CO2, N2, and CO2/N2 mixed gas injection for enhanced shale gas recovery and CO2 geological storage

Jianfa WU, Haoran HU, Cheng CHANG, Deliang ZHANG, Jian ZHANG, Shengxian ZHAO, Bo WANG, Qiushi ZHANG, Yiming CHEN, Fanhua ZENG

PDF(12593 KB)
PDF(12593 KB)
Front. Energy ›› 2023, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (3) : 428-445. DOI: 10.1007/s11708-023-0865-9
RESEARCH ARTICLE
RESEARCH ARTICLE

CO2, N2, and CO2/N2 mixed gas injection for enhanced shale gas recovery and CO2 geological storage

Author information +
History +

Abstract

In this work, using fractured shale cores, isothermal adsorption experiments and core flooding tests were conducted to investigate the performance of injecting different gases to enhance shale gas recovery and CO2 geological storage efficiency under real reservoir conditions. The adsorption process of shale to different gases was in agreement with the extended-Langmuir model, and the adsorption capacity of CO2 was the largest, followed by CH4, and that of N2 was the smallest of the three pure gases. In addition, when the CO2 concentration in the mixed gas exceeded 50%, the adsorption capacity of the mixed gas was greater than that of CH4, and had a strong competitive adsorption effect. For the core flooding tests, pure gas injection showed that the breakthrough time of CO2 was longer than that of N2, and the CH4 recovery factor at the breakthrough time () was also higher than that of N2. The of CO2 gas injection was approximately 44.09%, while the of N2 was only 31.63%. For CO2/N2 mixed gas injection, with the increase of CO2 concentration, the increased, and the for mixed gas CO2/N2 = 8:2 was close to that of pure CO2, about 40.24%. Moreover, the breakthrough time of N2 in mixed gas was not much different from that when pure N2 was injected, while the breakthrough time of CO2 was prolonged, which indicated that with the increase of N2 concentration in the mixed gas, the breakthrough time of CO2 could be extended. Furthermore, an abnormal surge of N2 concentration in the produced gas was observed after N2 breakthrough. In regards to CO2 storage efficiency (), as the CO2 concentration increased, also increased. The of the pure CO2 gas injection was about 35.96%, while for mixed gas CO2/N2 = 8:2, was about 32.28%.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

shale gas / gas injection / competitive adsorption / enhanced shale gas recovery / CO2 geological storage

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Jianfa WU, Haoran HU, Cheng CHANG, Deliang ZHANG, Jian ZHANG, Shengxian ZHAO, Bo WANG, Qiushi ZHANG, Yiming CHEN, Fanhua ZENG. CO2, N2, and CO2/N2 mixed gas injection for enhanced shale gas recovery and CO2 geological storage. Front. Energy, 2023, 17(3): 428‒445 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-023-0865-9

