Laboratory Measurements of CO2-H2O Interfacial Tension at HP/HT Conditions: Implications for CO2 Sequestration in Deep Aquifers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Disposal of carbon dioxide (CO2) in permeable, porous subsurface rock formations (i.e., geological sequestration) has been identified as a viable option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions into the Earth's atmosphere. Potential subsurface systems considered for geological sequestration include depleted oil and gas reservoirs, coalbed methane and shale gas reservoirs, and deep aquifers. Though each of these disposal systems has their advantages, deep aquifers (mostly filled with non-potable or brackish waters) have the greatest potential for large CO2 sequestration programs primarily because of their relative abundance in most sedimentary basins and their large effective capacities. Successful selection of potential of CO2 deep aquifer sequestration sites, however, requires an understanding of all physical and chemical trapping mechanisms by which CO2 may be retained. Principle retention mechanisms in aquifers include structural/stratigraphic (CO2 immobilization or trapping below an impermeable confining layer), residual fluid (trapped as immobile fluid phase in aquifer pore spaces), solubility (immobilized as fluid phase dissolved in in-situ water), mineral (immobilized as solid carbonate minerals formed from reaction with aquifer rock), and hydrodynamic (CO2 dissolved in slow-moving water) trapping. While all of these mechanisms contribute to CO2 sequestration, the structural/stratigraphic and residual fluid mechanisms have the largest and most immediate impact on trapping or retaining CO2 in aquifers. The effectiveness of both structural/stratigraphic and residual fluid trapping mechanisms is dependent on the capillary pressure characteristics of the aquifer seal and formation, respectively. And, the capillary pressure characteristics are strong functions of the interfacial tension (IFT) properties of the carbon dioxide-water (CO2-H2O) system. Unfortunately, there is a general lack of understanding of the CO2-H2O IFTs, particularly at high-pressure/high-temperature (HP/HT) conditions typical of many potential deep aquifer sites. The vast majority of published CO2-H2O IFT data were obtained at pressures less than 10,000 psia and temperature less than about 250oF. Additionally, there are often inconsistencies among the existing data published in the literature, thereby making it difficult to create predictive models. To address these inadequacies in the existing technical literature data base, we conducted laboratory studies to measure CO2- H2O IFTs using a pendant drop method at pressures between 1,000 and 18,000 psia and temperatures up to 400 oF. Rather than relying on correlations or previously published data, we also measured water-vapor-saturated CO2 as well as CO2- saturated water densities directly at each pressure and temperature. General observations from our laboratory study include:CO2-H2O IFTs demonstrated a strong dependence on temperature (decreasing with increasing temperature);For a given temperature, CO2-H2O IFTs were relatively insensitive to pressure with values between 10 to 23 dynes/cm; values never fell below 10 dynes/cm for all temperatures up to 400oF;Full miscibility between CO2 and H2O never occurred at any pressure and temperature evaluated in the study;CO2-saturated water densities showed a strong dependence on pressure and temperature, while water-vapor-saturated CO2 densities showed little change from the CO2 density with no vapor content.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».