CRANFIELD LOG

Program Overview

The Bureau of Economic Geology Gulf Coast Carbon Center is currently

conducting a $34 million multi­year field study of sequestration and monitoring

strategies for long­term storage of carbon dioxide. This work is being performed in

conjunction with the Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership

(SECARB) with support from the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)

and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and managed by the Southern States

Energy Board (SSEB).

Planning for the project began in November 2006 and we are now reaching the point where data collection begins.

The project involves numerous industrial partners, scientific collaborators, and technical subcontractors, each of

whom is responsible for different aspects of the study:

The Gulf Coast Carbon Center is responsible for geologic characterization, monitoring design, integration,

and near­surface monitoring.

Denbury Resources, Inc. is the site host. They are also responsible for the well preparation and will supply

the CO2 for storage and sequestration.

Sandia Technologies LLC is responsible for subsurface monitoring systems design and deployment.

Schlumberger Carbon Services will perform wireline logging and interpretation.

Lawrence Berkeley National Lab is responsible for cross­well, VSP and Continuous Active Seismic Source

Monitoring (CASSM). Implementation and evaluation of of noble gas and other tracers and the U­tube and

Distributed Temperature System (DTTS).

Lawrence Livermore National Labs and Promore will perform cross well Electrical Resistance Tomography

(ERT).

University of Mississippi and Mississippi State University are responsible for groundwater monitoring.

Our aim in presenting this log of real­time updates about the project is to document our research, which is one step

in the progress toward developing a process for safe, long­term, subsurface sequestration of carbon. We are aware

that our work will involve successes as well as practical problems that must be overcome along the way. No other

project in the United States has incorporated so many different geological and technical measurements and we

expect to accumulate significant information and experience that will increase confidence and decrease costs of

future geologic carbon sequestration projects.

The Study Site

The site for the project is Denbury Resources Cranfield Field in southwest Mississippi. Cranfield field, Mississippi,

was discovered in 1946 and abandoned in 1965 at the end of primary oil and gas production. Denbury Resources,

Inc. currently operates the field and is a partner in the study.

The study site in Cranfield field, MS includes an injection well and two observation wells. The detailed area of study (DAS)

includes three wells. The westernmost well (F­1) is operated by Denbury and is the site of injection of carbon dioxide into the

subsurface geologic reservoir. Two observations wells are approximately 300 ft and 400 ft to the southeast and are referred to as

F­2 and F­3, respectively. The observation wells will be equipped with state­of the­art monitoring systems that will track and

monitor the carbon dioxide plume as it moves through the reservoir more than 10,000 feet below the surface.

Fall 2014

The SECARB “early” test at Cranfield is reviewed in a number of papers. Many, but not all, of these papers are

categorized and listed below. Many of these papers or abstracts of these papers can be found on the GCCC

Bookshelf. Papers from relevant GCCC­led projects by non­GCCC authors and relevant papers from before

GCCC members forum

GCCC bookshelf

GCCC home

about GCCC

areas of research

research themes

sponsors

staff

FAQs

Mission

The GCCC seeks to apply its

technical and educational

resources to implement

geologic storage of

anthropogenic carbon dioxide

on an aggressive time scale

with a focus in a region where

large­scale reduction of

atmospheric releases is needed

and short term action is

possible.
2011 are also included below.

Overviews of the SECARB project

Hovorka, S. D., 2013, Three­million­metric­ton­monitored injection at the SECARB Cranfield project—project

update: Energy Procedia, v. 37, p. 6412–6423 DOI information: 10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.571

Hovorka, S. D., Choi, J.­W., Meckel, T. A., Treviño, R. H., Zeng, H., Kordi, M., Wang, F. P., and Nicot, J.­P., 2009,

Comparing carbon sequestration in an oil reservoir to sequestration in a brine formation—field study, in Energy

Procedia (v. 1, no. 1), Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies

GHGT9, November 16–20, Washington, D.C., p. 2051–2056.

Hovorka, S. D., Meckel, T. A., and Nicot, J­.P., 2013 Mid­project assessment of the SECARB early test at

Cranfield, Mississippi: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control.

Hovorka, S. D., Meckel, T. A., and Treviño, R. T, 2013, Monitoring a large­volume injection at Cranfield,

Mississippi— project design and recommendations: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, v. 18, p.

345–360, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.03.021.

Hovorka, S. D., Meckel, Timothy, Treviño, R. H., Lu, Jiemin, Nicot, J.­P., Choi, Jong­Won, Freeman, D., Cook, P.

G., Daley, Tom, Ajo­Franklin, J., Freifeld, Barry, Doughty, C. A., Carrigan, C. R., La Brecque, D., Kharaka, Yousif,

Thordsen, J. J., Phelps, Tommy, Yang, Changbing, Romanak, Katherine, Zhang, Tongwei, Holt, R. M., Lindler, J.

S., and Butsch, R. J., 2011, Monitoring a large volume CO2 injection: year two results from SECARB project at

Denbury's Cranfield, Mississippi, USA, in Energy Procedia, v. 4, Proceedings of 10th International Conference on

Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies GHGT10, September 1923, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, p. 3478–

3485.

Hovorka, S. D., Meckel, T. A., Treviño, R. H., Nicot, J. –P., Choi, J. –W., Yang, C., Paine, J., Romanak, K., Lu, J.,

Zeng, H., and Kordi, M., 2009, Southeast Partnership Early Test Update – Cranfield field, MS: presented at the

Eighth Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 4­7, 2009.

Characterization

Reservoir, regional seal, overburden, groundwater and the near surface were characterized using published

field history, historic and current production data, a 2007 3­D seismic survey prior to CO2 injection, historic and

modern wireline logs, 4 cores, published and newly collected groundwater data, and airborne surveys.

Kordi, Masoumeh, 2013, Characterization and prediction of reservoir quality in chlorite­coated sandstones:

evidence from the Late Cretaceous Lower Tuscaloosa Formation at Cranfield Field, Mississippi, U.S.A., PhD

Dissertation, the University of Texas at Austin, 193p.

Lu, Jiemin. Kordi, Masoumeh, Hovorka, S.D. , Meckel, T.A., Christopher, C.A, 2013., Reservoir characterization

and complications for trapping mechanisms at Cranfield CO2 injection site. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control

(2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.10.007

Lu, Jiemin, Milliken, K., Reed, R. M., and Hovorka, S. D., 2011, Diagenesis and sealing capacity of the middle

Tuscaloosa mudstone at the Cranfield carbon dioxide injection site, Mississippi: Environmental Geosciences, v.

18, no. 1, p. 35–53.

Time lapse (4D) seismic survey

A second 3D survey was collected over part the area that had been flooded with CO2 after two years of CO2

injection. A 3D VSP was also conducted under funding from NRAP.

Carter, R.W., Spikes, K.T., 2013, Sensitivity analysis of Tuscaloosa sandstones to CO2 saturation, Cranfield field,

Cranfield, MS. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.01.006

Daley, T.M., Henderickson, Joel, and Queen, in press, Analysis of Time­Lapse Offset VSP For Monitoring of CO2

Storage at Cranfield, MS, SEG.

