地热水回灌耦合CO<sub>2</sub>地质封存系统安全性分析

罗亚南; 蒋坤卿; 黄思浩; 冯波; 卜宪标

doi:10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20230618

地热水回灌耦合CO₂地质封存系统安全性分析

doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20230618

罗亚南^{1, 2,},
蒋坤卿^{1, 2},
黄思浩^{1, 2},
冯波³,
卜宪标^{1, 2, ,}

1.
中国科学技术大学能源科学与技术学院, 广州 510640
2.
中国科学院广州能源研究所, 广州 510640
3.
吉林大学新能源与环境学院, 长春 130021

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目 41972314

详细信息

作者简介:
罗亚南, E-mail: luoyn@ms.giec.ac.cn

通讯作者:
卜宪标, E-mail: buxb@ms.giec.ac.cn

中图分类号: P314.2
计量
- 文章访问数: 240
- PDF下载量: 122
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2023-11-03
- 录用日期: 2024-01-25
- 修回日期: 2024-01-25

Safety analysis of geothermal water recharge coupled with CO₂ geological storage system

LUO Yanan^{1, 2
,},
JIANG Kunqing^{1, 2},
HUANG Sihao^{1, 2},
FENG Bo³,
BU Xianbiao^{1, 2
, ,}

1.
School of Energy Science and Engineering, University of Science and Technology of China, Guangzhou 510640, China
2.
Guangzhou Institute of Energy Conversion, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510640, China
3.
College of New Energy and Environment, Jilin University, Changchun 130021, China

More Information

Author Bio:
LUO Yanan, E-mail: luoyn@ms.giec.ac.cn

Corresponding author: BU Xianbiao, E-mail: buxb@ms.giec.ac.cn

摘要

摘要:
在圈闭良好的水热型地热储层, 开展CO₂随回灌水同时注入储层的研究, 既具有经济效益又具有碳封存的环境效益。建立了3D储层模型, 对不同井距、地层倾角、筛管位置和采灌速率下CO₂突破时间以及富含CO₂的盐水在储层中的运移情况进行了研究。结果表明: (1)在采灌速率为20 kg/s, 20 a运行时间内井距为1 200 m时CO₂未突破; (2)在倾斜地层中, 当回灌井位于开采井下游时, 随地层倾角增加, CO₂突破时间延长, 沿地层下倾方向碳酸水运移距离增大; (3)综合考虑筛管位置对突破时间和突破后开采井中CO₂质量分数的影响, 回灌井筛管位于储层上部30 m、开采井筛管位于储层下部30 m时, 有利于CO₂地质封存的安全性和有效性; (4)采灌速率对CO₂突破时间影响较大, 当采灌速率为12 kg/s时, CO₂未突破; 当采灌速率增加到28 kg/s时, 突破时间缩短到11.8 a。因此, 在实际工程应用中可以通过对操作参数和地层固有特性的研究延缓CO₂突破, 提高CO₂地质封存安全性。
- 地热水回灌 /
- CO₂地质封存 /
- 延缓突破 /
- 安全性
Abstract: Objective
In well-trapped hydrothermal geothermal reservoirs, the research on injecting CO₂ into reservoirs simultaneously with recharge water is carried out, which has both economic and environmental benefits for carbon sequestration.
Methods
A 3D reservoir model was established to study the CO₂ breakthrough time and the migration of CO₂-rich brine in a reservoir under different well spacings, formation inclination angles, sieve tube positions and exploitation and reinjection rates.
Results
The results show that (1) when the exploitation and reinjection rate is 20 kg/s and the well spacing is 1 200 m within 20 years of operation, there is no CO₂ breakthrough. (2) In inclined formations, when the recharge well is located downstream of the production well, as the formation inclination angle increases, the CO₂ breakthrough time increases, and the migration distance of carbonated water increases along the downdip direction of the formation. (3) Considering the impact of the screen position on the breakthrough time and CO₂ mass fraction in the production well after breakthrough, it is beneficial to ensure the safety and effectiveness of CO₂ geological storage when the recharge well sieve tube is located 30 m above the reservoir and the production well sieve is located 30 m below the reservoir. (4) The exploitation and reinjection rates have greater impacts on the CO₂ breakthrough time. When the exploitation and reinjection rate is 12 kg/s, there is no CO₂ breakthrough. When the exploitation and reinjection rate increases to 28 kg/s, the breakthrough time decreases to 11.8 years.
Conclusion
Therefore, in practical engineering applications, the CO₂ breakthrough time can be delayed, and the safety of CO₂ geological storage can be improved through the study of operating parameters and the inherent characteristics of the formation.
- geothermal water recharge /
- CO₂ geological storage /
- delayed breakthrough /
- safety
注释:

