Next Article in Journal
Study on Thermal Chamber Expansion of VH-SAGD Process Using CO2-Inducing Effect for Heavy Oil Reservoirs
Next Article in Special Issue
Numerical Simulation of the Coal Measure Gas Accumulation Process in Well Z-7 in Qinshui Basin
Previous Article in Journal
Opportunities and Constraints of the Adsorption of Rare Earth Elements onto Pyrolytic Carbon-Based Materials: A Mini-Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Oolitic Sedimentary Characteristics of the Upper Paleozoic Bauxite Series in the Eastern Ordos Basin and Its Significance for Oil and Gas Reservoirs
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Geophysical Monitoring Technologies for the Entire Life Cycle of CO2 Geological Sequestration

1
Department of Geology, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China
2
School of Carbon Neutrality, Northwest University, Xi’an 710069, China
3
National Local Joint Engineering Research Center for Carbon Capture and Storage, Xi’an 710069, China
4
Shaanxi Provincial Key Laboratory of Carbon Neutrality Technology, Xi’an 710069, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Processes 2024, 12(10), 2258; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12102258
Submission received: 6 October 2024 / Revised: 12 October 2024 / Accepted: 14 October 2024 / Published: 16 October 2024

Abstract

:
Geophysical monitoring of CO2 geological sequestration represents a critical technology for ensuring the long-term safe storage of CO2 while verifying its characteristics and dynamic changes. Currently, the primary geophysical monitoring methods employed in CO2 geological sequestration include seismic, fiber optic, and logging technologies. Among these methods, seismic monitoring techniques encompass high-resolution P-Cable three-dimensional seismic systems, delayed vertical seismic profiling technology, and four-dimensional distributed acoustic sensing (DAS). These methods are utilized to monitor interlayer strain induced by CO2 injection, thereby indirectly determining the injection volume, distribution range, and potential diffusion pathways of the CO2 plume. In contrast, fiber optic monitoring primarily involves distributed fiber optic sensing (DFOS), which can be further classified into distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) and distributed temperature sensing (DTS). This technology serves to complement seismic monitoring in observing interlayer strain resulting from CO2 injection. The logging techniques utilized for monitoring CO2 geological sequestration include neutron logging methods, such as thermal neutron imaging and pulsed neutron gamma-ray spectroscopy, which are primarily employed to assess the sequestration volume and state of CO2 plumes within a reservoir. Seismic monitoring technology provides a broader monitoring scale (ranging from dozens of meters to kilometers), while logging techniques operate at centimeter to meter scales; however, their results can be significantly affected by the heterogeneity of a reservoir.

1. Introduction

China has established the objectives of achieving carbon peak and carbon neutrality, with a target to reach the peak of carbon emissions by 2030 and to strive for carbon neutrality by 2060. This initiative has garnered significant attention from both domestic and international communities [1]. As one of the critical technological means for attaining carbon neutrality, carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technology is considered a pivotal approach in this endeavor [2]. In recent years, there have been notable shifts in global climate change dynamics and policies, leading to an emergence of new technologies within CCUS that exhibit increasing diversity, decreasing energy consumption costs, enhanced technical sophistication, and broader application scopes; its connotation and extension have also been further enriched and expanded [3]. Serving as a vital measure for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and addressing global climate change challenges, CO2 geological sequestration represents China’s primary strategy for CO2 emission reduction [4]. With the advancement of industrial policies coupled with favorable conditions, China is experiencing a surge in large-scale CCUS demonstration project development. These projects primarily focus on geological utilization and sequestration while being predominantly employed for enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) [5,6] and coalbed methane displacement (CO2-ECBM), as well as brine layer sequestration [7].
While the prospects for CCUS are promising, the risk of leakage following geological sequestration of CO2 and the associated monitoring methods remain significant challenges. Currently, it is believed that the primary causes of CO2 leakage stem from compromised well integrity and seal integrity [8]. Monitoring CO2 geological sequestration not only facilitates the assessment of leakage risks but also serves to verify and confirm dynamic changes post-CO2 injection, as well as ensure consistency between injected volumes, actual sequestration volumes, and their respective locations relative to expected parameters. The geophysical monitoring techniques employed in CO2 geological sequestration encompass time-lapse seismic imaging, fiber optic technology, thermal neutron logging, and nuclear magnetic resonance, among others. In terms of monitoring effectiveness for CO2 geological sequestration, Zhang et al., Sun et al., and Massarweh et al. have provided comprehensive summaries on seismic logging technology [9], distributed fiber technology [10], and laboratory-scale studies [11]. By synthesizing recent advancements in seismic monitoring technologies, fiber optic monitoring technologies, and logging methodologies while analyzing their respective characteristics, various geophysical monitoring approaches can be integrated throughout the entire life cycle of CO2 geological sequestration to address limitations inherent in individual detection methods, ultimately achieving a goal of comprehensive and continuous regulatory oversight regarding both the characteristics and dynamic changes associated with CO2 geological sequestration.