Daley, T.M., Ajo­Franklin, J.B., Doughty, C., Hovorka, S., 2010, Seismic monitoring and reservoir modeling at

SECARB’s Phase­III Cranfield Site, Ninth Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration, Pittsburgh,

May 10­13, 2010.

Ditkof, J., Caspar E, Pevzner, R., Urosevic, M., Meckel, T. A., Hovorka, S. D., in press, Time lapse seismic signal

analysis for EOR and CCS site, Cranfield field, Mississippi, Geophysics.

Ditkof, Julie N., 2013, Time­lapse seismic monitoring for enhanced oil recovery and carbon capture and storage

field site at Cranfield field, Mississippi, University of Texas Jackson School of Geosciences Master’s thesis;

http://hdl.handle.net/2152/23200

Zhang, R., Ghoshe, Ranjana, Sen, M. K, Srinivansan, Sanjay, 2013, Time­lapse surface seismic inversion with

thin bed resolution for monitoring CO2 sequestration: A case study from Cranfield, Mississippi. Int. J. Greenhouse

Gas Control (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.08.015.

Zhang, Rui, Song, Xiaolei, Fomel, Sergey, Sen, Mrinal, Srinivasan, Sanjey, in press, Time­lapse pre­stack

seismic data registration and inversion for CO2 sequestration study at Cranfield.

Well­based monitoring program

Imaging of a segment of the flood with high spatial and temporal resolution was accomplished using many

technologies at the Detailed Area Study (DAS) where two observation wells were placed in a 100m transect
downdip of an injection well in the water leg of the reservoir.

Ajo­Franklin, J.B., Peterson, J, Doetsch, J., Daley, T.M., 2013, High­resolution characterization of a CO2 plume

using crosswell seismic tomography: Cranfield, MS, USA., Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2013),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.12.018

Butsch, Robert, Brown, A. L., Bryans, Bradley, Kolb, Conrad, Hovorka, Susan, 2013, Integration of well­based

subsurface monitoring technologies: Lessons learned at SECARB study, Cranfield, MS, Int. J. Greenhouse Gas

Control

Carrigan, C.R., Yang, Xianjin, LaBrecque, D. J., Larson, Dennis, Freeman, David, Ramirez, A. L., Daily, William,

Aines, Roger, Newmark, Robin, Friedmann, Julio, Hovorka, Susan, 2013, Electrical resistance tomographic

monitoring of CO2 movement in deep geologic reservoirs. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2013),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.04.016

Dodds, Kevin, Krahenbuhl, Richard, Reitz, Anya, Li, Yaoguo, Hovorka, Susan, 2013, Evaluation of time lapse

borehole gravity for CO2 plume detection SECARB Cranfield . Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2013)

Doetsch, Joseph, Kowalsky, M. A. Doughty, Christine, Finsterle , Stefan, Ajo­Franklin, J. B., Carrigan, C. R., Yang,

Xianjin, Hovorka, S. D., Daley, T. M., 2013, Constraining CO2 simulations by coupled modeling and inversion of

electrical resistance and gas composition data. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2013),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.04.011

Fluid­flow models

A series of fluid flow models were constructed to assess the response of the reservoir.

Chang, K.­W., Hesse, M. A., Nicot, J. ­P., and Hovorka, S. D., 2011, Effects of adjacent mud rocks on CO2

injection pressure: model case based on a typical U.S. Gulf Coast salt diapir field under injection, in Energy

Procedia, v. 4, Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies

GHGT10, September 19–23, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, p. 4567–4574.

Choi, Jong­Won, Nicot, J. ­P., Meckel, Timothy, and Hovorka, S. D., 2011, Numerical modeling of CO2 injection

into a typical U.S. Gulf Coast anticline structure, in Energy Procedia, v. 4, Proceedings of 10th International

Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies GHGT10, September 19–23, Amsterdam, The

Netherlands, p. 3486–3493.

Choi, J.­W., Nicot, J.­P. Hosseini, S. A., Clift, S. J., and Hovorka, S. D., 2013, CO2 recycling accounting and EOR

operation scheduling to assist in storage capacity assessment at a U.S. gulf coast depleted reservoir. Int. J.

Greenhouse Gas Control (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.01.033

Delshad, Mojdeh, Kong, Xianhui, Tavakoli, Reza, Hosseini, S. A. Wheeler, M. A., 2013., Modeling and simulation

of carbon sequestration at Cranfield incorporating new physical models. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2013),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.

Doughty, Christine, and Freifeld, Barry, in review, Modeling CO2 injection at Cranfield Mississippi, Inversion of

methane and temperature effects.

Hosseini, S.A., Lashgarib, Hamidreza, Choi, J.­W., Nicot, J.­P., Ju, Jiemin, Hovorka, S. D, 2013., Static and

dynamic reservoir modeling for geological CO2 sequestration at Cranfield, Mississippi, U.S.A. Int. J. Greenhouse

Gas Control (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.11.009

Hosseini, S. A., and Nicot, J. ­P., 2012, Numerical modeling of a multiphase wateroil CO2 system using a water–

CO2 system: application to the far field of a U.S. Gulf Coast reservoir: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas

Control, v. 10, p. 88–99.

Kim, Seunghee, and Hosseini, S. A., 2013, Above­zone pressure monitoring and geomechanical analysis of a

field scale CO2 injection, Cranfield Mississippi, Greenhouse Gases Science and Technology, Wiley Online

Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/ghg.1388

Lu, J., Cook, P. J., Hosseini, S. A., Yang, C., Romanak, K. D., Zhang, T., Freifeld, B. M., Smyth, R. C., Zeng, H.,

and Hovorka, S. D., 2012, Complex fluid flow revealed by monitoring CO2 injection in a fluvial formation: Journal

of Geophysical Research, v. 117, B03208, doi:10.1029/2011JB008939.

Mukhopadhyay, S., Birkholzer, J. T., Nicot, J. ­P., and Hosseini, S. A., 2012, A model comparison initiative for a

CO2 injection field test: an introduction to Sim­SEQ: Environmental Earth Science, v. 67, p. 601–611.

Risk and well performance

Meckel, T.A., Zeidouni, Mehdi, Hovorka, S. D., Hosseini, S.A., 2013, Assessing sensitivity to well leakage from

three years of continuous reservoir pressure monitoring during CO2 injection at Cranfield, MS, USA. Int. J.

Greenhouse Gas Control (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.01.019

Nicot, J.­P., Oldenberg, C. M., Houseworth, J. E., Choi, J.­ W, 2013 Analysis of potential leakage pathways at the

Cranfield, MS, U.S.A., CO2 sequestration site. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2012),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.10.011

Tao, Qing, Bryant, S. L., Meckel, T. A., 2013., Modeling above­zone measurements of pressure and temperature

for monitoring CCS sites. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.08.011

Geochemical studies of fluid response
Studies of the geochemical response to the CO2 injection found CO2–mineral reaction produced only small

changes, however, exsolution of methane as a result of CO2 dissolution was identified for the first time.