References

[1]
US. Energy Information Administration. International Energy Outlook, 2016, available at the EIA website
[2]
Josh M, Esteban L, Delle Piane C. . Laboratory characterization of shale properties. Journal of Petroleum Science Engineering, 2012, 88–89: 107–124
CrossRef Google scholar
[3]
Zhang Y, Ju B, Zhang M. . The effect of salt precipitation on the petrophysical properties and the adsorption capacity of shale matrix based on the porous structure reconstruction. Fuel, 2022, 310: 122287
CrossRef Google scholar
[4]
Dong Z, Holditch S A, McVay D A. Resource evaluation for shale gas reservoirs. SPE Economics & Management, 2013, 5(1): 5–16
CrossRef Google scholar
[5]
Richardson J, Yu W. Calculation of estimated ultimate recovery and recovery factors of shale-gas wells using a probabilistic model of original gas in place. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering, 2018, 21(3): 638–653
CrossRef Google scholar
[6]
Wang L, Tian Y, Yu X. . Advances in improved/enhanced oil recovery technologies for tight and shale reservoirs. Fuel, 2017, 210: 425–445
CrossRef Google scholar
[7]
Mahzari P, Mitchell T M, Jones A P. . Direct gas-in-place measurements prove much higher production potential than expected for shale formations. Scientific Reports, 2017, 11(1): 1–10
[8]
Gasparik M, Ghanizadeh A, Bertier P. . High-pressure methane sorption isotherms of black shales from the Netherlands. Energy & Fuels, 2012, 26(8): 4995–5004
CrossRef Google scholar
[9]
Duan X G, Hu Z M, Gao S S. . Shale high pressure isothermal adsorption curve and the production dynamic experiments of gas well. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2018, 45(1): 127–135
CrossRef Google scholar
[10]
Nguyen P, Carey J W, Viswanathan H S. . Effectiveness of supercritical-CO2 and N2 huff-and-puff methods of enhanced oil recovery in shale fracture networks using microfluidic experiments. Applied Energy, 2018, 230: 160–174
CrossRef Google scholar
[11]
StevensS HSpector DRiemerP. Enhanced coalbed methane recovery using CO2 injection: worldwide resource and CO2 sequestration potential. In: SPE International Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition in China, Beijing, China, 1998
[12]
ReevesSTaillefert APekotL. The Allison unit CO2-ECBM pilot: a reservoir modeling study. Technical Report, Advanced Resources International (US), 2003
[13]
Oudinot A Y, Koperna G J, Philip Z G. . CO2 injection performance in the Fruitland coal fairway, San Juan Basin: results of a field pilot. SPE Journal, 2011, 16(4): 864–879
CrossRef Google scholar
[14]
Wong S, Law D, Deng X. . Enhanced coalbed methane and CO2 storage in anthracitic coals—micro-pilot test at South Qinshui, Shanxi, China. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2007, 1(2): 215–222
CrossRef Google scholar
[15]
Zou C N, Zhang G S, Yang Z. . Concepts, characteristics, potential and technology of unconventional hydrocarbons: on unconventional petroleum geology. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2013, 40(4): 413–428
CrossRef Google scholar
[16]
ShiY JHua YMaoZ Q, . Comparisons of pore structure for unconventional tight gas, coalbed methane and shale gas reservoirs. In: SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta, Indonesia, 2013
[17]
Shang F, Zhu Y, Gao H. . Relationship between tectonism and composition and pore characteristics of shale reservoirs. Geofluids, 2020, 2020: 1–14
CrossRef Google scholar
[18]
Ma J, Wang X, Gao R. . Enhanced light oil recovery from tight formations through CO2 huff ‘n’puff processes. Fuel, 2015, 154: 35–44
CrossRef Google scholar
[19]
Ma J, Wang X, Gao R. . Study of cyclic CO2 injection for low-pressure light oil recovery under reservoir conditions. Fuel, 2016, 174: 296–306
CrossRef Google scholar
[20]
Zhang K, Jia N, Zeng F. . A new diminishing interface method for determining the minimum miscibility pressures of light oil–CO2 systems in bulk phase and nanopores. Energy & Fuels, 2017, 31(11): 12021–12034
CrossRef Google scholar
[21]
LinLMaH ZengF, . A critical review of the solvent-based heavy oil recovery methods. In: SPE Heavy Oil Conference–Canada, Alberta, Canada, 2014
[22]
Zhou X, Yuan Q, Peng X. . A critical review of the CO2 huff ‘n’puff process for enhanced heavy oil recovery. Fuel, 2018, 215: 813–824
CrossRef Google scholar
[23]
Jamshidi T, Zeng F, Tontiwachwuthikul P. . Viability of carbonated water injection (CWI) as a means of secondary oil recovery in heavy oil systems in presence and absence of wormholes: microfluidic experiments. Fuel, 2019, 249: 286–293
