English
 
Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
Add to Basket
  Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released
Journal Article

From Pilot to Demo Scale – Comparing Ketzin results with the Illinois Basin-decatur Project

Authors
/persons/resource/streibel

Streibel,  M.
CGS Centre for Geological Storage, Geoengineering Centres, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

Finley,  Robert J.
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/martens

Martens,  S.
CGS Centre for Geological Storage, Geoengineering Centres, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

Greenberg,  Sallie
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/cgstech

Moeller,  F.
CGS Centre for Geological Storage, Geoengineering Centres, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

/persons/resource/alieb

Liebscher,  A.
CGS Centre for Geological Storage, Geoengineering Centres, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

External Ressource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (public)

838900.pdf
(Publisher version), 2MB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Streibel, M., Finley, R. J., Martens, S., Greenberg, S., Moeller, F., Liebscher, A. (2014): From Pilot to Demo Scale – Comparing Ketzin results with the Illinois Basin-decatur Project. - Energy Procedia, 63, 6323-6334.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.665


Cite as: https://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_838900
Abstract
The Ketzin pilot site and the Illinois Basin-Decatur Project (IBDP) are examples for successful onshore CO2 storage projects. Both projects aim to demonstrate the safe operation and efficient handling of CO2 storage in saline reservoirs representing different types of fluvial depositional systems and different reservoir pressure-temperature conditions. Major operational differences between both projects are the injection rates and the total amount of CO2 stored which will be about 15 times larger in the IBDP reservoir. This paper compares the operational settings and respective results of both projects and highlights similarities and differences which we consider to be important for large scale implementation of CO2 storage in such reservoirs.