所有作者声明不存在利益冲突。

HTML全文

图 1 地热水回灌与CO₂地质封存耦合系统

Figure 1. Coupling system of geothermal water recharge and CO₂ geological storage

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 3D概念模型

Figure 2. 3D conceptual model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 井距对CO₂突破时间的影响

Figure 3. Effect of well spacing on CO₂ breakthrough time

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 井距对液相中CO₂质量分数分布的影响(a~d井距分别为800, 1 000, 1 200, 1 400 m)

Figure 4. Effect of well spacing on the distribution of the CO₂ mass fraction in the liquid phase

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 倾斜地层xz平面图(θ为地层倾角)

Figure 5. xz plan view of inclined formation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 回灌井位于开采井下游(a)和上游(b)地层倾角对CO₂突破时间的影响

Figure 6. Effect of formation inclination angle on CO₂ breakthrough time when the recharge well is located downstream (a) and upstream (b) of the production well

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 地层倾角对液相中CO₂质量分数分布的影响(a~f地层倾角分别为0°, 2°, 4°, 6°, 8°, 10°)

Figure 7. Effect of the formation inclination angle on the distribution of the CO₂ mass fraction in the liquid phase

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 筛管位置对CO₂突破时间的影响(方案参数见表 2, 下同)

Figure 8. Effect of sieve tube position on CO₂ breakthrough time

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 筛管位置对液相CO₂质量分数分布的影响(a~e分别为方案1, 方案11, 方案12, 方案13, 方案14)

Figure 9. Effect of the sieve tube position on the distribution of the CO₂ mass fraction in the liquid phase

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 采灌速率对CO₂突破时间的影响

Figure 10. Effect of exploitation and reinjection rate on CO₂ breakthrough time

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 采灌速率对液相CO₂质量分数分布的影响(a~e采灌速率分别为12, 16, 20, 24, 28 kg/s)

Figure 11. Effect of the exploitation and reinjection rate on the distribution of the CO₂ mass fraction in the liquid phase

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 采灌速率对气相CO₂饱和度分布的影响(a, b采灌速率分别为12, 16 kg/s)

Figure 12. Effect of the exploitation and reinjection rate on the distribution of the CO₂ saturation in the gas phase

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 储层及注入参数^[23]

Table 1. Reservoir and injection parameters

主要参数	参数取值
孔隙度/%	20
水平渗透率/10^-3 μm²	600
垂直渗透率/10^-3 μm²	30
岩石密度/(kg·m^-3)	2 650
岩石热传导率/(W·m^-1·℃^-1)	2.5
岩石比热容/(J·kg^-1·℃^-1)	920
回灌温度/℃	35
CO₂注入速率/(kg·s^-1)	0.8
地热水回灌速率/(kg·s^-1)	12~28

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 不同方案的参数设置

Table 2. Parameter settings for different solutions

方案	回灌井位置/m	开采井位置/m	井距/m	地层倾角/(°)	筛管位置/m	采灌速率/(kg·s^-1)	备注
1	500	-500	1 000	0	60	20	基础方案
2	300	-300	600	0	60	20	井距
3	400	-400	800	0	60	20
4	600	-600	1 200	0	60	20
5	700	-700	1 400	0	60	20
6	500	-500	1 000	2	60	20	地层倾角
7	500	-500	1 000	4	60	20
8	500	-500	1 000	6	60	20
9	500	-500	1 000	8	60	20
10	500	-500	1 000	10	60	20
11	500	-500	1 000	0	回灌井：储层上部30 m 开采井：储层上部30 m	20	筛管位置
12	500	-500	1 000	0	回灌井：储层上部30 m 开采井：储层下部30 m	20
13	500	-500	1 000	0	回灌井：储层下部30 m 开采井：储层上部30 m	20
14	500	-500	1 000	0	回灌井：储层下部30 m 开采井：储层下部30 m	20
15	500	-500	1 000	0	60	12	采灌速率
16	500	-500	1 000	0	60	16
17	500	-500	1 000	0	60	24
18	500	-500	1 000	0	60	28