Hosseini, S. A., Mathias, S. A., and Javadpour, F., 2012, Analytical model for CO2 injection into brine aquifers

containing residual CH4: Transport in Porous Media, v. 94, p. 795–815.

Lu, Jiemin, Kharaka, Y. K., Thordsen, J. J., Horita, J., Karamalidis, A., Griffith, C., Hakala, J. A., Ambats, G., Cole,

D. R., Phelps, T. J., Manning, M. A., Cook, P. J., and Hovorka, S. D., 2012, CO2–rock–brine interactions in Lower

Tuscaloosa Formation at Cranfield CO2 sequestration site, Mississippi, U.S.A.: Chemical Geology, v. 291, p.

269–277.

Verma, Sandeep, Oaks, C.S., Chugunov, N., Ramakrishnan, T. S., Hosseini, Hovorka, S.. 2013, Reservoir fluid

monitoring in carbon dioxide sequestration at Cranfield, Energy Procedia, 37, p. 4344–4355

Near surface groundwater monitoring

As expected, no impact from groundwater as a result of large volume injection at 10,000ft depth was found. A

push­pull test was used to identify the signal that would result if migration should occur.

Yang Changbing, Mickler, P. J , Reed Robert, Scanlon, B. R, . Romanak, K. D., Jean­Philippe Nicot J.­P.,.

Hovorka, S. D., Trevino, R. H., Larson, Toti, 2013, Single­well push–pull test for assessing potential impacts of

CO2 leak­age on groundwater quality in a shallow Gulf Coast aquifer in Cranfield, Mississippi. Int. J. Greenhouse

Gas Control (2013),

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.12.030

Romanak, K. D., Bennett, P. C., Yang, C., and Hovorka, S. D., 2012, Process­based approach to CO2 leakage

detection by vadose zone gas monitoring at geologic CO2 storage sites: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 39,

L15405, doi:10.1029/2012GL052426.

Yang, Changbing, Romanak, Katherine, Holt, R. M., Linder, J., Smith, L., Treviño, R. H., Roecker, Frank, Xia, Y.,

and Rickerts, J., 2012, Large volume of CO2 injection at the Cranfield, early field test of the SECARB Phase III:

near­surface monitoring, in Carbon Management Technology Conference, 7–9 February, Orlando, Florida, USA,

SPE 163075 DOI: 10.7122/151428­MS.

July 30, 2014 Update of Accomplishments at Cranfield

GCCC has participated in SECARB principally through leading a two­stage field experiment in monitoring at

Denbury Onshore LLC’s Cranfield field CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) project. The first test program, known

as Phase II, was conducted from 2008 to 2011 within the EOR injection­production patterns and tested the

above­zone monitoring interval (AZMI) pressure monitoring as a surveillance tool to assess isolation. The

second stage of testing, known as Phase III, or the SECARB “early test,” assessed many elements of field­scale

monitoring, such as reservoir pressure surveillance, wireline logging of the reservoir interval, 4D seismic

surveillance of the reservoir and zones above it for change in fluid composition, AZMI pressure monitoring,

groundwater geochemical sampling, and airborne magnetic and conductivity surveys. In addition, an intensive

study was conducted at the detailed area of study (DAS), where two observation wells were placed 100 m

downdip of an injection well in the water leg below the oil­water contact. An intensive multistage, multiresearcher

effort was conducted to characterize the reservoir, monitor flow, and model the system response to CO2 injection

at the DAS.
Colors in the 3­D seismic map flattened on the lower Tuscaloosa D­E show sand in brighter colors and

lower quality reservoir in blue­green, with methane gas in the yellow colors. Interpreted stratigraphic cross

section showing depositional facies.

This is a base­line 3­D survey with interpreted structure on base Tuscaloosa, showing key units. The

crestal graben fault is showing blue.

The GCCC­led SECARB projects at Cranfield have resulted in a number of accomplishments for the RCSP

program:

Monitored a large­volume injection (5 million metric tons CO2 stored).

Monitored at a commercial EOR site.

Monitored over a very long timeframe (2008–14).

Provided information about the feasibility and limitations of common monitoring approaches such as 4D

seismic surveillance and groundwater geochemical testing programs.

Created highly collaborative opportunity for industry, national lab, U.S. Geological Survey, and academic

interaction. Hosted many experiments within and outside of the RCSP, such as the National Risk

Assessment Partnership (NRAP), the Carbon Capture Project (CCP), GEO­SEQ, the Center for Frontiers

of Subsurface Energy Security (CFSES), and other targeted projects.

Provided dense data that can be used for capacity assessment.

Published numerous results (see list of references below).

Led the way toward the next phase of more commercially oriented monitoring.

In addition, significant R&D was undertaken as part of this study:

The second geologic CO2 storage tests of cross­well electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) for detection

of CO2 substituting for brine were performed. (The first was the small shallow deployment at Ketzin,

Germany.) The favorable outcome showed good sensitivity, even with significant noise from the

instruments, and possible sensitivity to increases in saturation beyond the range of seismic detection.

The second geologic CO2 storage tests of gravity (after the seafloor gravity measurement at Sleipner,

North Sea) were performed. The wellbore instrument was able to detect and reasonably quantify CO2

substitution for brine. This work was done as part of CCP.

Exsolution of methane from brine as a result of CO2 dissolution was observed.

The complexities of interaction between reservoir heterogeneity and injection rate in the two­phase­flow

field were documented. Efficiency of occupancy was dependent on injection rate.

This project supported development and demonstration of the process­based soil

gas method for attribution of the source of anomalies. This method is sensitive to very small (insignificant)

fluxes. (See Natural Analog Studies Theme for more.)

No microseismicity was detected from the injection. This work was done as part of the Research Institute

of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE).

.

Complex responses of many parts of the system during monitoring led to difficulty in uniquely matching fluid­flow

models to observation. Also, observed limitations on detectability of response—for example, inability to reliably

“map the plume edge” above noise using 4D surface seismic or vertical seismic profiling (VSP)—are important

outcomes in terms of regulatory expectations. This finding leads to the development of the concept of

assessment of low­probability material impacts (ALPMI) described in the EPA –CCS site­specific sensitivity

study, where neither continually updated history match nor comprehensive monitoring of plume movement is

needed. The ALPMI method requires assessment of the material impacts and the signal that would precede the

impact, and designs monitoring to intercept the unacceptable low­probability reservoir responses. Use of

modeling becomes primarily an up­front activity, which only needs updating if major flaws are observed that

potentially lead to project failure.

Another outcome of observations at Cranfield is that near­surface monitoring requires deep and substantive

characterization if it is to be effectively used to show no change during and after injection. Many changes are

already under way in near­surface settings, and changes in climate, development, or recovery from past use are

expected. We recommend careful characterization of the near surface to identify (1) the natural range and trend

of variability and (2) the response of the system should it be perturbed as a result of injection. For example, the

signal produced should CO2, brine, or other fluids migrate from the reservoir to shallow depths or the surface. We

do not recommend that groundwater soil gas be systematically sampled with the expectation of detecting a
signal if, as expected, the noise is high and complex. These data are valuable should an unexplained change

occur so that project personnel can determine if the response is a result of injection.

