><subject>Carbon capture and storage</subject><subject>Carbon dioxide</subject><subject>Carbon sequestration</subject><subject>Earthquakes</subject><subject>Fault lines</subject><subject>Faults</subject><subject>Fractures</subject><subject>Geological faults</subject><subject>Geology</subject><subject>Greenhouse effect</subject><subject>Greenhouse gases</subject><subject>Injection</subject><subject>Leakage</subject><subject>Overburden</subject><subject>Overpressure</subject><subject>Porosity</subject><subject>Pressure</subject><subject>Pressure variations</subject><subject>Reservoirs</subject><subject>Seismic activity</subject><subject>Seismicity</subject><issn>0094-8276</issn><issn>1944-8007</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpNkM1Kw1AQhS-iYK3ufIALrqNzf7w_yxJsLEQqRtdhktzIrWnS5gfJzkfwGX0SU-rC1QxzPs5hDiHXDG4ZcHvHgfMoBmtA8RMyY1bKwADoUzIDsNPOtTonF123AQABgs1IvaDJFquKhmtOY4cf-O7oE450VRdD7mjifLf1ue9H2tQUaTJkP1_ff1e6xKHqqT8IUdMUk_LctE13oMMKu35CEqx87ehiP_jStZfkrMSqc1d_c07elg-v4WMQr6NVuIiDHVdSB1KKImegNZNaOcMdFtJKyLQVwuQqQ4PW4fRSpoUqhS5BCYFlrrEwokQm5uTm6Ltrm_3guj7dNENbT5EpV4ZpywyXE8WP1Kev3JjuWr_FdkwZpIc60_91ptFLrKS41-IX70ZpVw</recordid><startdate>20220628</startdate><enddate>20220628</enddate><creator>Glubokovskikh, Stanislav</creator><creator>Saygin, Erdinc</creator><creator>Shapiro, Serge</creator><creator>Gurevich, Boris</creator><creator>Isaenkov, Roman</creator><creator>Lumley, David</creator><creator>Nakata, Rie</creator><creator>Drew, Julian</creator><creator>Pevzner, Roman</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>L7M</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4342-4551</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2555-6860</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5741-8091</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2752-3528</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5062-2698</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8815-8918</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9188-9030</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4666-0955</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220628</creationdate><title>A Small CO2 Leakage May Induce Seismicity on a Sub‐Seismic Fault in a Good‐Porosity Clastic Saline Aquifer</title><author>Glubokovskikh, Stanislav ; Saygin, Erdinc ; Shapiro, Serge ; Gurevich, Boris ; Isaenkov, Roman ; Lumley, David ; Nakata, Rie ; Drew, Julian ; Pevzner, Roman</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p2647-443dc10771476e82ead4940b79338c6ba8a9ea094b736f37f0633afc7ad83fa13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Aquifers</topic><topic>Carbon capture and storage</topic><topic>Carbon dioxide</topic><topic>Carbon sequestration</topic><topic>Earthquakes</topic><topic>Fault lines</topic><topic>Faults</topic><topic>Fractures</topic><topic>Geological faults</topic><topic>Geology</topic><topic>Greenhouse effect</topic><topic>Greenhouse gases</topic><topic>Injection</topic><topic>Leakage</topic><topic>Overburden</topic><topic>Overpressure</topic><topic>Porosity</topic><topic>Pressure</topic><topic>Pressure variations</topic><topic>Reservoirs</topic><topic>Seismic activity</topic><topic>Seismicity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Glubokovskikh, Stanislav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saygin, Erdinc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shapiro, Serge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gurevich, Boris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Isaenkov, Roman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lumley, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakata, Rie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drew, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pevzner, Roman</creatorcontrib><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><jtitle>Geophysical research letters</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Glubokovskikh, Stanislav</au><au>Saygin, Erdinc</au><au>Shapiro, Serge</au><au>Gurevich, Boris</au><au>Isaenkov, Roman</au><au>Lumley, David</au><au>Nakata, Rie</au><au>Drew, Julian</au><au>Pevzner, Roman</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Small CO2 Leakage May Induce Seismicity on a Sub‐Seismic Fault in a Good‐Porosity Clastic Saline Aquifer</atitle><jtitle>Geophysical research letters</jtitle><date>2022-06-28</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>12</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>0094-8276</issn><eissn>1944-8007</eissn><abstract>Despite