2. Geophysical Monitoring Approaches for CO2 Sequestration

2.1. Rock Physics Simulation Experiments

Rock physics simulation experiments play a crucial role in calibrating the rock properties of the target reservoir and developing a comprehensive reservoir property map. They hold significant importance throughout the entire life cycle of CO2 geological sequestration monitoring. Currently, efforts in rock physics simulation primarily concentrate on replicating the geochemical indicators of the actual reservoir before and during CO2 injection, utilizing core samples collected from the target reservoir to investigate the CO2–water–rock interactions and capture corresponding dynamic changes in physical property parameters as well as variations in mineral composition. Consequently, these experiments can indirectly assess the actual volume of CO2 sequestered within core samples during the mineralization phase using instruments such as scanning electron microscopes, X-ray computed tomography (CT), and mass spectrometers. The fundamental experimental principles and procedures are illustrated in Figure 1.
Wang et al. conducted an experimental analysis (Figure 1a) to investigate the changes in the mineral composition and chemical properties of rocks following CO2 injection into coal seams. This experimental device is well-suited for experimental evaluation under standard temperature and pressure conditions to simulate the rock’s physical parameters during low-temperature and low-pressure phases in a CO2 storage reservoir [12]. The results indicate that silicate minerals within the coal seam roof are transformed into smectite and illite due to dissolution processes, while carbonate minerals in calcareous shale primarily result from precipitation. Han et al. [13] and Cui et al. [14] used a high-temperature and high-pressure desorption adsorption device to determine the optimal CO2 injection depth for each layer using the linear relationship between adsorption parameters and temperature, as well as a fixed drop method. They revealed that the adsorption capacity reached its peak at a depth of approximately 1000 m (Figure 1b). Additionally, researchers simulated alterations in saline water chemistry resulting from CO2–water–rock interactions (Figure 1c) during continuous CO2 injection, observing significant increases in concentrations of HCO3 and Ca2+ when utilizing sandstone reservoirs and shale caprocks as sequestration sites [15]. The CO2–water–rock reaction significantly influences the wetting properties, microscopic pore structure, and mobile fluid saturation of the reservoir. Alkali feldspars, including potassium feldspar, calcite, and aluminum silicate minerals, undergo dissolution to create micron-sized dissolution pores and micro-fractures; concurrently, calcite experiences recrystallization [16,17]. The wetting characteristics of the reservoir shift from oil-wet/neutral wet to strong water-wet; newly formed precipitation particles lead to partial blockage of throat radii, consequently reducing the mobile fluid saturation governed by these throats. Furthermore, a higher concentration of alkali feldspars (e.g., potassium feldspars) within the core correlates with an intensified CO2–water–rock reaction that enhances the microscopic heterogeneity of the reservoir while diminishing mobile fluid saturation [18,19]. Following their release into fractures, CO2-rich fluids migrate into the overlying shale caprock, where calcite veins gradually precipitate within these fractures. This process augments both the cementation and sealing effects associated with calcite precipitation in fractures, thereby improving the sealing capacity of the overlying caprock [20].
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of a common CO2 water rock reaction device. (a) Modified by Wang et al., 2016 [12]. (b) According to Cui et al.’s revision, 2024 [14]. (c) Modified by Liu et al., 2019 [15].
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of a common CO2 water rock reaction device. (a) Modified by Wang et al., 2016 [12]. (b) According to Cui et al.’s revision, 2024 [14]. (c) Modified by Liu et al., 2019 [15].
Processes 12 02258 g001
CO2–water–rock reactions can significantly modify the chemical composition, mineralogy, porosity, permeability, and wetting properties of both the reservoir and cap rock. Silicate minerals undergo dissolution processes, while carbonate minerals precipitate; this dissolution of silicate minerals generates clay minerals, such as illite and smectite, which further diminish the porosity of the cap rock and enhance the safety of CO2 geological sequestration. Furthermore, CO2–water–rock interactions can induce alterations in the composition and structure of carbonate rocks, increasing their hydrophilicity along with their porosity and permeability. Basalt reacts with CO2 to form carbonate minerals that continue to interact with CO2-saturated water solutions; this ongoing reaction increases both the porosity and permeability of the reservoir but may compromise sequestration safety. Consequently, a comprehensive study on seal integrity is essential, considering factors such as actual reservoir-cap rock combinations as well as lithology and post-diagenesis mechanisms associated with faults and fractures. In contrast, sandstone presents a more favorable choice for reservoirs in CO2 geological sequestration; its integrity alongside mineralized sequestration can be effectively monitored through rock physics simulation experiments. Based on these findings, sites for CO2 geological sequestration and geophysical monitoring primarily focus on sandstone and shale formations.
Rock physics simulation experiments can effectively monitor the integrity of wellbores at a laboratory scale, providing valuable references for assessing the integrity of existing wells and selecting materials for new constructions (Typical apparatus is illustrated in Figure 2). The study conducted by Condor et al. clearly demonstrates that under sulfate and CO2 environments, both the permeability and compressive strength of the cement ring within the annulus will diminish, highlighting that the gap between the cement and casing may represent the most probable pathway for CO2 leakage in wellbores [21].
Mito et al. conducted an experiment to assess the impact of CO2 alteration on wellbore integrity. By analyzing the reaction rates in experiments involving water vapor-saturated CO2 and saturated CO2 brine, the authors estimated that the corrosion depths of the steel casing would be 4.6 mm and 2.1 mm over a period of 30 years, respectively [22]. Vecchia et al. simulated the effects of injected CO2 on the formation of corrosion layers on steel pipes using microscopy techniques and scanning electron energy-dispersive spectroscopy [23]. The results indicated that CO2-rich brine initially interacted with the surface of the steel pipe, leading to the leaching of Fe2+ ions into solution and subsequent precipitation of FeCO3 on its surface. As degradation progressed, Fe2+ began migrating into the cement structure, thereby impacting both the self-healing capabilities and pore-blocking characteristics of the material. Concurrently, Ca2+ started forming mixed carbonates (FexCayCO3), resulting in a corrosion film that further influenced the protective efficiency against corrosion layer deterioration. Ultimately, localized accumulation of Ca2+ and Fe2+; near materials may lead to CaCO3 formation on corrosion layers as well as the precipitation of FeCO3 within cement matrices.
Figure 2. Common wellbore integrity laboratory monitoring device (modified by Mamoudou et al., 2024 [24]).
Figure 2. Common wellbore integrity laboratory monitoring device (modified by Mamoudou et al., 2024 [24]).
Processes 12 02258 g002
Mamoudou et al. conducted an experimental (Figure 2) investigation into the reactivity of G-grade cement with supercritical CO2, detailing the process of pore volume changes in cement subjected to a supercritical CO2 environment [24]. The results indicated that after 2 weeks, the peak pore throat size decreased from 50 nm to 30 nm, signifying a reduction in pore throat dimensions and demonstrating that the carbonation process led to a decrease in the effective pore volume of the cement. However, after 5 weeks, there was a significant reduction in the number of pore throats averaging 30 nm in diameter, resulting in smaller pore throats forming within the range of 2–30 nm. This suggests that both dissolution and precipitation occur concurrently in larger pores, while dissolution is predominant solely within smaller pores.
The CO2–water–cement/pipe experiment not only allows for the assessment of old wellbore integrity at a laboratory scale but also serves as an effective method for evaluating cement performance and facilitating timely improvements prior to the solidification of new wellbores, thereby significantly reducing the challenges associated with subsequent wellbore integrity monitoring. This experiment can effectively simulate real-world conditions and provide critical data on material interactions under varying circumstances. In terms of old wellbores, conducting a systematic analysis of existing structures and materials enables the identification of potential weaknesses and defects. Such preliminary assessments not only enhance safety but also offer a scientific basis for future maintenance efforts. For new wellbores, performing cement performance evaluations before solidification ensures that selected materials meet specific geological requirements, thus optimizing construction strategies.
In rock physics simulation experiments for CO2 geological sequestration, several technical challenges must be addressed: A. Due to reservoir heterogeneity, the experimental environment cannot fully replicate the parameters found in actual formations, leading to discrepancies between experimental results and those observed in real reservoirs as a result of environmental parameter variations. B. Rock physics simulation experiments can only capture the CO2 sequestration state and volume of core samples at specific time points. Therefore, it is essential to integrate geophysical monitoring technologies for multi-scale matching to facilitate effective scaling from laboratory conditions to field applications.