October 28, 2013 Featured Publication

A special section of the October issue of the International Journal of Greenhouse

Gas Control is dedicated to CCS work at Cranfield Field, Mississippi. The section

comprises a mid­project overview and assessment of the CCS field work, dense

data collection, and analysis that began a decade ago with the formation of the

Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership and that continues today

at Cranfield Field. The section consists of sixteen papers authored by GCCC staff

and their colleagues. It opens with a discussion of the Cranfield project design

and covers risk assessment, characterization, injection and production activities,

as well as monitoring techniques and modeling.

The publication of this collection of papers is a gratifying milestone for the GCCC.

The volume was guest­edited by Susan Hovorka, Tip Meckel and JP Nicot. Nicot

commented, "This is the first exhaustive document of the Partnership's projects,

and it will be useful to the entire CCS community."

February 2013 Update of Accomplishments at Cranfield

Four million metric tons of CO2 have been stored at Cranfield over the past 4 years. This is an important

demonstration that large scale CO2 injection is a viable and commercially available technology. Note: Recycling

of CO2 at the field for EOR is 6.5 million metric tons, so the 4 million tons of CO2 stored represents actual saline

storage.

Modeled lab, and field tests have simulated leakage to groundwater to define the signal that would be detected

should this occur. Monitoring of Cranfield groundwater by BEG, Ol' Miss and Mississippi State have detected no

CO2 related change to groundwater even in an area with many dozens of 1940s era wells, and plugged and

abandoned (P&A) wells.

Pressure in Cranfield field has been elevated above hydrostatic (natural pressure) as much as 1200 psi, which is

not insignificant. Microseismic monitoring by RITE (Japan) has detected no microseismicity. This is an important

contribution in the context of concern about seismicity related to deep underground injection of CO2.

August, 2012 Like Champagne Bubbles in the Wellbore

We are assessing a new and elegantly simple technique to study the timing and chemical composition of

breakthrough. This work was primarily developed by GCCC’s Seyyed Hosseini and Sandeep Verma of

Schlumberger.

At breakthrough, supercritical carbon dioxide first enters the well­bore. Because CO2 is lower density than the

surrounding brine (about 0.6 compared to 1.1 g/cm3), bubbles of CO2 form and rise to the top of the well, just

like bubbles in a champagne flute. The first bubbles to arrive at the top of the well contain the first breakthrough

fluid. The next bubbles record the chemical composition of the next bit of fluid, and so on. If the well is shut­in,

the bubbles rise in the well­bore and collect in a narrow tubing in which mixing is suppressed. From the top

down, the collected fluid represent a time series of breakthrough chemistry.

As a part of the final monitoring program at Ella G. Lees #7 (the Phase II observation well), we assessed the

wellbore fluid in order to assess CO2­methane ratio at breakthrough. Reservoir fluid has not been sampled at

this well. The Schlumberger Platform Basic Measurement Sonde (PBMS) measures wellbore pressure and

temperature, and the Platform Gradiomanometer Sonde (PGMS) measures high resolution average density.

Schlumberger­Doll labs analyzed the density of the wellbore fluid. We combined fluid density information

calculated by subtracting bottom­hole pressure and temperature from surface pressure and temperature. This

provides breakthrough composition data in the same way that on­site sampling with a U­tube does but a lower

cost.

The timing of breakthrough can be easily resolved from change in rate of change of tubing pressure at the

wellhead. Prior to breakthrough the wellbore is filled with brine. As the CO2 fills the idle tubing, pressure

gauges at the wellhead record increase change of pressure as a result of the more less dense supercritcal CO2

displacing the dense brine. This method has been previously validated by comparison of real­time sampling at

the DAS. Fluid composition was measured with the U­tube during breakthrough at the observation well F2,

which is closer to the injector and began to fill with CO2 on December 16, as evidenced by the increased

pressure at the wellhead. Breakthrough began at the second observation well F3 three days later. After the

wellbores filled with low­density CO2, the pressure remained high and constant as shown in the graph.
Pressure increases as CO2 bubbles fill the observation wells. The bubbling takes 3­4

days.

Sampling fluid in the shut­in well bore allows for a one­time effort rather than

continuous monitoring.

August, 2012 Update of Activities at Cranfield

At Cranfield Field, long­term and time­lapse surveillance of carbon dioxide injection continues, as does data

analysis, presentation, and discussion. A special volume of the International Journal of Greenhouse Gas

Control Technologies focused on Cranfield results is in preparation.

In order to assess risk and signal from unexpected CO2 leakage to fresh water, we have completed a first­of­itskind push­pull test to test CO2 interaction with aquifer mineralogy and water under in­situ conditions. Aquifer

water was produced, saturated with CO2, and reinjected in a closed look. Reacted brine was withdrawn and

analyzed for chemical and isotopic composition. This work is being conducted partly under funding from the

American Water Works Association (AWWA).

GCCC student Julie Ditkof traveled to Curtain University in Perth, Australia to improve the 4­D seismic signal

using time­lapse cross­equalization. The work attempts to improve CO2 signal in this deep, thin, and complex

reservoir.

The Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE) started collecting data from a recently

installed 6­site microseismic array over the whole Cranfield field (in collaboration with WESTCARB). The

seismic array is now operational and, while it has recognized distant events, no local seismic events have

been detected, however noise from unidentified sources has been noted. The objective of the project is to

develop experience with prediction and monitoring methods for microseismicity related to CO2 injection.

The cumulative total stored CO2 mass monitored at Cranfield at the end of the quarter has reached 3,565,107

metric tons. Cranfield is the first of the DOE’s Storage Partnerships to exceed its storage goals.
May 3, 2011 Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration

Katherine Romanak presented results from soil­gas monitoring work at Cranfield's P­site at the 10th Annual

Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration in Pittsburgh, PA. To view the complete poster, "Method for

Distinguishing Signal From Noise in the Near­Surface Using Simple Soil­Gas Measurements: Lessons from

Natural and Industrial Analogues", please click here.

May 6­8, 2010 Monitoring Network Meeting

The GCCC sponsored a Monitoring Network meeting of the International Energy Agency Greenhouse Gas

R&D Programme at Cranfield. During the meeting, engineers demonstrated the venting of CO2 from injection

equipment. CO2 is colorless, but it appears as a white stream because it cools rapidly from very high

temperature to ambient temperature, which causes water from the air to condense. These water droplets

scatter light so that the stream appears white. The force of the release also demonstrates the high pressure at

which CO2 is injected into containment systems.

Download full video in Quicktime [142 Mb] or reduced Animated GIF [12.5 Mb]

April and May, 2010 Tracer Monitoring Test at Cranfield

Researchers of Gulf Coast Carbon Center, Laurence Berkley National Lab, US Geological Survey, Oak Ridge

National Lab, and University of Edinburgh conducted a reservoir fluid sampling and tracer monitoring program

at Cranfield field, Mississippi. Production wells under CO2 flood were sampled to understand CO2 ­related

water­rock reactions and their impact on organic chemistry. Tracers consisting of krypton, xenon, a suite of

perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride were introduced to the CO2 stream of the injector at Detailed Area of

Study (DAS). The tracers were detected in the two monitoring wells by frequent sampling using U­tube

systems. Two such tracer tests were conducted at different CO2 injection rates. The collected datasets shed

light on fluid migration rates and evolution of pathways in the injection zone.

