IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/greenh/v13y2023i1p99-119.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing a potential site for offshore CO2 storage in the Weixinan Sag in the northwestern Beibu Gulf Basin, northern South China Sea

Author

Listed:
  • Jian Xie
  • Xiaofeng Gou
  • Jian Guo

Abstract

Geologic carbon storage (GCS) activities, especially offshore, are still far insufficient worldwide. Sedimentary basins in the northern South China Sea (nSCS) are identified to be favorable to offshore GCS deployment. This study investigates by numerical reservoir simulations the performance of the Weixinan Sag in the northern depression of the Beibu Gulf Basin (BGB), which is considered the most promising area for CO2 offshore GCS in saline formations. Simulations of CO2 injection at a potential site with a normal fault indicate that the pressure buildup induced by CO2 horizontal injection could penetrate extremely low‐permeability faults or caprock formations. The CO2 plumes under higher injection pressures are more constrained in the horizontal direction and hence appear thicker while CO2 tends to spread out horizontally in conditions of low pressure. The impermeable fault renders the CO2 plume about 200 m smaller in size horizontally. Assuming the presence of a fault with a highly permeable core causes leakage to occur after about 30 years of injection, which accounts for only 0.04% the injected amount. For the vertical‐well injection case, the potential CO2 leakage only accounts for around 0.28% of the injection amount, which is far less than the criterion (i.e., 2%) required to make GCS worthwhile. The storage capacities of the formations are mainly controlled by the depths and thicknesses since both their porosities and permeabilities are comparable. The formation Jiaowei‐2 and Xiayang have the largest and second largest storage capacities, respectively, when using a fully perforated well for vertical injection. The average storage capacity of the studied site is 13.04 kg m−3, which is comparable to that of the formation Xiayang. Average injectivities of formations Jiaowei‐2, Xiayang, Weizhou‐1, and Weizhou‐3 are 8.29 × 10−5, 1.75 × 10−4, 6.58 × 10−5, and 2.99 × 10−3 kg s−1 Pa−1, respectively. © 2022 The Authors. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology published by Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Jian Xie & Xiaofeng Gou & Jian Guo, 2023. "Assessing a potential site for offshore CO2 storage in the Weixinan Sag in the northwestern Beibu Gulf Basin, northern South China Sea," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 13(1), pages 99-119, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:greenh:v:13:y:2023:i:1:p:99-119
    DOI: 10.1002/ghg.2199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.2199
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ghg.2199?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bob van der Zwaan & Reyer Gerlagh, 2008. "The Economics of Geological CO2 Storage and Leakage," Working Papers 2008.10, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Narita, Daiju & Klepper, Gernot, 2015. "Economic incentives for carbon dioxide storage under uncertainty: A real options analysis," Kiel Working Papers 2002, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    2. García, Jorge H. & Torvanger, Asbjørn, 2019. "Carbon leakage from geological storage sites: Implications for carbon trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 320-329.
    3. Grimaud, André & Rouge, Luc, 2014. "Carbon sequestration, economic policies and growth," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 307-331.
    4. Claire Alestra & Gilbert Cette & Valérie Chouard & Rémy Lecat, 2024. "How can technology significantly contribute to climate change mitigation?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(41), pages 4925-4937, September.
    5. Sebastiano Cupertino, 2013. "Cost-benefit analysis of carbon dioxide capture and storage considering the impact of two different climate change mitigation regimes," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 73-89.
    6. Nikolaos Koukouzas & Marina Christopoulou & Panagiota P. Giannakopoulou & Aikaterini Rogkala & Eleni Gianni & Christos Karkalis & Konstantina Pyrgaki & Pavlos Krassakis & Petros Koutsovitis & Dionisio, 2022. "Current CO 2 Capture and Storage Trends in Europe in a View of Social Knowledge and Acceptance. A Short Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-30, August.
    7. Soren Lindner & Sonja Peterson & Wilhelm Windhorst, 2010. "An economic and environmental assessment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) power plants: a case study for the City of Kiel," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(8), pages 1069-1088.
    8. Bob van der Zwaan & Reyer Gerlagh, 2016. "Offshore CCS and ocean acidification: a global long-term probabilistic cost-benefit analysis of climate change mitigation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 157-170, July.
    9. Wei Jin & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2018. "Capital Accumulation, Green Paradox, and Stranded Assets: An Endogenous Growth Perspective," Working Papers 2018.33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    10. Schmidt, Johannes & Leduc, Sylvain & Dotzauer, Erik & Kindermann, Georg & Schmid, Erwin, 2010. "Cost-effective CO2 emission reduction through heat, power and biofuel production from woody biomass: A spatially explicit comparison of conversion technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(7), pages 2128-2141, July.
    11. Lilliestam, Johan & Bielicki, Jeffrey M. & Patt, Anthony G., 2012. "Comparing carbon capture and storage (CCS) with concentrating solar power (CSP): Potentials, costs, risks, and barriers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 447-455.
    12. Alain Jean-Marie & Michel Moreaux & Mabel Tidball, 2011. "Carbon sequestration in leaky reservoirs," Post-Print hal-00863230, HAL.
    13. Matthias Kalkuhl & Ottmar Edenhofer & Kai Lessmann, 2015. "The Role of Carbon Capture and Sequestration Policies for Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(1), pages 55-80, January.
    14. Sreenivasulu, B. & Gayatri, D.V. & Sreedhar, I. & Raghavan, K.V., 2015. "A journey into the process and engineering aspects of carbon capture technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1324-1350.
    15. Hang Deng & Jeffrey M. Bielicki & Michael Oppenheimer & Jeffrey P. Fitts & Catherine A. Peters, 2017. "Leakage risks of geologic CO2 storage and the impacts on the global energy system and climate change mitigation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 151-163, September.
    16. van der Zwaan, Bob & Keppo, Ilkka & Johnsson, Filip, 2013. "How to decarbonize the transport sector?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 562-573.
    17. Kern, Florian & Gaede, James & Meadowcroft, James & Watson, Jim, 2016. "The political economy of carbon capture and storage: An analysis of two demonstration projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 250-260.
    18. Schmidt, Johannes & Leduc, Sylvain & Dotzauer, Erik & Schmid, Erwin, 2011. "Cost-effective policy instruments for greenhouse gas emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution through bioenergy production in Austria," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3261-3280, June.
    19. Nadine Heitmann & Christine Bertram & Daiju Narita, 2012. "Embedding CCS infrastructure into the European electricity system: a policy coordination problem," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 669-686, August.
    20. Derek Lemoine & Sabine Fuss & Jana Szolgayova & Michael Obersteiner & Daniel Kammen, 2012. "The influence of negative emission technologies and technology policies on the optimal climate mitigation portfolio," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 141-162, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:greenh:v:13:y:2023:i:1:p:99-119. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2152-3878 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.