2.2. Seismic Techniques

Researchers are focused on developing seismic acquisition systems that offer higher resolution, enhanced deplorability, and superior imaging quality [25]. High-resolution seismic acquisition systems can be more effectively integrated with CO2 fluid migration modeling studies. The prevalent seismic monitoring technologies include 3D and 4D seismic methods. Compared with 2D seismic technology, 3D seismic technology is more advantageous in capturing the three-dimensional characteristics of rock formations, but it has limitations in monitoring the spatial and temporal distribution of CO2. In contrast, 4D seismic technology involves repeating the same 3D method multiple times at a fixed location over different time intervals, making it an essential tool for dynamic reservoir characterization and monitoring. Additionally, it serves as an effective physical monitoring approach for CO2 geological sequestration due to its higher resolution compared to 3D techniques and its capability for real-time tracking of CO2 variations over time. Nevertheless, the duration required for conducting 4D monitoring tends to be relatively longer.
Huh et al. [26] and Luth et al. [27] employed four-dimensional seismic and two-dimensional/three-dimensional multi-channel reflection seismic techniques to investigate the storage capacity, spatial distribution, and migration pathways of CO2. These studies utilized high-precision imaging technologies to effectively capture dynamic changes in subsurface structures, thereby providing critical insights for assessing CO2 behavior across various reservoirs. Four-dimensional seismic monitoring is particularly well-suited for long-term tracking of fluid evolution within a reservoir post-injection, thus offering valuable data support for optimizing injection strategies. Wang et al. [28], Luo et al. [29], and Diao et al. [30] integrated the well log forward model with the Hertz–Mindlin equation and the Gassmann equation to predict the migration pathways and distribution areas of CO2, as well as its sources and plume diffusion patterns. This comprehensive approach facilitates a more accurate simulation of how different rock types influence CO2 migration characteristics while elucidating its behavior in complex geological environments. Furthermore, the model effectively identifies potential leakage points, thereby enhancing overall sequestration safety. Wang et al. employed the time-migrated seismic differential analysis method alongside the time-migrated amplitude versus offset (AVO) forward and inverse techniques to quantitatively predict gas saturation and reservoir pressure differentials resulting from CO2 injection [31]. This approach effectively identifies changes in subsurface media induced by CO2 injection through a comparative analysis of seismic data at various temporal intervals. Specifically, the time-migrated seismic differential analysis elucidates the heterogeneous distribution of fluids within the reservoir, while the time-migrated amplitude variation with offset (AVO) forward and inverse techniques yield additional insights into fluid properties, thereby providing a scientific basis for assessing sequestration efficacy. Waage et al. distinctly delineated the changes in saturation and leakage rates during the CO2 injection and sequestration process through a comparative analysis of 3D P-Cable and conventional 3D seismic systems [32]. Leveraging its high-resolution imaging capabilities, the 3D P-Cable system allows researchers to monitor the dynamic behavior of CO2 within the reservoir with enhanced precision across various stages. This comparison not only highlights the advantages of novel monitoring technologies in practical applications but also serves as an effective complement to traditional methods, thereby contributing to improved overall monitoring efficiency.
Seismic monitoring of CO2 geological sequestration primarily focuses on geological strain induced by CO2 injection, encompassing key aspects such as the distribution range and potential diffusion pathways of injected CO2 plumes, along with indirect assessments of CO2 saturation within pore spaces, thus addressing both structural sequestration and residual sequestration phases.

2.3. Fiber Optic Technology

The advantages of fiber optic technology for CO2 geological sequestration monitoring include low loss, a wide dynamic range, non-electrical operation, compact size, lightweight design, flexibility in bending, and robust resistance to electromagnetic interference and radiation. Fiber optic technology has found extensive application in CO2 geological sequestration monitoring. Currently, the predominant fiber optic technique employed for this purpose is distributed fiber optic sensing (DFOS). In comparison to traditional fiber optic sensing methods, DFOS offers benefits such as extended detection range, high pressure and temperature tolerance, multiplexing capabilities, and intelligent sensing features. Commercial DFOS systems primarily assess the effectiveness of CO2 sequestration by monitoring formation strain through techniques, including distributed temperature sensing (DTS), distributed acoustic sensing (DAS), and distributed strain sensing (DFOSS). Among these technologies, DAS specifically targets vibrations induced by CO2 injection; it is compact with strong networking capabilities but suffers from limited radial resolution and requires installation during drilling operations, rendering it unsuitable for existing well infrastructure. Conversely, DTS concentrates on measuring the depth and arrival of CO2 entering the reservoir via injection well perforations; while it boasts a high resolution, its efficacy often necessitates integration with other fiber optic monitoring technologies. Distributed fiber optic strain sensing (DFOSS) is dedicated to monitoring the distribution of strain responses induced by CO2 injection, facilitating the advancement of fiber optic monitoring technology from laboratory scale to carbon capture and storage (CCS) storage site applications. Nevertheless, it still faces challenges regarding resolution and accuracy.
It is evident that individual distributed temperature sensing (DTS), distributed acoustic sensing (DAS), and distributed fiber optic strain sensing (DFOSS), along with other fiber optic monitoring technologies, exhibit significant limitations in CO2 geological sequestration monitoring, particularly regarding resolution and accuracy. Consequently, multiple fiber optic monitoring techniques are typically employed concurrently or integrated with seismic monitoring and logging methods, demonstrating widespread application across numerous CO2 geological sequestration projects. Furthermore, due to the inherent characteristics of fiber optics, this technology cannot directly assess the dissolution saturation of CO2 in brine; rather, it is primarily utilized for tracking the dynamic movement of CO2 plumes. As such, fiber optic monitoring technology is predominantly applied to monitor structural and residual sequestration.
Distributed fiber optic sensing (DFOS) has found extensive application in the dynamic monitoring of oil and gas fields. In casing leakage detection, DTS or DAS data from the entire well section are collected during the pumping fluid state and following the cessation of injection recovery. The changes in temperature fields within the wellbore are analyzed based on axial and radial thermal dynamics principles. When anomalies in well temperature or abnormal recovery speeds are observed, it can be inferred that a leakage point exists within the well. Furthermore, the demodulation of vibration event signals allows the identification of abnormal points, which may also indicate potential leakage sites [33]. In CO2 geological sequestration monitoring, insights gained from dynamic monitoring practices in oil and gas fields can be leveraged to assess the integrity of CO2 injection wells using distributed fiber optic sensing technology.
Mawalkar et al. investigated the dynamics of CO2 plume movement by integrating distributed temperature sensing (DTS) technology with formation pressure, gas saturation, and cable temperature logging. The findings indicated that this method effectively monitors the position of the CO2 injection front, revealing that most injected CO2 entered two target formations without vertically migrating to other formations along the casing [34]. Yao et al. introduced a Pareto-based multi-objective genetic algorithm (MOGA), which integrates an extended flowline inversion algorithm to establish local historical matches for achieving layered historical matching of CO2 plumes during injection processes [35]. Pevzner et al. successfully combined distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) with four-dimensional vertical seismic profiling (4D VSP) monitoring technology to assess both the dynamic state and imaging of CO2 plumes [36]. Additionally, by employing continuous seismic acquisition through multi-well DAS systems, they expanded the bandwidth required for data transmission, thereby mitigating delays between data acquisition and processing results in seismic monitoring applications. Li et al. employed distributed acoustic sensing (DAS), vertical seismic profiling (VSP), and an integrated approach utilizing synthetic aperture radar interferometry (InSAR) to investigate the dynamics of CO2 gas plumes within coal seams. Subsequently, by leveraging InSAR technology from remote sensing satellites to monitor surface deformation, the direction of CO2 migration was ascertained, with the results verified bidirectionally using a time-shifted DAS-VSP system [37]. Xu et al. utilized distributed fiber optic strain sensing (DFOSS) technology to assess the flow behavior of CO2 in tight sandstone reservoirs [38]. The study revealed that the peak strain response consistently occurred at the CO2 injection point, exhibiting gradient attenuation in alignment with fluid movement direction. Therefore, distributed fiber optic strain sensing technology can effectively monitor the position of the CO2 front and evaluate its velocity based on the time difference between when CO2 passes through monitoring points and when it flows into those points.