March 7­10, 2010 GCCC Collaborates with Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology

Laboratory (DOE NETL) on CO2­Rock­Water Interaction Experiments

GCCC’s Jiemin Lu traveled to NETL in Pittsburgh to work with scientists who have developed two autoclave

reactors to study rock­water interactions. The system precisely controls both temperature and pressure to

carefully replicate the conditions that occur deep underground in the formations used for geologic

sequestration of carbon dioxide.

The system’s inner vessel is a gold bag that serves as the reaction container. Brine and rock samples are

sealed in this bag. One tube is connected to allow water sample to be taken during the reaction. The gold

bag is then placed inside a steel container, which is filled with water. Pressure is applied to the water to

change the pressure inside the gold bag. The entire apparatus is placed in a heat chamber, which controls

the temperature. The system is closed, so that the samples are never exposed to oxygen or atmospheric

pressure.

Lu’s initial experiment will involve Tuscaloosa sandstone and brine collected from the U­tube at Cranfield

field during the SEACARB III experiments. Rock and brine will equilibrate for one month, after which CO2 will

be added to the system to simulate injection of carbon dioxide. Samples of brine will be taken periodically to

study changes in acidity, concentrations of anions and cations, redox, and isotopes.

Lu explains that the study will both “help refine our questions and bound model conditions,” providing new
insights into the interactions that occur during geological sequestration.

December 25, 2009 Holiday Season at Cranfield

GCCC scientists maintained an around the clock work schedule throughout the holidays, monitoring the

development of the injection experiment. For the full story, click here.

December 6, 2009 Tour of P­Site

Katherine Romanak hosted a tour of P­site, which is the study site established by GCCC for determining

how environmental factors affect near­surface monitoring at an engineered location. Romanak

demonstrated methods used by BEG scientists to monitor the site and showed the scientists the first soil­gas

data set that collected. The scientists discussed preliminary interpretations of the data, as well as numerous

areas for future collaboration.

The visitors to the P­site are (from left to right) Stuart Gilfillan (University of Edinburgh, Scotland) Susan Pfiffner

(University of Tennessee) Yousif Kharaka (U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California) Tommy Phelps (Oak Ridge

National Laboratory) Kim Gilbert (Ph.D. student, The University of Texas at Austin) and GCCC’s Katherine Romanak.

December 5, 2009 Update – First Week of Injection at SECARB III: Detailed Area of Study (DAS)

We have begun injection in the Detailed Area of Study (DAS) of the SECARB project at Cranfield. The DAS

consists of three wells drilled at close spacing: one injection well (CFU 31­F1) and two observation wells

(CFU 31­F2 and CFU 31­F3). The spacing from F1 to F2 is 227 feet (69 m) and from F1 to F3 367 ft (111 m).

The observation wells are east and downdip of F1. The three wells are completed in the lower Tuscaloosa

with a 65 ft (20 m) perforated interval at a top average depth of 10,445 feet. The downdip is 1 to 2 degrees.

A dense array of subsurface instruments have been deployed in the DAS wells designed to: (1) test novel

MVA (monitoring, verification, and accounting) tools and improve tool performance evaluation and (2)

improve capacity assessment via measurement of saturation and sweep efficiency as a CO2 flood develops.

The instrumentation in the DAS wells allows us to simultaneously collect numerous physical measurements

to assess the spatial extent and concentration of CO2. Electrical resistance tomography (ERT) receivers are

installed on the casing, above­zone pressure gages, and distributed temperature sensors were installed on

both F2 and F3. Baseline geophysical surveys requiring full well diameter, such as cross­well seismic

measurements, gravity measurements, and VSP (vertical seismic profiles), were run several months ago

prior to perforation. During tubing completion, additional tools were strapped onto the tubing and lowered

into the wells, including reservoir pressure and temperature gages on wireline read­outs, tubing conveyed

piezoelectric sources fabricated by LBNL (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) in F2 and two receiver

strings in F3. The installed seismic system is known as continuous active seismic source monitoring

(CASSM).

The DAS is the last portion of the Phase III Early Test to start injection. Injection has been underway at wells

to the north of the DAS since April as part of the Phase III high volume injection test (HiVIT). We have

observed a relatively strong pressure increase in the DAS as a result of this injection.
The background pressure in the DAS has been increasing as a result of injection in the high volume test at Cranfield.

In mid November, we completed a hydrologic interference test, which demonstrated that the wells are in

good hydrologic continuity. We performed a step rate field brine injection into F1, during which the rate of

brine injected into the well was repeatedly increased over time. We estimated that the permeability over the

perforated interval is 216 mD at F1 and 411 mD at F2.

Pressure gauges have been collecting baseline data since early November. ERT began on November 26,

2009. ERT is returning consistent data, with some intermittent noise issues near the packer and in the F2

well. The theoretical depth of penetration of ERT in monopole mode is 4 meters away from the well. CASSM

began operations incrementally and at first performed very well.

On November 30, 2009 the project collected the baseline pulsed neutron log Schlumberger Reservoir

Saturation Tool (RST) in F2 and F1. F3 still contains dense workover fluid, that will be produced next week

and baseline runs will be conducted at the same time as the first repeat in F2. F1 repeat RST will be at the

same time as repeat cross well seismic, gravity, and VSP, as injection will continue into this well in the near

term.

At 8:40 AM December 1, 2009, CO2 injection began into CFU 31 F1. The injection rate was initially set by a

10/64 choke on a needle valve at the wellhead to assess the well and formation response. The pressure in

the reservoir responded immediately and as expected, stabilizing about 550 psi higher than the initial

pressure. The pressure in F2 and F3 has been rising to about 25 psi above initial conditions.

As the well and near­well bore saturated and the back­pressure decreased over the first few hours, we

stepped up the rate to 240 tons/day. This was determined to be a moderate rate for the experiment. We plan

to step up the injection rate at this well over the next few weeks to double or more, and then step up rates at

nearby wells to produce the Phase III million­ton­per­year rate.
Following injection at well F1 (red), pressure at the F2 observation well (blue) and at the F3 observation well (green)

increased as expected.

A program of pulsed tracers including 5 PFT’s, SF6, and Xe and Kr was introduced into the injection well

CO2 stream over the first 4 days of injection and will be repeated when the injection rate is increased. These

tracers will be used to: (1) measure changes in velocity as the plume builds, (2) observe transport

mechanism, and (3) estimate dissolution into brine.

To measure these tracer concentrations, we have developed a program of high frequency sampling

employing the U­tube in­situ fluid sampler constructed by LBNL and operated in teamwork by the Bureau.

Samples are extracted at a rate of one sample every 2 to 4 hours. The USGS operates an in­line high

pressure pH meter. The tracer and gas composition of every sample is measured with an LBNL quadrupole

mass spectrometer in the field, along with lab duplicates of selected samples.