CrossRef Google scholar
[24]
Wang X, Hou J, Song S. . Combining pressure-controlled porosimetry and rate-controlled porosimetry to investigate the fractal characteristics of full-range pores in tight oil reservoirs. Journal of Petroleum Science Engineering, 2018, 171: 353–361
CrossRef Google scholar
[25]
Zhou X, Yuan Q, Zhang Y. . Performance evaluation of CO2 flooding process in tight oil reservoir via experimental and numerical simulation studies. Fuel, 2019, 236: 730–746
CrossRef Google scholar
[26]
Peng X, Wang X, Zhou X. . Lab-on-a-chip systems in imbibition processes: a review and applications/issues for studying tight formations. Fuel, 2021, 306: 121603
CrossRef Google scholar
[27]
Zhang H, Diao R, Mostofi M. . Monte Carlo simulation of the adsorption and displacement of CH4 by CO2 injection in shale organic carbon slit micropores for CO2 enhanced shale gas recovery. Energy & Fuels, 2020, 34(1): 150–163
CrossRef Google scholar
[28]
Qin C, Jiang Y, Zhou J. . Effect of supercritical CO2 extraction on CO2/CH4 competitive adsorption in Yanchang shale. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2021, 412: 128701
CrossRef Google scholar
[29]
Lu T, Zeng K, Jiang P. . Competitive adsorption in CO2 enhancing shale gas: low-field NMR measurement combined with molecular simulation for selectivity and displacement efficiency model. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2022, 440: 135865
CrossRef Google scholar
[30]
Duan S, Gu M, Tao M. . Adsorption characteristics and thermodynamic property fields of methane and Sichuan Basin shales. Adsorption, 2022, 28(1−2): 41–54
CrossRef Google scholar
[31]
Sun H, Sun W, Zhao H. . Adsorption properties of CH4 and CO2 in quartz nanopores studied by molecular simulation. RSC Advances, 2016, 6(39): 32770–32778
CrossRef Google scholar
[32]
Zhu Y S, Song X X, Guo Y T. . High pressure adsorption characteristics and controlling factors of CH4 and CO2 on shales from Longmaxi Formation, Chongqing, Sichuan Basin. Natural Gas Geoscience, 2016, 27(10): 1942–1952
[33]
Wang X Q, Zhai Z Q, Jin X. . Molecular simulation of CO2/CH4 competitive adsorption in organic matter pores in shale under certain geological conditions. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2016, 43(5): 841–848
CrossRef Google scholar
[34]
Huo P, Zhang D, Yang Z. . CO2 geological sequestration: displacement behavior of shale gas methane by carbon dioxide injection. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2017, 66: 48–59
CrossRef Google scholar
[35]
Du X, Gu M, Duan S. . The influences of CO2 injection pressure on CO2 dispersion and the mechanism of CO2–CH4 displacement in shale. Journal of Energy Resources Technology, 2018, 140(1): 012907
CrossRef Google scholar
[36]
Sim S S K, Turtata A T, Singhal A K. . Enhanced gas recovery: factors affecting gas-gas displacement efficiency. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, 2009, 48(8): 49–55
CrossRef Google scholar
[37]
Sims M, Fraser A, Watson J. . Estimating shale gas resources in the Lower Carboniferous mudstones of northern England. European Association of Geoscientists Engineers, 2021, 1: 1–2
CrossRef Google scholar
[38]
Zhang H, Cao D. Molecular simulation of displacement of shale gas by carbon dioxide at different geological depths. Chemical Engineering Science, 2016, 156: 121–127
CrossRef Google scholar
[39]
Guo C, Xu J, Wei M. . Experimental study and numerical simulation of hydraulic fracturing tight sandstone reservoirs. Fuel, 2015, 159: 334–344
CrossRef Google scholar
[40]
Zhang L F, Zhou F J, Zhang S C. . Evaluation of permeability damage caused by drilling and fracturing fluids in tight low permeability sandstone reservoirs. Journal of Petroleum Science Engineering, 2019, 175: 1122–1135
CrossRef Google scholar
[41]
Miao Y, Zhao C, Zhou G. New rate-decline forecast approach for low-permeability gas reservoirs with hydraulic fracturing treatments. Journal of Petroleum Science Engineering, 2020, 190: 107112
CrossRef Google scholar
[42]
Hu W R, Wei Y, Bao J W. Development of the theory and technology for low permeability reservoirs in China. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2018, 45(4): 685–697
CrossRef Google scholar
[43]
Mahmoodi F, Darvishi P, Vaferi B. Prediction of coefficients of the Langmuir adsorption isotherm using various artificial intelligence (AI) techniques. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society, 2018, 15(12): 2747–2757