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(29)

[1]	YANG B L, SHAO C, HU X L, et al. Advances in carbon dioxide storage projects: Assessment and perspectives[J]. Energy & Fuels, 2023, 37(3): 1757-1776.
[2]	LI M W, QIN J R, HAN Z Y, et al. Low-carbon economic optimization method for integrated energy systems based on life cycle assessment and carbon capture utilization technologies[J]. Energy Science & Engineering, 2023, 11(11): 4238-4255.
[3]	章程, 肖琼, 孙平安, 等. 岩溶碳循环及碳汇效应研究与展望[J]. 地质科技通报, 2022, 41(5): 190-198. doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2022.0193 ZHANG C, XIAO Q, SUN P A, et al. Progress on karst carbon cycle and carbon sink effect study and perspective[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2022, 41(5): 190-198. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.2022.0193
[4]	PARK J, PARK S S, CHO J, et al. Analysis on caprock and aquifer properties related with leakage during CO₂ storage[J]. Geosystem Engineering, 2016, 19(4): 188-196. doi: 10.1080/12269328.2016.1165632
[5]	王贵玲, 蔺文静. 我国主要水热型地热系统形成机制与成因模式[J]. 地质学报, 2020, 94(7): 1923-1937. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZXE202007002.htm WANG G L, LIN W J. Main hydro-geothermal systems and their genetic models in China[J]. Acta Geologica Sinica, 2020, 94(7): 1923-1937. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DZXE202007002.htm
[6]	王贵玲, 刘彦广, 朱喜, 等. 中国地热资源现状及发展趋势[J]. 地学前缘, 2020, 27(1): 1-9. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DXQY202001002.htm WANG G L, LIU Y G, ZHU X, et al. The status and development trend of geothermal resources in China[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2020, 27(1): 1-9. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DXQY202001002.htm
[7]	BROWN D. A hot dry rock geothermal energy concept utilizing supercritical CO₂ instead of water[C]//Anon. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering. Stanford, California, United States: Stanford University, 2000: 233-238.
[8]	PRUESS K. On production behavior of enhanced geothermal systems with CO₂ as working fluid[J]. Energy Conversion and Management, 2008, 49(6): 1446-1454.
[9]	RANDOLPH J B, SAAR M O. Coupling carbon dioxide sequestration with geothermal energy capture in naturally permeable, porous geologic formations: Implications for CO₂ sequestration[J]. Energy Procedia, 2011, 4: 2206-2213.
[10]	PAN C J, CHÁVEZ O, ROMERO C E, et al. Heat mining assessment for geothermal reservoirs in Mexico using supercritical CO₂ injection[J]. Energy, 2016, 102: 148-160.
[11]	SALIMI H, WOLF K H. Integration of heat-energy recovery and carbon sequestration[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2012, 6: 56-68.
[12]	GANJDANESH R, BRYANT S L, ORBACH R L, et al. Coupled carbon dioxide sequestration and energy production from geopressured/geothermal aquifers[J]. SPE Journal, 2014, 19(2): 239-248.
[13]	BUSCHECK T A, CHEN M, SUN Y, et al. Two-stage, integrated, geothermal-CO₂ storage reservoirs: An approach for sustainable energy production, CO₂-sequestration security, and reduced environmental risk[R]. Livermore, California, United States: Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), 2012.
[14]	JING J, YANG Y L, TANG Z H. Assessing the influence of injection temperature on CO₂ storage efficiency and capacity in the sloping formation with fault[J]. Energy, 2021, 215: 119097.
[15]	WANG F G, JING J, XU T F, et al. Impacts of stratum dip angle on CO₂ geological storage amount and security[J]. Greenhouse Gases (Science and Technology), 2016, 6(5): 682-694.
[16]	WANG F, JING J, YANG Y, et al. Impacts of injection pressure of a dip-angle sloping strata reservoir with low porosity and permeability on CO₂ injection amount[J]. Greenhouse Gases Science & Technology, 2017, 7(1): 92-105.