public concerns, only a few CO2 injections into saline aquifers have reported microseismicity. We analyze passive seismic monitoring of a small (15,000 tonnes and 0.15 MPa pressure) injection of supercritical CO2‐rich mixture for Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), which induced 19 detectable events with maximum moment magnitude MW‐0.5. The locations and dynamic parameters of the triggered events indicate a reactivation of a small fault patch where CO2 flowed through the fault. Time‐lapse seismic images of the plume and reservoir simulations show that the reactivation occurred when the CO2 plume reached this fault. This might be indicative of a fault weakening by the plume that enabled subsequent reactivation by pressure variations. Our observations suggest that a leakage from a commercial‐scale storage may trigger felt seismicity in the overburden without strong overpressure, thus, the de‐risking workflows should involve a detailed study of small faults.
Plain Language Summary
Geological carbon storage is one of the key technologies for reducing the greenhouse gas effects. The storage projects may reactivate subsurface faults and lead to felt earthquakes and even surface deformations. We present a new case study, Stage 2C of the CO2CRC Otway Project (Victoria, Australia), where a small leakage‐like injection triggered seismicity that could be detected by high‐sensitivity sensors but is way below the “felt” levels. Typically, pre‐existing faults and fractures are triggered by pressure build‐up from an injection. Timing and locations of the triggered micro‐earthquakes at the Otway Project may suggest that the injected gas might have weakened the rocks filling the fault gouge thus making the fault more prone to reactivation. Our study implies that even a small leakage into such a reservoir, driven mainly by buoyancy, has seismogenic potential and thus this risk should be carefully considered by site operators for geological carbon storage projects.
Key Points
A low‐pressure injection of 3,000 tonnes of supercritical CO2 into a high‐quality sandstone aquifer induced detectable seismicity
All of the seismic events are located on a small fault undetected in the seismic images prior to the injection
The seismic monitoring data suggest that a fluid‐rock interaction enabled the fault's reactivation by the increased pore pressure</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><doi>10.1029/2022GL098062</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4342-4551</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2555-6860</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5741-8091</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2752-3528</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5062-2698</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8815-8918</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9188-9030</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4666-0955</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0094-8276 |
ispartof | Geophysical research letters, 2022-06, Vol.49 (12), p.n/a |
issn | 0094-8276 1944-8007 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2681791824 |
source | Wiley Free Content; Wiley-Blackwell AGU Digital Library; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Aquifers Carbon capture and storage Carbon dioxide Carbon sequestration Earthquakes Fault lines Faults Fractures Geological faults Geology Greenhouse effect Greenhouse gases Injection Leakage Overburden Overpressure Porosity Pressure Pressure variations Reservoirs Seismic activity Seismicity |
title | A Small CO2 Leakage May Induce Seismicity on a Sub‐Seismic Fault in a Good‐Porosity Clastic Saline Aquifer |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T02%3A00%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Small%20CO2%20Leakage%20May%20Induce%20Seismicity%20on%20a%20Sub%E2%80%90Seismic%20Fault%20in%20a%20Good%E2%80%90Porosity%20Clastic%20Saline%20Aquifer&rft.jtitle=Geophysical%20research%20letters&rft.au=Glubokovskikh,%20Stanislav&rft.date=2022-06-28&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=12&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=0094-8276&rft.eissn=1944-8007&rft_id=info:doi/10.1029/2022GL098062&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wiley%3E2681791824%3C/proquest_wiley%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2681791824&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |