MRCSP Phase I Geologic Characterization Report - Midwest ...

1
CHARACTERIZATION OF GEOLOGIC SEQUESTRATION
OPPORTUNITIES IN THE MRCSP REGION
GEOLOGIC TEAM MEMBERS
The geologic team for the MRCSP project consists of a multifaceted
collaboration of geologic, geographic information system,
and computer scientists from the geological surveys of Indiana,
Kentucky, Ohio, Maryland, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and
the Michigan Basin Core Research Laboratory of Western Michigan
University. These agencies are the major repositories for most publicly
available geologic data in the seven state MRCSP region.
Larry Wickstrom, of the Ohio Geological Survey, served as
the geologic team leader. Other team members included John
Rupp and Premkrishnan Radhakrishnan (Indiana); Dr. James
Drahovzal, Dr. Stephen Greb, Brandon Nuttall, Marty Parris,
and Mike Solis (Kentucky); Dr. Gerald Baum, Christine Conn,
Catherine Garcia, and Sacha Lanham (Maryland); Dr. William
Harrison III and Dr. David Barnes (Michigan); Larry Wickstrom,
James McDonald, Donovan Powers, Ernie Slucher, Dr. Erik Venteris,
and Joseph Wells (Ohio); Dr. John Harper, Kristin Carter,
and Karen McCoy (Pennsylvania); Katharine Lee Avary, Dr.
Michael Hohn, Patrick Kish, and Susan Pool (West Virginia); Dr.
Neeraj Gupta (Battelle Institute). Members of this team brought
to the project extensive experience, from both the public and private
sectors, in analyzing and evaluating the diverse geology of
the MRCSP region.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Recognizing the contributions of all individuals and organizations,
without inadvertent omissions, that contributed to a project
of this magnitude is always difficult. However, the contributions
of several individuals deserve special recognition, and are herein
thanked for their contributions. Charles Byrer of the U.S. DOE/
NETL served as the DOE project manager for the MRCSP. Ron
Cudnik served as the Battelle project manager during the formative
stages of Phase I and David Ball is the current project leader for the
partnership. Strategic guidance was also provided by Jim Dooley of
Battelle’s Joint Global Change Research Institute and outreach support
was led by Judith Bradbury, also of Battelle.
We thank Lisa Van Doren and Edward V. Kuehnle in the Cartography
and Editing Group of the Ohio Division of Geological
Survey for their patience and great skills in helping compile this
report and their assistance to team members giving presentations
related to this study.
TASK STATEMENT
Under Subtask 2.1 of the MRCSP Phase I project, the geologic
team examined the regional geology of the project area, created
a regional correlation chart showing the various geologic units
in the study area, and delineated the most promising prospective
geologic reservoirs and sinks for CO 2 sequestration via data
collation, interpretation, and mapping. These data and maps
were then used to calculate a first approximation of the region’s
geologic CO 2 sequestration capacities of four main reservoir
classes: deep saline formations, oil and gas fields, unmineable
coal beds, and organic-rich shales. All information was captured
in a Geographic Information System (GIS) using ESRI’s suite of
ARC-GIS products.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The MRCSP region generates almost 21 percent of our country’s
electricity, 78 percent of which is from coal, and can be appropriately
considered America’s “engine” room. The region also contains a
wide array of facilities classified as CO 2 point-sources that produce
26 percent of the nation’s CO 2 emissions from power plants and 12
percent of the nation’s total CO 2 emissions (Ball, 2005). Task 1 of
the MRCSP study identified over 600 stationary facilities that are
considered CO 2 point-sources, of which at about 300 are classified
as large sources (> 100,000 tons of CO 2/year), that emit over 800
million tons of CO 2 per year. These facilities include plants that
produce ammonia, cement, ethanol, ethylene, ethylene oxide, hydrogen,
and power, as well as petroleum refineries, gas processing
facilities, and iron and steel mills. Because of this large number of,
and the high volumes of emissions from, these point-sources the
future prospects of environmental liability from these CO 2 emissions
necessitate research in the potential of using geologic units
for carbon dioxide sequestration in all seven states (Figure 1). The
main objective of Subtask 2.1 for the MRCSP Phase I project was
to evaluate the potential capacity for geologic sequestration of CO 2
in the MRCSP region.
Until recently, the major options under consideration for mitigation
of greenhouse gas emissions included switching to noncarbon-based
fuels, increasing energy efficiency thereby reducing
greenhouse gas emissions, and terrestrial or biotic sequestration
of CO 2. However, during the last several years, the idea of storing
CO 2 in geologic reservoirs has gained increased prominence as a
result of research funded by the U.S. DOE, similar agencies in other
countries of the world, and a growing interest of CO 2-producing
industries.
The primary attraction of the geologic sequestration option is
due to the potential for direct and long-term storage of captured
CO 2 emissions in close proximity to the CO 2 source. However, to
achieve this objective, the potential capacity of any geologic reservoir
needs to be verified by a detailed regional assessment as well as
by a site-specific investigation to insure that decision-makers fully
understand the characteristics of the geologic sequestration system.
Thus, a major task of the Phase I work of the DOE-funded regional
partnerships was a first-round regional assessment of this capacity.
In principal, geologic storage of CO 2 emissions involves purification
of the gas (capture) from its sources (e.g., power plants and refineries),
compression of the CO 2 in order to transform it to a supercritical
phase, followed by its injection in deep geologic formations
1