[17]	林鹏威, 曾平, 林署炯, 等. 增强型地热系统热储层研究进展[J]. 中外能源, 2015, 20(10): 21-30. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYZW201510007.htm LIN P W, ZENG P, LIN S J, et al. Advances in research on reservoirs of enhanced geothermal system[J]. Sino-Global Energy, 2015, 20(10): 21-30. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYZW201510007.htm
[18]	PRUESS K. ECO2N: A TOUGH2 fluid property module for mixtures of water, NaCl, and CO₂[M]. Berkeley, CA, United States: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2005.
[19]	ZHANG K, WU Y S, PRUESS K. User's guide for TOUGH2-MP: A massively parallelversion of the TOUGH2 code[R]. Berkeley, CA, United States: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2008.
[20]	杨艳林, 许天福, 靖晶. OpenMP在CO₂地质储存数值模拟并行计算中的应用[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2018, 45(5): 129-135. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SWDG201805019.htm YANG Y L, XU T F, JING J. Application of parallel computing with OpenMP in numerical simulation of CO₂ geological storage[J]. Hydrogeology & Engineering Geology, 2018, 45(5): 129-135. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SWDG201805019.htm
[21]	PRUESS K, OLDENBURG C, MORIDIS G. TOUGH2 user's guide version 2[R]. Berkeley, CA, United States: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1999.
[22]	李红斌, 王贵文, 庞小娇, 等. 苏北盆地古近系阜宁组页岩工程品质测井评价[J]. 地质科技通报, 2023, 42(3): 311-322. doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20210692 LI H B, WANG G W, PANG X J, et al. Logging evaluation of the engineering quality of the Paleogene Funing Formation oil shales in the Subei Basin[J]. Bulletin of Geological Science and Technology, 2023, 42(3): 311-322. (in Chinese with English abstract) doi: 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkq.tb20210692
[23]	莫绍星, 龙星皎, 李瀛, 等. 基于TOUGHREACT-MP的苏北盆地盐城组咸水层CO₂矿物封存数值模拟[J]. 吉林大学学报(地球科学版), 2014, 44(5): 1647-1658. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CCDZ201405025.htm MO S X, LONG X J, LI Y, et al. Numerical modeling of CO₂ sequestration in the saline aquifer of Yancheng Formation in Subei Basin using TOUGHREACT-MP[J]. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition), 2014, 44(5): 1647-1658. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CCDZ201405025.htm
[24]	BU F, XU T, WANG F, et al. Influence of highly permeable faults within a low-porosity and low-permeability reservoir on migration and storage of injected CO₂[J]. Geofluids, 2016, 16(4): 769-781.
[25]	MUKHOPADHYAY S, DOUGHTY C A, BACON D H, et al. Preliminary model comparison results from the Sim-SEQ project using TOUGH2, STOMP, Eclipse, and VESA approach[R]. Richland, WA, United States: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 2013.
[26]	SPYCHER N, PRUESS K. CO₂-H₂O mixtures in the geological sequestration of CO₂: Ⅱ. Partitioning in chloride brines at 12-100 ℃ and up to 600 bar[J]. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 2005, 69(13): 3309-3320.
[27]	王福刚, 郭兵, 杨永智, 等. 中高渗倾斜地层与水平地层中CO₂地质封存的差异性对比[J]. 地球科学与环境学报, 2020, 42(2): 246-255. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XAGX202002009.htm WANG F G, GUO B, YANG Y Z, et al. Comparison on the difference of CO₂ geological storage between sloping and horizontal strata with mid-high permeability[J]. Journal of Earth Sciences and Environment, 2020, 42(2): 246-255. (in Chinese with English abstract) https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XAGX202002009.htm
[28]	JING J, YANG Y L, TANG Z H, et al. Impacts of salinity on CO₂ spatial distribution and storage amount in the formation with different dip angles[J]. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 2019, 26(22): 22173-22188.
[29]	JING J, TANG Z H, YANG Y L, et al. Impact of formation slope and fault on CO₂ storage efficiency and containment at the Shenhua CO₂ geological storage site in the Ordos Basin, China[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2019, 88: 209-225.