2.4. Well-Logging Technology

Among various logging techniques, neutron logging is extensively utilized for monitoring geological CO2 sequestration. Research on the initial two monitoring methods indicates that most seismic and fiber optic monitoring technologies and equipment compare their results with neutron logging data throughout the monitoring process. Consequently, neutron logging assumes an indispensable role in CO2 sequestration monitoring. Currently, the primary neutron logging techniques employed for CO2 monitoring include delayed pulse neutron logging (PNL) and radioactive pulse neutron–gamma logging (PNG).
Baumann et al. applied the pulse neutron–gamma logging technique (PNG) to ascertain the saturation profiles of wells Ktzi201, Ktzi200, and Ktzi202 within Germany’s Ketzin project based on PNG data acquired during the CO2 injection phase. The findings reveal that the CO2 saturation at well Ktzi201 (SCO2 > 68%) exceeds that of well Ktzi200 (SCO2 > 60%) and well Ktzi202 (SCO2 < 60%); furthermore, there is a gradual decrease in CO2 saturation from Ktzi201 to both Ktzi200 and Ktzi202 [39]. Braunberger et al. employed delayed pulse neutron logging (PNL) and observed that the variation in CO2 saturation within the reservoir’s middle section was significantly greater than that at the top and bottom sections. By integrating delayed pulse neutron logging with neutron capture cross-section logging (sigma logs) and carbon–oxygen ratio logging, a more accurate determination of CO2 distribution after its entry into the reservoir can be achieved [40]. Song et al. validated the applicability of an approximate calculation formula for CO2 saturation in reservoirs with low CH4 saturation through simulation examples. The findings indicate that a precise calculation formula can limit the error in CO2 saturation calculations to within 2%, excluding considerations for CH4 saturation [41]. Conner et al. introduced a gamma ray capture ratio between short-interval detectors and ultra-long-interval detectors (RATO13), which, when combined with Sigma analysis, effectively identifies saturations of CO2, water, and oil. The introduction of RATO13 addresses the limitation inherent in using Sigma analysis alone, which only allows for the identification of water and oil saturations [42]. Additionally, a non-elastic gamma ray count rate ratio (RIN13) was proposed; when salt plugs form within reservoir pores, RATO13 experiences a sharp increase, while RIN13 decreases; this characteristic serves as an indicator for identifying salt-cemented layers within target reservoirs.
Well-logging technology, particularly neutron logging, has been extensively utilized in CO2 monitoring, serving not only to track the movement of CO2 plumes but also to assess CO2 saturation levels. It is evident that well logging primarily focuses on the monitoring of geological CO2 sequestration, specifically addressing structural sequestration, residual sequestration, and dissolution sequestration. However, given the substantial influence of reservoir heterogeneity on well-logging accuracy, it is imperative to integrate other monitoring technologies to achieve a comprehensive life-cycle assessment of the characteristics and dynamic changes associated with geological CO2 sequestration.
Well-logging monitoring technology plays a crucial role in the dynamic assessment of wellbore integrity at the site scale and has been extensively utilized. Hawkes et al. [43], Nakajima et al. [44], and Duguid et al. [45] conducted evaluations of wellbore integrity using reservoir saturation logging (RST) and cement bond logging techniques. Specifically, Hawkes et al. employed acoustic and electromagnetic logging to assess the integrity of uncased wells, with monitoring results indicating that the overall condition of the casing was satisfactory. The findings from reservoir saturation logging (RST) revealed no presence of CO2 outside the casing, thereby confirming that the annular space beneath the liner provided effective inter-layer isolation. Nakajima et al., through a combination of delayed ultrasonic logging and cement bond logging, demonstrated that there was no significant damage or deformation to the casing nor any notable changes in the cement state. Building on this foundation, Duguid et al. applied X-ray diffraction analysis to investigate the composition of cement samples collected from depths ranging from 2135.43 m to 3012.64 m and at 3026.51 m. They concluded that either a sufficiently low CO2 concentration or slow migration rate along the well resulted in calcite formation within these cement samples, indicating complete carbonation of the cement phase.
In summary, the characteristics of CO2 geological sequestration monitoring using seismic, fiber optic, and logging technologies are as follows:
A.
Seismic monitoring can simultaneously track CO2 plume injection across multiple wells along with its distribution range and diffusion path. While it has extensive capabilities, it cannot accurately measure the CO2 injection for individual wells;
B.
Logging technology covers the wellbore and surrounding area to detect CO2 concentration and plume distribution in nearby formations around a single well. It is suitable for evaluating sequestration volumes—residual and dissolution—and wellbore integrity; however, its results may be affected by strong reservoir heterogeneity;
C.
Fiber optic monitoring also encompasses the wellbore and adjacent areas by tracking real-time temperature and pressure changes due to CO2 injection to determine the injection volume and potential diffusion paths. This technology enhances the detection of wellbore integrity but is primarily used for assessing structural and residual sequestration volumes while being less effective for detecting dissolution or mineralization sequestration.

3. Integration of Geophysical Techniques and Machine Learning Algorithms

As CO2 sequestration monitoring progresses, the volume of collected data is increasing, with seismic, fiber optic, and well-logging technologies yielding exponential growth in data. In this context, machine learning algorithms have shown unique advantages by processing large datasets quickly and significantly improving efficiency. After years of research, these algorithms are now widely applied in CO2 geological sequestration.
Li et al. used a fully convolutional neural network (FCN) to predict carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration based on time-migrated differential seismic data, with its prediction accuracy increasing as the CO2 injection rate varied [46]. Leong et al. predicted the location and saturation of the CO2 plume during sequestration using seismic inversion data and compared SeisCO2Net’s saturation map with physical model inversion results, revealing similar shapes, features, and saturation values for the CO2 plume [47]. Sheng et al. achieved an accuracy of 95.8% in predicting the CO2 plume location using 4D seismic monitoring data, with a precision of 0.8 mIoU (mIoU indicates the average overlap ratio between predicted and marked CO2 areas) [48]. Nagao et al. employed two machine learning algorithms—a convolutional neural network (CNN) and a feedforward neural network (FFNN)—to predict the CO2 plume location. By combining casing post-pressure with distributed temperature sensing (DTS), their average absolute percentage error (MAPE) was 2.75%, lower than errors of 3.04% when using DTS alone or 5.13% when relying solely on casing post-pressure [49,50].
The effectiveness of employing machine learning algorithms for processing CO2 geological sequestration monitoring data hinges on parameter selection and model fitting [51]. Specifically, parameter selection involves identifying the most critical features influencing CO2 behavior from a range of potential variables, utilizing domain knowledge and statistical analysis. This process is essential to ensure that the chosen parameters accurately reflect the physical and chemical characteristics of the underground reservoir. Furthermore, the quality of model fitting directly impacts the magnitude of prediction analysis errors. A high-quality model not only necessitates robust fitting but also demands strong generalization capabilities. To achieve this objective, researchers frequently employ cross-validation and other methodologies to assess model performance while optimizing the model structure through hyperparameter adjustment. Additionally, various types of machine learning algorithms (such as regression, decision trees, and neural networks) possess distinct advantages and disadvantages; thus, selecting the appropriate method is essential. In practical applications, data preprocessing, including steps such as noise reduction, normalization, and imputation of missing values, must also be considered to enhance data quality and improve the reliability of final prediction outcomes. Consequently, a comprehensive integration of diverse technical approaches is required throughout the process to ensure an accurate, efficient, and scientifically rigorous analysis of CO2 geological sequestration monitoring data.

