English
 
Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONS
  This item is discarded!DetailsSummary

Discarded

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)
There are no public fulltexts stored in GFZpublic
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


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.