[44]
Wang T, Tian S, Li G. . Molecular simulation of CO2/CH4 competitive adsorption on shale kerogen for CO2 sequestration and enhanced gas recovery. Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 2018, 122(30): 17009–17018
CrossRef Google scholar
[45]
Li Z, Elsworth D. Controls of CO2–N2 gas flood ratios on enhanced shale gas recovery and ultimate CO2 sequestration. Journal of Petroleum Science Engineering, 2019, 179: 1037–1045
CrossRef Google scholar
[46]
Du X, Gu M, Liu Z. . Enhanced shale gas recovery by the injections of CO2, N2, and CO2/N2 mixture gases. Energy & Fuels, 2019, 33(6): 5091–5101
CrossRef Google scholar
[47]
Hui G, Chen S, He Y. . Machine learning-based production forecast for shale gas in unconventional reservoirs via integration of geological and operational factors. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2021, 94: 104045
CrossRef Google scholar
[48]
Jessen K, Tang G Q, Kovscek A R. Laboratory and simulation investigation of enhanced coalbed methane recovery by gas injection. Transport in Porous Media, 2008, 73(2): 141–159
CrossRef Google scholar
[49]
Pini R, Storti G, Mazzotti M. A model for enhanced coal bed methane recovery aimed at carbon dioxide storage. Adsorption, 2011, 17(5): 889–900
CrossRef Google scholar
[50]
Zhou F, Hussain F, Cinar Y. Injecting pure N2 and CO2 to coal for enhanced coalbed methane: experimental observations and numerical simulation. International Journal of Coal Geology, 2013, 116–117: 53–62
CrossRef Google scholar
[51]
Wang L, Wang Z, Li K. . Comparison of enhanced coalbed methane recovery by pure N2 and CO2 injection: experimental observations and numerical simulation. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2015, 23: 363–372
CrossRef Google scholar
[52]
Li X, Elsworth D. Geomechanics of CO2 enhanced shale gas recovery. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2015, 26: 1607–1619
CrossRef Google scholar
[53]
Ranathunga A S, Perera M S A, Ranjith P G. . An experimental investigation of applicability of CO2 enhanced coal bed methane recovery to low rank coal. Fuel, 2017, 189: 391–399
CrossRef Google scholar
[54]
van Bergen F, Pagnier H, Krzystolik P. Field experiment of enhanced coalbed methane-CO2 in the upper Silesian basin of Poland. Environmental Geoscience, 2006, 13(3): 201–224
CrossRef Google scholar
[55]
MazumderSWolf K H. Differential swelling and permeability change of coal in response to CO2 injection for ECBM. International Journal of Coal Geology, 74(2): 123−138
[56]
Edwards R W, Celia M A, Bandilla K W. . A model to estimate carbon dioxide injectivity and storage capacity for geological sequestration in shale gas wells. Environmental Science & Technology, 2015, 49(15): 9222–9229
CrossRef Google scholar
[57]
Jessen K, Tang G Q, Kovscek A R. Laboratory and simulation investigation of enhanced coalbed methane recovery by gas injection. Transport in Porous Media, 2008, 73: 141–159
CrossRef Google scholar
[58]
Pan D, Zhong X, Zhu Y. . CH4 recovery and CO2 sequestration from hydrate-bearing clayey sediments via CO2/N2 injection. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2020, 83: 103503
CrossRef Google scholar
[59]
Deng J, Zhu W, Ma Q. A new seepage model for shale gas reservoir and productivity analysis of fractured well. Fuel, 2014, 124: 232–240
CrossRef Google scholar
[60]
Lin K, Huang X, Zhao Y P. Combining image recognition and simulation to reproduce the adsorption/desorption behaviors of shale gas. Energy & Fuels, 2020, 34(1): 258–269
CrossRef Google scholar
[61]
WangBZhang QHuH, . Experimental study of CO2 gas injection parameters on enhanced shale gas recovery under high temperature and pressure conditions. In: Proceedings of the 16th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference, 2022

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the China National Petroleum Corporation South-west Oil and Gas Field Branch Shale Gas Research Institute (Grant No. JS-2020-42) for providing research funding.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Supplementary material is available in the online version of this article at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-023-0865-9 and is accessible for authorized users.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2023 Higher Education Press
AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF(12593 KB)

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/