As of December 5, 2009, the gas species measured in the U­tube is methane at concentrations consistent

with dissolved phase, and no increase in CO2 or tracer has been detected. The USGS conducts additional

assessments of selected samples for aqueous geochemistry. Baseline alkalinity of 370mg/L as HCO3 has

been measured. Fluorescent dye placed in 900 barrels of injection brine at step­rate test has been detected

at F2, confirming that the wells are in good connection for single phase transport. Rhodamine was used as a

tag in workover water prior to perforation and is an indication of a contaminant that is present but of low

quantity. The USGS is also resampling and adding to the HiVIT monitoring program.

The U­tube operation is staffed around the clock by a minimum of two staff per shift. Two additional

geochemists are also processing samples. A site supervisor from Sandia Technology manages well issues,

and the U­tube N2 and compressor issues on a 3 to 5 days/week schedule. This schedule will continue

though arrival of the last tracer estimated to occur mid January. Denbury provides 24­hour oversight of

injection.
Example model result prepared by Christine Dougty, LBNL using TOUGH 2 showing the spatial extent of carbon

dioxide 10 and 30 days after the initiation of injection. The model predits breakthrough at F2 after 9.5 days and F3

after 22.7 days.

BEG and LBNL have recently completed several models using our new data to estimate the time it will take

CO2 to move from F1 to F2 and then F3. The model results are sensitive to saturation and sweep efficiency

(the variables that the experiment is designed to assess), also to assumptions about interaction of pressure

and gravity on transport. The modeling provides a range of estimates of plume building performance. The

fastest estimate of breakthrough (detection of supercritical CO2 arrival at the F2 observation well) is 7 days,

with an average of about two weeks. Our past experience during the Frio pilot injection tests showed

breakthrough at the observation well on the early end of estimates. Therefore, we began the well­based

detection programs prior to injection with gradually increasing intensity during the first week. The average

estimated arrival time for F3 is January 4, 2010.

October 13, 2009 Instrumentation Installed at Soil­Gas Monitoring Site

GCCC researchers Changbing Yang and Katherine Romanak continue their work to understand how soilgas monitoring can best be used to document storage effectiveness. The study site at Cranfield has a suite

of the complexities that must be studied and analyzed in order to separate any possible subsurface­sources

leakage signal from background variability. These complexities include a constructed gravel pad that

contains a plugged and abandoned (P&A) oil well and a 1950’s era pit filled with water and possibly some

legacy hydrocarbons. The entire area is surrounded by forest, and the plants are expected to play an

important role in the dynamics of carbon dioxide and other gases in the area. The relative importance of the

contribution of the pad, the pit, and the plants will be assessed in our analysis, so we therefore refer to the

site as the P­site. The Jackson School of Geosciences at the University of Texas generously provided

matching funding to GCCC for the instrumentation.

Romanak and Yang with the help of researcher Bob Reedy established four soil­gas monitoring transects

within P­site to help distinguish the various influences of the pad, pit, plants, and P&A well on near­surface

soil­gas compositions as shown in the diagram of the site.
Schematic diagram of the P­site shows the locations of twelve soil­ gas stations relative to the gravel pad, the P&A

well, and the mud pit.

Each transect is composed of three to six soil­gas stations. A single soil­gas station includes three 1/8­inch

stainless steel gas wells with 6­inch screens set at depths ranging from 2 to 15 feet. The wells are packed

with sand in the regions where gas is to be sampled and bentonite clay between sample regions. In

addition, a soil­gas well was installed in the detailed area of study (DAS).

A soil­gas well is constructed of 1/8 inch stainless steel tubing and fitted with a 6­inch screen for sampling of

gas. These types of wells are permanently installed at various depths within one gas station.

PVC protector pipes emerging from the ground at P­site indicate the locations of soil­gas stations.

Sediment samples were collected from the soil­gas stations. They have been brought back to the lab at

GCCC where they will be analyzed for water content, matric potential (an indicator of the potential of water to

move through soils), bulk density, organic matter, and texture. These measurements will be used in

modeling of the movement of gases at the P­site.
Sediment samples were collected in clear plastic tubes. The different colors visible through the

tubes suggest significant complexity of the soils at P­site. The orange and reddish colors may

indicate oxidation and reductive processes.

A near­surface observatory, an integrated system for continuously connecting above­ and below­ground

information was also installed at the P­site. The observatory collects above­ground information, such as air

temperature, barometric pressure, precipitation, air CO2 concentration, solar radiation, wind speed and

directions, and relative humidity and also subsurface data including soil water content, matric potential,

temperature, and soil CO2 concentration at different depths. A solar panel provides power to the observatory.

Data from the observatory and soil gas stations will also be used for numerical modeling exercises.

Romanak and Reedy program the data collection system to continuously collect measurements at

the weather observatory.

A water well with a depth of 34 feet was also drilled at the P­site. The diameter of the borehole was 3 inches.

It was completed with 1­inch diameter PVC pipe with10 feet screen at the bottom. The depth of the water

level at P­site is around 30 feet. This is a perched aquifer, as the regional aquifer used for industrial and

domestic water supply is roughly 200 to 300 feet below the ground surface.

September 21, 2009 Geomechanical Test begins at Cranfield

With his colleagues at the GCCC, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and Weston Geophysical, Tip

Meckel recently initiated a subsurface geomechanical experiment at Cranfield. The study site for the project is

approximately one mile from the DAS site and contains an observation well located about 1,200 feet from an

injection well.
The observation well is equipped with downhole tool string on which twelve high­resolution geophones are

attached. As CO2 is pumped into the injection well, pressure will increase as anticipated in the subsurface

formations. The geophones will continuously monitor for and record any deep­subsurface small­scale acoustic

signals that are generated within the injection reservoir and overlying seals. The number and frequency of the

acoustic signals will indicate how changes in pressure affect the rock formations.

On September 14th a tool string was lowered more than 10,000 feet underground in the observation well, and

initiation of CO2 injection began on September 21st. However, normal operational problems delayed initial

data acquisition. A valve problem at the injection wellhead at the surface was detected, which delayed

pumping for a few days. In the meantime, some of the geophones near the bottom of the observation well

stopped communicating with the surface. Repairs to the problems are underway, and injection and monitoring

are expected to continue imminently.
Video: Microseismic tool string is installed in observation well.

September 14, 2009: Work Plan for Analysis of the Sample Cores

GCCC Post Doc Jiemin Lu has begun analyzing the three cores taken from the observations wells at the

Detailed Area of Study (DAS). The work plan for the cores involves four major categories of analysis: petrology

and mineralogy, chemistry, petrophysics, and geomechanics Many of the tests or analyses will be performed at

BEG. In addition other institutions and subcontractors are being contacted to perform specialized analyses.