4. Discussion and Analysis

Following a comprehensive analysis of various monitoring technologies for CO2 geological sequestration, it is necessary to fully consider the impact of spatial and temporal factors on the effectiveness of carbon dioxide geological sequestration. In the process of selecting appropriate monitoring technologies, it is crucial to emphasize the analysis of in-well fluid data to fulfill comprehensive life cycle monitoring objectives. Prior to CO2 injection, it is essential to identify suitable reservoirs, assess their technical and economic feasibility, and recognize potential leakage risks to optimize the monitoring strategy. During the injection phase, real-time data analysis and frequency adjustments should be implemented, followed by regular evaluations of sequestration effectiveness post-injection. By leveraging domestic and international experiences in CO2 sequestration monitoring—and acknowledging China’s current limited experience in this domain—a more systematic geophysical monitoring framework can facilitate successful project implementation. As future experiences accumulate from implementing comprehensive geophysical monitoring schemes for CO2 geological sequestration in China, strategies can be tailored to local conditions, thereby developing more effective geophysical monitoring indicators.

4.1. Rock Physics Simulation

The physical properties of rocks, including the modulus of elasticity and porosity, significantly influence CO2 storage and its safety [52]. These two parameters are essential for assessing the physical characteristics of rocks, as they are directly linked to the safety and efficacy of CO2 storage. The modulus of elasticity quantifies a rock’s resistance to deformation; thus, rocks with a high modulus can better withstand pressure and deformation, thereby mitigating the risk of rock failure during CO2 storage. Conversely, porosity reflects the volume fraction of pore space within the rock, where increased porosity correlates with enhanced gas storage capacity but also elevates the potential for CO2 leakage [53]. Specifically, while high-porosity rocks offer greater gas storage space, they may develop high-permeability pathways that facilitate CO2 leakage and compromise storage safety. In contrast, low-porosity rocks exhibit limited gas storage capacity yet possess superior stability that aids in reducing leakage risks. Porosity represents the proportion of pore space within a rock, where increased porosity correlates with enhanced CO2 storage capacity but also elevates the risk of leakage. Specifically, rocks with high porosity offer greater storage potential; however, they may develop high-permeability pathways that facilitate CO2 leakage and compromise storage safety. Conversely, low-porosity rocks exhibit limited storage capacity yet provide superior stability, thereby aiding in the reduction of leakage risks [54].
Field outcrops and core samples from the target reservoir are collected for rock physics simulation experiments, during which the lithology and physical properties of the reservoir are determined and calibrated. Additionally, these simulations are employed to select injection wells that satisfy CO2 injection requirements, with appropriate cement types and wellbore materials chosen accordingly. Furthermore, real-time monitoring of CO2 mineralization sequestration progress in the target reservoir’s rock core is essential at the laboratory scale, particularly given the relatively rapid CO2 mineralization rate in basalt; thus, continuous tracking of its sequestration degree within basalt is imperative.

4.2. CO2 Geological Sequestration Monitoring at the Site Level

Based on the lithology and physical properties of both the study area and the target reservoir, appropriate geophysical monitoring technologies are selected.
A.
Structural and residual sequestration
Depending on the specific types of sequestration sites and geological characteristics, a combination of seismic monitoring, fiber optic monitoring, and logging technologies is employed to achieve optimal monitoring outcomes. For instance, in deep coal seams, depleted oil and gas reservoirs, and saline aquifers within sedimentary rocks, as well as basaltic formations, all three technologies can be utilized concurrently. Whereas for CO2 sequestration in carbonate rocks, it is more prudent to select fiber optic and logging monitoring techniques;
  • B. Dissolution sequestration
Given the inherent limitations of seismic and fiber optic monitoring methods during this phase, priority should be given to logging technology. Additionally, suitable detection methods must be chosen based on the type of target reservoir; for example, three-head pulse neutron logging and four-head pulse neutron logging are particularly effective for CO2 sequestration in depleted oil and gas reservoirs;
  • C. Mineralization sequestration
The mineralization process typically spans several decades; therefore, this stage necessitates employing time-lapse seismic monitoring technology alongside integrated fiber optic systems and other relevant methodologies for comprehensive oversight.
Basaltic extrusive rock, exemplified by basalt, is categorized as a dark, fine-grained, cryptocrystalline igneous rock with a magnesium–iron mineral content ranging from 45% to 85%. The distinctive gas bubbles and fractures formed during the cooling and tectonic processes significantly enhance the porosity and permeability of the rock matrix, thereby providing effective storage capacity for geological CO2 sequestration [55].
When supercritical CO2 is injected into basalt formations, it initially reacts with water to produce carbonic acid, which not only reduces the pH of the solution but also increases its reactivity with minerals. This process facilitates the dissolution of primary minerals within the basalt matrix and releases cations, such as Ca2+, Mg2+, and Fe3+, into the solution. The released divalent cations subsequently react with dissolved CO2 to form stable carbonate minerals, including calcite, magnesite, and siderite [56,57]. The rapid dissolution of silicate rocks and the release of divalent cations from the matrix can effectively facilitate permanent carbonation. The selection of appropriate silicate rocks, enhancement of the mineral–fluid interface surface area, elevation in temperature, or injection of high-reactivity fluids can significantly expedite the dissolution process [58,59].
To maximize the surface area for mineral–fluid interactions, it is essential to select appropriate porous fractured rocks that allow injected CO2 to penetrate as deeply into the rock matrix as possible. Consequently, basalt may exhibit a higher reaction efficiency compared to other basaltic and ultramafic rocks. Notably, as the pH value increases downstream of the injection well, the precipitation of secondary minerals (such as calcite and magnesite) can diminish the available reaction surface area, ultimately resulting in blockages within migration channels [60]. Marini found that the interaction between carbon dioxide and basalt aquifer water leads to a reduction in porosity; therefore, it is essential to control the temperature and composition of the injected fluid to optimize the release rate of divalent cations [61]. The dissolution rate of basalt is a function influenced by pH, temperature, and other factors, while the solubility of carbon dioxide in water increases with pressure. Consequently, appropriately elevating the injection fluid to critical pressure levels will facilitate an acceleration in the dissolution rate [62,63];
  • D. Well integrity
For site-level assessments of well integrity, a combined approach utilizing both fiber optic sensing and logging technologies is recommended. When implementing fiber optic monitoring techniques, one may draw upon advanced practices from oilfield development—such as distributed acoustic sensing or distributed temperature sensing—to facilitate real-time surveillance of well integrity. Furthermore, various assessment measures, including reservoir saturation testing, acoustic testing, cement bond evaluation, and delayed ultrasonic testing, can provide thorough evaluations.

