Uncertainties in practical simulation of CO2 storage

Nordbotten, J. M.; Flemisch, B.; Gasda, S. E.; Nilsen, H. M.; Fan, Y.; Pickup, G. E.; Wiese, Bernd; Celia, M. A.; Dahle, H. K.; Eigestad, G. T.; Pruess, K.

doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.03.007

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT

Zur Ablage hinzufügen

Lokale TagsFreigabegeschichteDetailsÜbersicht

Freigegeben

Zeitschriftenartikel

Uncertainties in practical simulation of CO2 storage

Urheber*innen

Nordbotten, J. M.
External Organizations;

Flemisch, B.
External Organizations;

Gasda, S. E.
External Organizations;

Nilsen, H. M.
External Organizations;

Fan, Y.
External Organizations;

Pickup, G. E.
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/wiese

Wiese, Bernd
CGS Centre for Geological Storage, Geoengineering Centres, GFZ Publication Database, Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum;

Celia, M. A.
External Organizations;

Dahle, H. K.
External Organizations;

Eigestad, G. T.
External Organizations;

Pruess, K.
External Organizations;

Externe Ressourcen

Es sind keine externen Ressourcen hinterlegt

Volltexte (frei zugänglich)

Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Volltexte in GFZpublic verfügbar

Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)

Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar

Zitation

Nordbotten, J. M., Flemisch, B., Gasda, S. E., Nilsen, H. M., Fan, Y., Pickup, G. E., Wiese, B., Celia, M. A., Dahle, H. K., Eigestad, G. T., Pruess, K. (2012): Uncertainties in practical simulation of CO2 storage. - International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 9, 234-242.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.03.007

https://gfzpublic.gfz-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_247539

Zusammenfassung

Practical simulation of CO2 storage in geological formations inherently involves decisions concerning relevant physics, upscaling, and numerical modeling. These decisions are unavoidable, since the full problem cannot be resolved by existing numerical approaches. Here, we report on the impact of three distinct approaches to make the problem computationally tractable: reduced physics, upscaling, and non-converged discretizations. Compounding these different strategies, we have used a benchmark study to try to assess the impact of an expert group on the results of the numerical simulations. In order to restrict the scope of the investigation, the geometric and geological description of the storage aquifer was simplified to the greatest extent possible. The different strategies applied to simplify the problem, lead to significantly deviating answers when addressing relevant storage questions. Furthermore, there is room for interpretation when complex simulation results are simplified to the type of higher-level information sought in decision making processes. Our experience leads us to conclude that, important questions relating to CO2 storage cannot be predicted convincingly to satisfactory accuracy with numerical simulation tools, even for highly idealized problems. This emphasizes the need for real-time monitoring and history matching during injection operations.