The Transport Mechanism of CO2 Underground Storage Considering the Rock Compressibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The underground storage of carbon dioxide (CO2) in deep geological formations is a critical technology for mitigating climate change by reducing atmospheric CO2 levels. This study investigates the transport mechanisms of CO2 during underground sequestration, with a particular focus on the role of rock compressibility in influencing storage efficiency and long-term containment. We present a mathematical model that incorporates the compressibility of both the CO2 phase and the surrounding rock matrix, as well as the interaction between the both. The model addresses the coupled processes of CO2 injection, migration, and pressure build-up within the reservoir, highlighting the importance of rock compaction in altering porosity, permeability, and fluid flow dynamics. Numerical simulations are used to assess the impact of rock compressibility on CO2 plume behaviour, pressure evolution, and storage capacity. Results show that compressibility significantly affects the rate of CO2 migration and the overall effectiveness of storage, with implications for optimal injection strategies and long-term monitoring. This work provides a more accurate framework for predicting the fate of CO2 in underground storage sites and for enhancing the design and management of CO2 sequestration projects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".