4.3. Monitoring Data Processing:

Given the substantial volume of monitoring data and the multitude of parameters involved, it is essential to employ machine learning algorithms for processing geophysical monitoring data related to CO2 geological sequestration and generating predictive outcomes. Among various machine learning techniques, deep learning methods should be prioritized, including convolutional neural networks, feedforward neural networks, and fully convolutional networks. Notably, when the injection speed of CO2 exceeds 150 m/s, the predictive performance of fully convolutional networks (FCNs) demonstrates a distinct advantage. The primary benefit of utilizing machine learning algorithms for predicting CO2 sequestration volumes lies in their ability to continuously adjust network parameters and autonomously identify complex patterns, thus producing high-quality predictions and classifications (Figure 3).

5. Conclusions

Based on the monitoring outcomes and technical insights of CO2 geological sequestration, a systematic analysis was performed on the geophysical monitoring technologies applicable to CO2 geological sequestration. A comprehensive set of multi-scale matching recommendations has been proposed for the entire process, spanning from laboratory scale to site level, with a focus on various sequestration sites and monitoring objectives. The recommended approach encompasses several critical stages, including initial screening of suitable reservoirs, conducting rock physics simulation experiments, and implementing field monitoring, as well as data processing and result evaluation. Additionally, a thorough compilation of multi-scale matching recommendations for geophysical monitoring in CO2 geological sequestration—from laboratory scale to site level—targeting diverse sequestration sites and monitoring goals has been summarized.
(1) During the initial screening stage, a comprehensive geological survey should be conducted on potential reservoirs, integrating existing data to assess rock properties, hydrological conditions, and other pertinent factors in a holistic manner to identify the most promising sequestration sites. This process typically involves analyzing historical drilling data and current groundwater level information within the region while also considering the potential impacts of climate change on the subsurface environment. Subsequently, rock physical simulation experiments should be performed to obtain more precise parameters, thereby providing a scientific basis for subsequent monitoring efforts. These experiments facilitate researchers’ understanding of CO2 behavior patterns across various reservoir types, ultimately optimizing injection strategies;
(2) During the on-site monitoring phase, advanced technological tools, such as fiber optic sensors, acoustic detection methods, and electromagnetic techniques, should be employed to capture real-time changes in the wellbore and surrounding environment, thereby facilitating an effective evaluation of the dynamic behavior associated with CO2 injection. In monitoring CO2 saturation, plume migration, and distribution, seismic monitoring techniques and logging methodologies can be utilized independently; however, fiber optic monitoring is typically integrated with seismic approaches. Most seismic and fiber optic monitoring technologies leverage neutron logging data for comparative analysis when assessing CO2 saturation levels. Fiber optic sensors are capable of detecting variations in temperature and pressure, while acoustic detection methods can identify fractures or pore structures. Furthermore, data should be systematically collected at regular intervals across different time points to allow for timely adjustments to injection strategies and the optimization of overall sequestration effectiveness. By establishing a long-term monitoring framework, it ensures that all indicators consistently remain within safe limits;
(3) In the data processing and result evaluation phase, the integration of machine learning algorithms can significantly enhance the capability to identify complex patterns, thereby facilitating efficient data analysis. These algorithms are applicable for processing large, multi-dimensional datasets, thereby empowering the system to automatically identify potential issues and enhance decision-making efficiency. Furthermore, through iterative model refinement, prediction accuracy will progressively increase, rendering future projects more reliable. This series of measures will ensure that the entire CO2 geological sequestration process is safer and more efficient while providing a reference methodology for analogous future projects, thus contributing significantly to global efforts in addressing climate change.

Author Contributions

C.L.: writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, project administration, conceptualization, funding acquisition, data curation, formal analysis, methodology. X.Z.: visualization, validation, methodology, investigation, formal analysis, data curation. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received the support of the Shaanxi Province Natural Science Basic Research Program Project (2022JC-DW-09).

