Modeling of Hydrogeochemical Processes of Carbon Dioxide Interaction with Formation Water and Rock Minerals During Enhanced Oil Recovery and Underground storage

Application of hydrogeochemical modeling using PHREEQC software to study interaction of formation water, carbon dioxide and reservoir rock minerals during CO₂ injection for enhanced oil recovery or underground storage is discussed. Hydrogeochemical modeling is a powerful tool to evaluate the physicochemical processes occurring in the “gas phase – aqueous solution – solid phases” system depending on initial parameters such as temperature, pressure and reactant concentrations. The use of hydrogeochemical simulators provides a wide range of opportunities to analyze the processes of dissolution and precipitation of minerals, changes in the ionic composition and pH of the solution, which can affect the efficiency of CO₂ injection, fluid flow, well and equipment operation. A step-by-step method for modeling interactions in the “formation water – CO2 – rock” system using the PHREEQC hydrogeochemical simulator provides good reproducing accuracy for the results of laboratory experiments and analysis of their correspondence to the processes occurring under different conditions. The obtained results are useful for optimization of oil and gas production processes involving carbon dioxide, planning and stability assessment of underground carbon dioxide storage facilities and other geological applications.

1. Appelo C.A.J., Parkhurst D.L, Post V.E.A. (2014). Equations for calculating hydrogeochemical reactions of minerals and gases such as CO2 at high pressures and temperatures. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 125, pp. 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2013.10.003

2. Bakhtiyarov S.I., Shakhverdiyev A.K., Panakhov G.M., Abbasov E.M. (2006a). Oil Recovery by In-Situ Gas Generation: Volume and Pressure Measurements. Proceedings of the ASME 2006 2nd Joint U.S.-European Fluids Engineering Summer Meeting Collocated With the 14th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering. Vol. 1: Symposia, Parts A and B, pp. 1487–1492. https://doi.org/10.1115/FEDSM2006-98359

3. Bakhtiyarov S.I., Shakhverdiev A.K., Panakhov G.M., Abbasov E.M., Siginer D. (2006b). In-Situ Carbon Dioxide Generation for Oil Recovery: Experimental Study of Pressure and Temperature Variations during Stoichiometric Reaction. Proceedings of the ASME 2006 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. Fluids Engineering. pp. 895–898. https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2006-15708

4. Charlton S.R., Parkhurst D.L. (2011). Modules based on the geochemical model PHREEQC for use in scripting and programming languages. Computers & Geosciences, 37(10), pp. 1653–1663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2011.02.005

5. Cherepovitsyn A.E., Sidorova K.I., Smirnova N.V. (2013). CCS technologies and feasibility of their application CO2 in Russia. Neftegazovoe delo = Petroleum Engineering, 5, pp. 459–473. (In Russ.)

6. Garifullina Ch.A., Indrupskiy I.M., Ibragimov I.I., Lutfullin A.A., Zakiev B.F., Akhmetzyanov F.M., Klimov D.S. (2024). Experimental study of geochemical interaction of carbon dioxide with formation water and rock of water-saturated and oil-saturated horizons. Georesursy = Georesources 26(4). (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.18599/grs.2024.4.1

7. Kohler E., Parra T., Vidal O. (2009). Clayey cap-rock behavior in H2O– CO2 media at low pressure and temperature conditions: An experimental approach. Clays and Clay Minerals, 57, pp. 616–637. https://doi.org/10.1346/CCMN.2009.0570509

8. Metz B., Davidson O., de Coninck H.C., Loos M., Meyer L.A. (2005) IPCC special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage. Prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Cambridge University Press, UK and New York, NY, USA, p. 431.

9. Parkhurst D.L., Appelo C.A.J. (2013). Description of input and examples for PHREEQC version 3: A computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations. U.S. Geological Survey, xx, 497 p. https://doi.org/10.3133/tm6A43

10. Pruess K., Garcia J., Kovscek T., Oldenburg C., Rutqvist J., Steefel C., Xu T. (2002). Intercomparison of numerical simulation codes for geologic disposal of CO2. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 105 p. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9jt1t30f

11. Shakhverdiev A.Kh., Panahov G.M., Abbasov E.M., Jiang R., Bakhtiyarov S. (2014). High efficiency EOR and IOR technology on in-situ CO2 generation. Neftyanoe hozyaistvo = Oil Industry, 5, pp. 90–95. (In Russ.) Shao Q., Matthai S., Driesner T., Gross L. (2021). Predicting plume spreading during CO2 geo-sequestration: benchmarking a new hybrid finite element-finite volume compositional simulator with asynchronous time marching. Computational Geosciences, 25, pp. 299–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10596-020-10006-1

12. The Global Status of CCS: 2019. (2019). Global CCS Institute, 46 pp. URL: https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/GCC_GLOBAL_STATUS_REPORT_2019.pdf р