Bruce Kobelski and Sean Porse

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Ground Water and Drinking Wate

Washington, D.C.

Geologic Sequestration of Carbon D

Current GS Rule Development and Re

Science Advisory Board Engineering Commi

August 16, 2010
Outline

 UIC Program Background What is Geologic Sequestration? Proposed GS Rule and Schedule LBNL Research in Support of GS  UIC GS Guidance 
UIC Program Backgr

 The 1974 Safe Drinking Water Act (Reauthorized in 

 Minimum federal regulations for protection of Undergroun

of Drinking Water (USDWs)

 USDW defined: 

 Any aquifer or portion of an aquifer that contains water that i

10,000 PPM total dissolved solids or contains a volume of wthat it is a present, or viable future, source for a Public Water System

 UIC Program regulates underground injection of all 

liquid, gas, or slurry

 Designation as a commodity does not change SDWA appli Some natural gas (hydrocarbon) storage, oil & gas product

some hydraulic fracturing fluids exempted

 Existing UIC program provides a regulatory framew

(baseline) for the Geologic Sequestration of CO

2
UIC Well Classes (Pro
What is Geologic 

Sequestration?

CCS Process Target Forma
EPA’s GS Rule Develo

Collaborative Effo

 In 2004 EPA’s Offices of Water and Air and Radiation started 

earnest on CCS and GS:

 Clarify and address issues across EPA statutes (SDWA, CA

Program Offices (OW, OAR, ORD, OSWER)

 Coordinate technical and cost analyses for proposed regula

 Workgroup of ~48 members included DOE and 4 States (Texa

Alabama and Ohio)

 EPA closely collaborated with the Department of Energy (CCS 

 EPA also coordinated with:

 Department of Transportation Bureau of Land Management United States Geological Survey States, NGOs, Electric Power Industry, Oil and Gas, Trade 
Special Considerations for GS

 Large Volumes Buoyancy Viscosity (Mobility) Corrosivity

I

EPA’s Proposed GS R

Approach to Rulemak

UIC Program E

 Site Characteriz Area Of Review Well Construct Well Operation Site Monitoring Well Plugging 

Injection Site C

 Public Participa Financial Respo Site Closure

Develop new Well 

Class for GS –Class VI
EPA’s GS Rulemak

Schedule

Final UIC Rule for GS of CO Late 2010/Early 

2

Implementation of UIC Rule for GS of CO

2 Post-rule publi

Technical Workshops & Data Collection CompleteStakeholder Meetings December 2007/Feb

Notice of Data Availability August 31, 2Administrator’s Signature of Proposed Rule July 15, 20

Activity Timefram
Lawrence Berkeley Na

Laboratory Resear

 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Re

in Support of Rule Effort

 Initial work on CO

2 Injection started in 2005; fo

on GS technology and analogs

 In 2007 LBNL began an effort to model ground 

quality changes related to the mobilization of traelements

 Also modeled basin-scale hydrologic impacts of 

storage (both projects relate to potential risks poUSDWs from large-scale CO

2 injection)
Lawrence Berkeley Na

Laboratory Resear

 Modeled Ground Water Quality Changes R

to the Mobilization of Trace Elements

 Identity naturally occurring minerals that could 

source of trace elements in ground water if they come into contact with CO

2

 Indirectly substantiated through an evaluation o

than 38,000 water quality analyses from the USNational Water Information System (NWIS)

 Results of this modeling obtained for typical aq

under reducing conditions indicate that certain ecould potentially exceed Federal drinking water standards at elevated CO

2 concentrations
Lawrence Berkeley Na

Laboratory Resear

Aqueous 

Concentrations 

at Elevated 

CO

2

Concentrations

(initial pH = 

7.6, reducing 

conditions, 

calcite 

saturation)
Lawrence Berkeley Na

Laboratory Resear

 Modeled Ground Water Quality Changes Related t

Mobilization of Trace Elements

 LBNL used the reactive-transport model TOUGHREACT 

and predict the transport of CO

2 within a shallow aquifer 

model potential geochemical effects in the subsurface

 Results suggest the potential for mobilization of arsenic a

be enhanced within certain ground waters 

 The MCL for arsenic was exceeded in only a few simulat

scenarios, while the lead concentrations remained below tunder all scenarios

 It is important to emphasize that these studies looked at p

consequences of CO

2 leakage into the USDW, not the lik

such leakage occurring
Lawrence Berkeley Na

Laboratory Resear

 Modeled Basin-Scale Hydrologic 

Impacts of CO

2 Storage

 LBNL studied a hypothetical, future 

scenario of GS in a sedimentary basin as an illustrative example to demonstrate the potential for basin-scale hydrologic impacts of CO2 storage

 The model assumed a scenario where 

 20 independent GS projects each 

injected 5 million tonnes of CO

2

over 50 years 

 Model Domain: 570 km by 550 km 

(354 miles by 342 miles)

Birkholzer et 
Lawrence Berkeley Na

Laboratory Resear

 Modeled Basin-Scale Hydrologic 

Impacts of CO

2 Storage

 Simulation runs indicated that 

injection pressures did not exceed fracture pressure or the maximum value used in the model for this basin. 

 Results indicated that farfield

pressure changes (in bars) could propagate as far away as 200 km from the core injection area 

 Predicted pressure changes 

could push saline water upward into overlying aquifers if localized pathways such as conductive faults existed.

Birkholzer et al, 20
Lawrence Berkeley Na

Laboratory Resear

 Evaluating the Consequences of CO

2 Intrusion i

Groundwater: Laboratory Experiments, Microspectroscopy, and Associated GeochemicaModeling

 Aquifer water and mineralogy from select US basins will 

characterized, and controlled laboratory experiments will 

conducted to assess the potential mobilization of hazardoconstituents by dissolved CO

2

 Current Work:

 Characterizing sediment and mineralogy samples from aqu

the Plant Daniel site in Escatawpa, Mississippi

 Setting up laboratory experiments for well-mixed flow thro

reactors to expose sediments to from these aquifers to diffeof CO

2
EPA’s Proposed GS 

Additional Effort on Technical G

 EPA will eventually produce 12 Technical Guidance 

documents and/or manuals on subtopics within the GS rdesigned to assist owners and operators as well as regul

 The first Technical Guidance documents and/or manual

cover the following areas:

 Site characterization Area of Review Monitoring and Testing Well Construction Financial Responsibility Implementation and Class VI Primacy Plan Development
Thank you!

More information about the UIC Pro

 EPA Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Web

http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/wells_sequestration

 Code of Federal Regulations: Underground Injection 

Regulations 40 CFR 144-148 –http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?sid=d6ee71a544eca89c533c825135913f13&c=ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfrv22_02.tpl