Data Availability Statement

All data, models, or code generated or used during the study are available from the corresponding author by request.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to the reviewers and editors for their careful review of this manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Dou, L.; Sun, L.; Lyu, W.; Wang, M.; Gao, F.; Gao, M.; Jiang, H. Trend of global carbon dioxide capture, utilization and storage industry and challenges and countermeasures in China. Pet. Explor. Dev. 2023, 50, 1246–1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Langhelle, O.; Sareen, S.; Silvester, B.R. From CCS to CCU and CCUS—The pitfalls of utilisation and storage. In Making CO2 a Resource; Routledge: London, UK, 2024; pp. 127–142. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bajpai, S.; Shreyash, N.; Singh, S.; Memon, A.R.; Sonker, M.; Tiwary, S.K.; Biswas, S. Opportunities, challenges, and the way ahead for carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS) by the hydrocarbon industry: Towards a sustainable future. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 15595–15616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wang, Y.; Guo, C.H.; Zhuang, S.R.; Chen, X.J.; Jia, L.Q.; Chen, Z.Y.; Xia, Z.L.; Wu, Z. Major contribution to carbon neutrality by China’s geosciences and geological technologies. China Geol. 2021, 4, 329–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Li, Q.; Li, Q.; Wang, F.; Wu, J.; Wang, Y. The carrying behavior of water-based fracturing fluid in shale reservoir fractures and molecular dynamics of sand-carrying mechanism. Processes 2024, 12, 2051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Li, Q.; Li, Q.; Han, Y. A numerical investigation on kick control with the displacement kill method during a well test in a deep-water gas reservoir: A case study. Processes 2024, 12, 2090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Liu, Z.X.; Gao, M.; Zhang, X.M.; Liang, Y.; Guo, Y.J.; Liu, W.L.; Bao, J.W. CCUS and CO2 injection field application in abroad and China: Status and progress. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 2023, 229, 212011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Evans, D.J.; Schultz, R.A. Analysis of occurrences at underground fuel storage facilities and assessment of the main mechanisms leading to loss of storage integrity. In ARMA US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium; ARMA: Lee’s Summit, MO, USA, 2017; p. ARMA-2017. [Google Scholar]
  9. Zhang, X.; Feng, Q.; Wang, X.; Ma, J.; Zhang, L.; Yu, B. Prediction of CO2 saturation by using well logging data, in the process of CO2-EOR and geological storage of CO2. Energy Procedia 2017, 114, 4552–4556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sun, Y.; Liu, J.; Xue, Z.; Li, Q.; Fan, C.; Zhang, X. A critical review of distributed fiber optic sensing for real-time monitoring geologic CO2 sequestration. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 2021, 88, 103751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Massarweh, O.; Abushaikha, A.S. CO2 sequestration in subsurface geological formations: A review of trapping mechanisms and monitoring techniques. Earth-Sci. Rev. 2024, 253, 104793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, K.; Xu, T.; Wang, F.; Tian, H. Experimental study of CO2–brine–rock interaction during CO2 sequestration in deep coal seams. Int. J. Coal Geol. 2016, 154–155, 265–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Han, S.; Sang, S.; Zhang, J.; Xiang, W.; Xu, A. Assessment of CO2 geological storage capacity based on adsorption isothermal experiments at various temperatures: A case study of No. 3 coal in the Qinshui Basin. Petroleum 2023, 9, 274–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Cui, C.; Yao, Y.; Liu, D.; Sun, X. Decoding wettability in coal-water-CO2 system for enhanced sequestration security. Gas Sci. Eng. 2024, 124, 205285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Liu, B.; Zhao, F.; Xu, J.; Qi, Y. Experimental investigation and numerical simulation of CO2–brine–rock interactions during CO2 sequestration in a deep saline aquifer. Sustainability 2019, 11, 317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Onstott, T.C.; Ehlmann, B.L.; Sapers, H.; Coleman, M.; Ivarsson, M.; Marlow, J.J.; Niles, P. Paleo-rock-hosted life on Earth and the search on Mars: A review and strategy for exploration. Astrobiology 2019, 19, 1230–1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Liu, Q.; Zhu, D.; Jin, Z.; Tian, H.; Zhou, B.; Jiang, P.; Zhu, H. Carbon capture and storage for long-term and safe sealing with constrained natural CO2 analogs. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2023, 171, 113000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Tan, Y.; Li, Q.; Xu Liang Xu, L.; Xu, L.; Yu, T.; Cao, X. CO2–Brine–rock interaction and sequestration capacity in carbonate reservoirs of the Tahe Oilfield, Xinjiang, China. Green House Gases Sci. Technol. 2022, 12, 642–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. McGrail, B.P.; Schaef, H.T.; Spane, F.A.; Horner, J.A.; Owen, A.T.; Cliff, J.B.; Qafoku, Q.; Thompson, C.J.; Sullivan, E.C. Wallula basalt pilot demonstration project: Post-injection results and conclusions. Energy Procedia 2017, 114, 5783–5790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Guthrie, G.D., Jr.; Pawar, R.J.; Carey, J.W.; Karra, S.; Harp, D.R.; Viswanathan, H.S. The mechanisms, dynamics, and implications of self-sealing and CO2 resistance in wellbore cements. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2018, 75, 162–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Condor, J.; Asghari, K. Experimental study of stability and integrity of cement in wellbores used for CO2 storage. Energy Procedia 2009, 1, 3633–3640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mito, S.; Xue, Z.; Satoh, H. Experimental assessment of well integrity for CO2 geological storage: Batch experimental results on geochemical interactions between a CO2–brine mixture and a sandstone–cement–steel sample. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2015, 39, 420–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Dalla Vecchia, F.; dos Santos, V.H.J.M.; Schütz, M.K.; Ponzi, G.G.D.; e Stepanha, A.S.D.G.; de Fraga Malfatti, C.; da Costa, E.M. Wellbore integrity in a saline aquifer: Experimental steel-cement interface degradation under supercritical CO2 conditions representative of Brazil’s Parana basin. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2020, 98, 103077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mamoudou, S.; Curtis, M.; Dang, S.; Rai, C. Experimental evaluation of cement integrity on exposure to supercritical CO2 using NMR: Application to geostorage. Heliyon 2024, 10, e24144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hwang, J.; Walk, W.; Baeten, G. Next generation onshore and offshore seismic acquisition technologies. In IPTC 2013: International Petroleum Technology Conference; European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2013; p. cp-350. [Google Scholar]
  26. Huh, C.; Kang, S.G.; Park, M.H.; Lee, K.S.; Park, Y.G.; Min, D.J.; Lee, J.S. Latest CO2 transport, storage and monitoring R&D progress in Republic of Korea: Offshore geologic storage. Energy Procedia 2013, 37, 6520–6526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lüth, S.; Bergmann, P.; Huang, F.; Ivandic, M.; Ivanova, A.; Juhlin, C.; Kempka, T. 4D seismic monitoring of CO2 storage during injection and postclosure at the Ketzin pilot site. Energy Procedia 2017, 114, 5761–5767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Wang, H.; Ma, J.; Li, L.; Jia, L.; Tan, M.; Cui, S.; Zhang, Y.; Qu, Z. Time-lapse seismic analysis for Gao89 area of CO2-EOR project in SINOPEC Shengli oilfield, China. Energy Procedia 2017, 114, 3980–3988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Luo, Q.; Wang, Y.; Chen, M.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, S.; Chang, X.; Zeng, R. Time-lapse VSP monitoring for CO2 injection: A case study in ordos. China. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2018, 75, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Diao, Y.; Zhu, G.; Li, X.; Bai, B.; Li, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, X.; Zhang, B. Characterizing CO2 plume migration in multi-layer reservoirs with strong heterogeneity and low permeability using time-lapse 2D VSP technology and numerical simulation. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2020, 92, 102880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wang, H.; Wang, Z.; Ma, J.; Li, L.; Wang, Y.; Tan, M.; Zhang, Y.; Cui, S.; Qu, Z. Effective pressure prediction from 4D Seismic AVO data during CO2-EOR and storage. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2022, 113, 103525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Waage, M.; Singhroha, S.; Bünz, S.; Planke, S.; Waghorn, K.A.; Bellwald, B. Feasibility of using the P-Cable high-resolution 3D seismic system in detecting and monitoring CO2 leakage. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2021, 106, 103240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sidenko, E.; Tertyshnikov, K.; Gurevich, B.; Pevzner, R. DAS signature of reservoir pressure changes caused by a CO2 injection: Experience from the CO2CRC Otway Project. