Carbon dioxide storage leads of the eastern Gippsland Basin, Australia - Terminology, seal and structure considerations in trap integrity assessments

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSayers, J.
dc.contributor.authorDaniel, R.
dc.contributor.authorHillis, R.
dc.contributor.authorSpencer, L.
dc.contributor.conferenceInternational Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT) (19 Sep 2010 - 23 Sep 2010 : Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
dc.contributor.editorGale, J.
dc.contributor.editorHendriks, C.
dc.contributor.editorTurkenberg, W.
dc.date.issued2011
dc.description.abstractGeotechnical assessments of carbon dioxide (CO<inf>2</inf>) storage sites in the Gippsland Basin have mainly focussed on interpreting stratigraphy, reservoir/seal characteristics, and populating geo-models using one dimensional (1D) well data. Less emphasis has been placed on ascertaining the openness of the fluid-flow pathway that could be anticipated for CO<inf>2</inf> migrating within a trap, and using 3D seismic data to interpret any associated faults. This study addresses the structural and seal complexities involved in the assessment of CO<inf>2</inf> storage leads (CO<inf>2</inf>SL) that are proximal to producing petroleum fields where, the data control is optimal and the geology well constrained. The study area is located in the eastern Gippsland Basin, southeast Australia, where we illustrate the concepts introduced and also undertake a fault seal analysis. To assist in the assessment of CO <inf>2</inf>SLs, we also introduce new terminology including flow-path distance, flow-path height, sweep area and fluid-flow cell. In the eastern Gippsland Basin, across-fault sand-on-shale contacts are unlikely to be maintained for fault planes that extend up to 20 km along strike; reservoir intervals are also exceptionally sandy. The trap integrity of the CO<inf>2</inf>SLs studied is likely to be acceptable on condition of a continuous shale smear being present. In the case where sealing by shale smear is considered, mercury injection capillary analyses (MICP) have independently confirmed that the clays of intra-formational seals have mineralogies capable of holding back significant injected columns of CO<inf>2</inf>. The majority of fault azimuths range from 095 to 140°N and are susceptible to fault reactivation as a result of being subparallel to one of the conjugate directions of shear failure; the latter estimated using a maximum shear stress azimuth of 139°N. However, the sinuous fault planes, possibly rugose in part, have azimuths varying up to ± 55°, which could make fault reactivation less likely as a result of increased shear resistance being anticipated. Finally, the low faulting density interpreted within fluid-flow cells provides some assurance for the unimpeded fluid flow of CO<inf>2</inf>. © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityJ. Sayers, R.F. Daniel, R.R. Hillis, L. Spencer
dc.identifier.citationEnergy Procedia, 2011 / Gale, J., Hendriks, C., Turkenberg, W. (ed./s), vol.4, pp.4680-4687
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.429
dc.identifier.issn1876-6102
dc.identifier.orcidHillis, R. [0000-0002-5222-7413]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/69999
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier BV
dc.publisher.placeNetherlands
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEnergy Procedia
dc.rightsCopyright © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.429
dc.subjectGippsland Basin
dc.subjectCO2 storage
dc.subjectStructure
dc.subject3D seismic
dc.subjectFault seal analysis
dc.titleCarbon dioxide storage leads of the eastern Gippsland Basin, Australia - Terminology, seal and structure considerations in trap integrity assessments
dc.typeConference paper
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Collections

Australian School of Petroleum publications