Preliminary Work Plan for Core Samples

Petrology and Mineralogy

Scanning Electron Microscopy

XRD mineralogy

Gamma ray core canning

Clay alignment analysis

Neutron scanning (National Energy Technology Labs)

Chemistry

X­ray fluorescence

Rock­water reactions (National Energy Technology Labs)

Stable isotope analysis

Petrophysics

Permeability and porosity (CoreLabs)

Micro computer tomography (Lawrence Berkley National Labs)

Seismic velocity (Lawrence Berkley National Labs)

CO2 saturation (Lawrence Berkley National Labs)

Residual saturation (Stanford)

CO2 diffusion in seal

Geomechanics

Triaxial compression test (CoreLabs, Petroleum Geosciences Engineering at UT)

XRD mineralogy is a specialized form of X­ray diffraction analysis. X­ray diffraction is a common technique

used by geologists to identify mineral phases, such as those in the sandstone and shale of the cores retrieved

from Cranfield. After the analysis is performed, the diffraction patterns are collected from samples. They are

then compared against a database maintained by the International Centre for Diffraction Data and used to

identify substances and quantify mineral compositions.

In order to perform quantitative XRD, samples must be ground to a powder, which is then mounted onto a slide

for analysis. A major assumption of the technique is that all crystalline orientations in the sample are

represented equally on the slide. A problem with some XRD techniques is that pressing powders onto sample

holder results in biases the orientation of the crystals.

Lu is the first user a new system purchased by the BEG Mudrocks System Research Laboratory that avoids the

types of artifacts that often plague XRD. The sample preparation system consists of a McCrone Micronizing Mill

(which allows wet grinding to produce fine and homogenized powder samples in resulting slurries), a Spay

drier (which makes truly randomly oriented powder samples), and a centrifuge (to separate clay minerals).
The new equipment at the Mudrocks System Research laboratory that is being used for sample analysis includes a large silver

spray dryer, which produces truly random powder samples. The rectangular black equipment on the bench on the left is McCrone

MicroNizing mill.

August 31, 2009: Preliminary Results from Environmental Monitoring Survey

During the initial survey of plugged and abandoned (P&A) wells around the detailed area of study (DAS),

GCCC researchers Katherine Romanak and Changbing Yang performed reconnaissance soil­gas

measurements with a soil probe and a portable gas chromatograph at three sites. A portable gas

chromatograph measures the volume percent concentrations of methane (CH4), carbon dioxide (CO2), oxygen

(O2), and nitrogen (N2) gas trapped between particles of soil.

A soil probe inserted through the gravel pad at a study site is used to sample soil gases.

The soil­gas probe is typically inserted up to 1 meter into the ground in a region called the vadose zone or the
unsaturated zone. In this region, which lies above the aquifer, the soils are not fully saturated by water. The

unsaturated zone is a region of significant environmental complexity as a result of microbial activity, water flux,

gas transport and exchange with the atmosphere, chemical reactions, and plant root respiration. Initial

measurements showed mostly concentrations of gases that are typically found in air at the sites. However, to

separate near­surface gas generation from a deep source that might indicate leakage takes more work.

Romanak and Yang will study in detail an old abandoned well site situated near the center of a newlyconstructed gravel pad. A swampy 1950’s era mud pit lies to the south of the site. The area around the gravel

pad is heavily wooded.

The study site is a plugged and abandoned well at the center of a newly constructed gravel pad.

A 1950’s era mud pit and dense woods are adjacent to the study site

Prior to the trip, the DAS experienced a week of heavy rainfall. Such environmental variability has been shown

to influence methane and carbon dioxide measurements. Romanak returned to the site ten days later, during

which time the soils had dried. When soil­gas measurements were repeated, soil­gas concentrations had

changed. This initial study highlights the environmental complexity involved with developing an accurate

environmental monitoring program.

In order to evaluate the chemical, physical, and biological processes at the site in more detail, Romanak and

Yang plan to install more permanent soil­gas monitoring stations and sensors to monitor environmental factors

such as barometric pressure, rainfall, water flux, and subsurface pressure and temperature. They will also

measure the isotopic composition of gases in order to trace their diverse sources. By unraveling the pathways

of gas evolution they hope to develop a framework for environmental monitoring at industrial sites. Some of the

questions Romanak and Yang hope to address include:

What is the possible contribution of methane from bacteria in the soil, in the mud pit, and from the well, if

any?

What is the possible contribution of carbon dioxide from the soil, the mud pit, the surrounding plants,

and the well, if any?

How do environmental impacts, such as rain, affect the concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane?

How can we identify and monitor impacts from industrial factors, such as pits, P&A wells, and pads?

How can we engineer sites that sufficiently reduce environmental complexities to allow accurate nearsurface monitoring of carbon sequestration?
A preliminary conceptual model of the study site highlights some of the many pathways in which carbon dioxide and

methane influence environmental monitoring.

August 19, 2009: Completion of the Second Observation Well F­2

We completed logging of the middle observation well F­2 today. The big questions are: How will the CO2 move through

this rock? Will it occupy a lot of the pores or will it look for a “shortcut”, and just move through the shortcut? If the CO2

occupies many available pores, this is known as “good sweep”. In the F­2 well, we collected dense data to characterize

the rock volume to improve our prediction and eventual understanding of this process. In addition to conventional

porosity logs, we are trying the Combinable Magnetic Resonance” CMR tool that shows where moveable water occurs in

the rock.

The photo below shows the view from inside the wireline rig truck. This work requires that we spend lot of time looking

out this window – it takes at least a 45 minute “trip” time to lower a tool on wireline cable to the bottom of the well more

than 10,700 feet below the surface. Think of it as a commute to the jobsite, but downward more than two miles into the

ground.

View from inside the wireline truck.

The photo below is shows our first image of the properties of the rocks in the well. The bright areas show the locations of

pore volumes that the first analysis suggests CO2 can access. In the detail view of the image on the screen, we indicated

with arrows the possible path that the carbon dioxide will access most quickly after injection. We have a lot more work to

do before we decide if CO2 will use this zone.
A first look at geophysical properties of the well.

We conclude this entry with a poetic look at our new powerline, which is less beautiful by day, but provides us with the

ability to operate our monitoring equipment.

A nighttime view of the drill rig.

August 18, 2009: Slabbing the Upper Core From the Second Observation Well F­2

The upper core from observation well F­2 arrived at GCCC yesterday morning and was slabbed this morning at the

Bureau of Economic Geology facility in Austin. This core is from the layer that will serve as the ultimate seal to the carbon

dioxide reservoir. When core was extruded from the tubes in which it was shipped, it was still coated in the thick drilling

mud.
A section of the upper core from observation well F­2 is extruded from its casing.

The shale, which is thick and hard to cut underground, becomes weak when stress is released and water content

changes and can easily break especially across the core. BEG staff had to handle the core extremely carefully to

maintain its structure. In order to successfully slab the delicate core, it was wrapped foil for stability.

The core was wrapped in foil to stabilize it and sawed into two sections.

When the core is cut, geologists can examine

many features of the rock. This core is from a

geologic layer called the marine member of

Tuscaloosa Formation, which is a dark

mudstone and shale. The smaller section of

core is retained and archived at the Bureau of

Economic Geology. The larger section of core,

shown at right, will be used for physical and

chemical analysis by GCCC and many

collaborators. It is rare to cut a shale core, but

we expect it to provide information about how

this common rock type can assure that CO2

storage is permanent.
The dark shale of the core is exposed after it is slabbed.

August 17, 2009: The Second Core From the Second Observation Well F­2

Over the weekend, rock from within the formation that will serve as the carbon dioxide reservoir was cored. GCCC

planned to retrieve 120 feet of rock from more than 10,500 feet below the surface. This includes the top seal, the

reservoir, and the bottom seal. Because the rig can pick up 90 feet of pipe at a time, we planned to core in two 60­foot

sections.

In the upper section of the core 56 feet of rock were successfully retrieved. This section contains the seal immediately

above the reservoir as well as a portion of the reservoir.

During drilling of the lower section of core, the core barrel became jammed about half way through the core. Because of

cost considerations, the GCCC decided not to make a fourth core trip into this well. Denbury has cored the bottom­seal in

other wells in the field. These data can be used in combination with wireline log information to provide rock properties

Besides cost, one of the factors that has to be considered with coring is the stability of the well. Some of the geologic

layers the well cuts through contain rock that are weak and can crumble or swell and slump into the well. Well drillers

constantly circulate a thick liquid called drilling mud to temporarily stabilize the walls, however it important to move as

quickly as possible to permanently stabilize the well by installing and cementing in the well casing.

After coring was completed, the drillers removed the core bit from the well and replaced it with a drill bit, which will be

used to finish drilling the well. Drilling to total depth (TD) is expected later today.
A drill bit used to drill the observation wells.

August 10, 2009:Survey of Sites for Environmental Monitoring

The Federal Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 requires that before any fluid (gas or liquid) is injected underground, proof

be provided that the injectate will be retained in the injection zone, and that no harm can come to underground sources

of drinking water. Because the Tuscaloosa Reservoir at Cranfield has held oil and natural gas for 100’s of millions years,

we do not expect that there is any risk of CO2 leakage. Most of our work is within the reservoir to confirm that CO2

movement and eventual stabilization is occurring as expected and therefore there is no possibility for injected CO2 to

reach the atmosphere. While we do not expect the CO2 to leak from the reservoir, part of our research is to determine

methods to confirm where the CO2 is located in the reservoir and that CO2 will not leak from the reservoir and reach the

atmosphere.

How can we make sure that there is no risk to water or to surface ecosystems from CO2 injected beneath? Environmental

monitoring is one tool that can be used to provide this information. We plant to look in detail at natural variations in the

ecosystem, and then consider how we could find changes that might indicate leakage and quickly and confidently

separate real leaks from other kinds of changes.

One of the features that may increase the risk of leakage are wells that were drilled into the injection zone. When wells

are no longer used, they are supposed to be properly plugged with cement and heavy mud, then capped and cut off

below the surface before they are abandoned. In some other fields, injection was started, and then the operator has

found out that some wells were forgotten or improperly plugged. Our team is assessing some of the plugged and

abandoned (P&A) wells at Cranfield to determine if they are performing correctly as the injection starts.

One way to do this is though soil gas measuments. Using these measurements we determine if there are any changes or

differences in the area where P&A wells are found.
GCCC Researcher Katherine Romanak sets up to perform surface monitoring of soil gas.

August 9, 2009: The First Core from the Second Observation Well

Last night, a 30­foot core was retrieved from observation well F­2 at Cranfield field. GCCC Project Manager Ramon

Trevino and GCCC Post­Doctoral Fellow, Jiemin Lu oversaw removal of the core from about 200 feet above the depth

that the core retrieved from F­3 in June was located. This layer will act as an ultimate seal to the carbon reservoir.

In order to drill a well to such a depth rigs similar to those used by oil and gas companies are erected on the site. A very

heavy fluid called drilling mud is pumped into the well and constantly circulated in order to properly stabilize the well

after it is drilled. A common problem with the mud is that it can cake up and stop circulating properly. When this occurs rig

operators perform a “wiper trip” in order to recondition the mud in the well. Because the well extends roughly two miles

below the surface, each wiper trip takes several hours.

The drill rig in position at F­2. Fiberglass casing is prepared to be inserted and cemented inside the well once the total depth (TD) is

reached.

After the core was retrieved, a subcontractor, Corelabs, sawed the 60­foot core into 3­foot sections for transport to the
University of Texas. This core is composed of rock known as marine Tuscaloosa. This marine Tuscaloosa is a black

shale. Coring through this layer of rock was a slow process: coring a single foot required about an hour.

Corelabs saws the 30­foot core exposing the dark marine Tuscaloosa shale. The core was divided into three­foot sections for transport to

the GCCC.

July 24, 2009: Slabbing the Core from the First Observation Well

GCCC Post Doc Jiemin Lu oversaw the slabbing of the core from observation well F­3 at the GCCC laboratory in Austin.

His first step was to cut off eight six­inch long intervals, which were preserved by wax coating for future whole core

analysis. He extruded the remaining cores out of the aluminum tubes in which they were shipped.

The core is from a geologic layer called Tuscaloosa Formation. It is composed of D and E sandstone and conglomerates

units interbedded with mudstone layers. At the top of the D sand unit, there is about ten feet of red mudstone and

siltstone. This interval will act as the immediate seal to prevent escape of the carbon dioxide from the reservoir.

The core shows that the lower Tuscaloosa Formation was deposited by gravelly rivers. The character of these rivers

changes over short distances from gravel, to sand, to mud. When these various parts of the river are turned to rock,

different lithologies are preserved. When the CO2 moves through these heterogeneous rocks, it will flow more quickly

than some zones than in others.

GCCC will continue to analyze the slabs from the core to understand physical features of the rock including its

permeability, strength, and porosity. In addition the rates of flow of carbon dioxide through the rock as well as its

chemical composition will be analyzed. One of the key factors that GCCC will study is the amount of variability in both the

physical and chemical structure of the core.

Slabs from the core retrieved from the first observation well consist of a reddish mudstone interbedded with sandstone. Some

conglomerate is also visible in the core (click images to enlarge photo).

June 16, 2009: Coring the First Observation Well

Observation well F­3 was drilled, cored, and logged. A 90­foot core was retrieved from a depth greater than 10,000 feet

below the surface. It was shipped to the Gulf Coast Carbon Center’s laboratory on the University of Texas campus for
analysis. Initial observations of the core revealed nothing unexpected.

A 90­foot core was retrieved from the first observation well.

June 6, 2009: Choosing the Location for the Core from the First Observation Well

The same type of rig used to drill oil and gas wells is used to drill the observation wells. The procedures for drilling

observation wells are very similar to those used by oil and gas companies for drilling wells, except that the diameter of

the well is somewhat larger. This additional area is required to fit scientific instrumentation into the well.

This morning, the location of the core that will be drilled from observation well F­3 was determined. The core will be used

to determine the physical and chemical properties of the geological formations. This information is critical for developing

accurate computer models of the subsurface carbon dioxide reservoir.

Three hundred and fifty 30­foot joints of well casing arrive at the well pad for completion of the F­3 observation well.