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2022, 119, 103735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Mawalkar, S.; Brock, D.; Burchwell, A.; Kelley, M.; Mishra, S.; Gupta, N.; Pardini, R.; Shroyer, B. Where is that CO2 flowing? Using distributed temperature sensing (DTS) technology for monitoring injection of CO2 into a depleted oil reservoir. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2019, 85, 132–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Yao, C.; Chen, H.; Onishi, T.; Datta-Gupta, A.; Mishra, S.; Mawalkar, S.; Pasumarti, A. Robust CO2 plume imaging by joint tomographic inversion using distributed pressure and temperature measurements. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2024, 135, 104166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Pevzner, R.; Isaenkov, R.; Yavuz, S.; Yurikov, A.; Tertyshnikov, K.; Shashkin, P.; Gurevich, B.; Correa, J.; Glubokovskikh, S.; Wood, T.; et al. Seismic monitoring of a small CO2 injection using a multi-well DAS array: Operations and initial results of Stage 3 of the CO2CRC Otway project. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2021, 110, 103437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Li, D.; Peng, S.; Yang, R.; Zheng, J.; Cai, Z.; Zhang, T.; Zhang, W. Joint monitoring of CO2-ECBM based on multiple geophysical methods: A case study of Shizhuang Town, Shanxi Province, China. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2022, 121, 103795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Xu, J.; Li, C.; Shi, M.; Wang, X.; Jiang, L.; Yang, M.; Song, Y.C. Monitoring fluid migration in a CO2 storage reservoir by distributed fiber optic strain sensing: A laboratory study. Gas Sci. Eng. 2024, 124, 205270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Baumann, G.; Henninges, J.; De Lucia, M. Monitoring of saturation changes and salt precipitation during CO2 injection using pulsed neutron-gamma logging at the Ketzin pilot site. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2014, 28, 134–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Braunberger, J.; Hamling, J.; Gorecki, C.; Miller, H.; Rawson, J.; Walsh, F.; Pasternack, E.; Rowe, W.; Butsch, R.; Steadman, E.; et al. Characterization and time-lapse monitoring utilizing pulsed-neutron well logging: Associated CO2 storage at a commercial CO2 EOR project. Energy Procedia 2014, 63, 3935–3944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Song, X.; Wu, W.; Zhang, H.; He, L.; Dong, D.; Fu, X.; Wang, R. Improving the accuracy of CO2 sequestration monitoring in depleted gas reservoirs using the pulsed neutron-gamma logging technique. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2024, 132, 104080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Conner, A.; Chace, D.; Abou-Saleh, J. Developing best practices for evaluating fluid saturations with pulsed neutron capture logging across multiple active CO2-EOR fields. Energy Procedia 2017, 114, 3636–3648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hawkes, C.; Gardner, C. Pressure transient testing for assessment of wellbore integrity in the IEAGHG Weyburn–Midale CO2 monitoring and storage project. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2013, 16 (Suppl. S1), S50–S61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Nakajima, T.; Xue, Z.; Watanabe, J.; Ito, Y.; Sakashita, S. Assessment of well integrity at Nagaoka CO2 injection site using ultrasonic logging and cement bond log data. Energy Procedia 2013, 37, 5746–5753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Duguid, A.; Carey, J.W.; Butsch, R. Well integrity assessment of a 68 year old well at a CO2 injection project. Energy Procedia 2014, 63, 5691–5706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Li, D.; Peng, S.P.; Guo, Y.L.; Lu, Y.X.; Cui, X.Q. CO2 storage monitoring based on time-lapse seismic data via deep learning. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2021, 108, 103336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Leong, Z.; Zhu, T.; Sun, A. Time-lapse seismic inversion for CO2 saturation with SeisCO2Net: An application to Frio-II site. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2024, 132, 104058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sheng, H.; Wu, X.; Sun, X.; Wu, L. Deep learning for characterizing CO2 migration in time-lapse seismic images. Fuel 2023, 336, 126806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Nagao, M.; Yao, C.; Onishi, T.; Chen, H.; Gupta, A.; Mishra, S. An efficient deep learning-based workflow for CO2 plume imaging considering model uncertainties with distributed pressure and temperature measurements. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2024, 132, 104066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Yao, C.; Nagao, M.; Gupta, A.; Mishra, S. An efficient deep learning-based workflow for real-time CO2 plume visualization in saline aquifer using distributed pressure and temperature measurements. Geoenergy Sci. Eng. 2024, 239, 212990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lechevallier, A. Physics Lnformed Deep Learning: Applications to Well Opening and Closing Events. Doctoral Dissertation, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  52. McKenna, J.J.; Gurevich, B.; Urosevic, M.; Evans, B.J. Rock physics—Application to geological storage of CO2. APPEA J. 2003, 43, 567–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Al-Ameri, W.A.; Abdulraheem, A.; Mahmoud, M. Long-term effects of CO2 sequestration on rock mechanical properties. J. Energy Resour. Technol. 2016, 138, 012201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kim, K.; Makhnenko, R.Y. Changes in rock matrix compressibility during deep CO2 storage. Greenh. Gases Sci. Technol. 2021, 11, 954–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Farooqui, M.Y.; Hou, H.; Li, G.; Machin, N.; Neville, T.; Pal, A.; Shrivastva, C.; Wang, Y.; Yang, F.; Yin, C.; et al. Evaluating volcanic reservoirs. Oilfield Rev. 2009, 21, 36–47. [Google Scholar]
  56. Matter, J.M.; Broecker, W.S.; Stute, M.; Gislason, S.R.; Oelkers, E.H.; Stefánsson, A.; Wolff-Boenisch, D.; Gunnlaugsson, E.; Axelsson, G.; Björnsson, G. Permanent carbon dioxide storage into basalt: The CarbFix pilot project, Iceland. Energy Procedia 2009, 1, 3641–3646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Goldberg, D.S.; Takahashi, T.; Slagle, A.L. Carbon dioxide sequestration in deep-sea basalt. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 9920–9925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Wolff-Boenisch, D.; Gislason, S.R.; Oelkers, E.H. The effect of crystallinity on dissolution rates and CO2 consumption capacity of silicates. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2006, 70, 858–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Gislason, S.R.; Wolff-Boenisch, D.; Stefansson, A.; Oelkers, E.H.; Gunnlaugsson, E.; Sigurdardottir, H.; Sigfusson, B.; Broecker, W.S.; Matter, J.M.; Stute, M. Mineral sequestration of carbon dioxide in basalt: A pre-injection overview of the CarbFix project. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 2010, 4, 537–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Stockmann, G.; Wolff-Boenisch, D.; Gislason, S.R.; Oelkers, E.H. Dissolution of diopside and basaltic glass: The effect of carbonate coating. Mineral. Mag. 2008, 72, 135–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Marini, L. Geological Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide: Thermodynamics, Kinetics, and Reaction Path Modeling; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  62. Gislason, S.R.; Oelkers, E.H. Mechanism, rates, and consequences of basaltic glass dissolution: II. An experimental study of the dissolution rates of basaltic glass as a function of pH and temperature. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2003, 67, 3817–3832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Flaathen, T.K. Water-rock interaction during CO2 sequestration in basalt. Ph.D. Dissertation, Université Paul Sabatier-Toulouse III, Toulouse, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
Figure 3. Whole life cycle geophysical monitoring process of CO2 geological storage.
Figure 3. Whole life cycle geophysical monitoring process of CO2 geological storage.
Processes 12 02258 g003
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, C.; Zhang, X. Geophysical Monitoring Technologies for the Entire Life Cycle of CO2 Geological Sequestration. Processes 2024, 12, 2258. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12102258

AMA Style

Li C, Zhang X. Geophysical Monitoring Technologies for the Entire Life Cycle of CO2 Geological Sequestration. Processes. 2024; 12(10):2258. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12102258

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Chenyang, and Xiaoli Zhang. 2024. "Geophysical Monitoring Technologies for the Entire Life Cycle of CO2 Geological Sequestration" Processes 12, no. 10: 2258. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12102258

APA Style

Li, C., & Zhang, X. (2024). Geophysical Monitoring Technologies for the Entire Life Cycle of CO2 Geological Sequestration. Processes, 12(10), 2258. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12102258

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop