Design and performance of CO2 injection equipment; MGSC Sugar Creek and Mumford Hills enhanced oil recovery pilot sites

This report describes the design and performance of the surface equipment used for CO2 storage and injection during the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) Validation Phase (Phase II) enhanced oil recovery (EOR) pilot test at the Mumford Hills, Indiana, test site (EOR II) f... Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Online Access: Get full text
doi: 2142/48814
Authors:McKaskle, R.W.; Sexton, A.
Source:Open File Series - Illinois State Geological Survey, No.2012-8, 18p. Publisher: Illinois State Geological Survey, Champaign, IL, United States
Publication Date:2012
Note:In English. Includes appendices. 4 refs.
Subjects:Carbon dioxide; Carbon sequestration; Design; Injection; Instruments; Pumping; Site exploration; Technology; Underground installations; Underground storage; Illinois Basin; Indiana; Kentucky; United States; Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium; Mumford Hills; Sugar Creek Site
Record ID:2014071304
Copyright Information:GeoRef, Copyright 2020 American Geosciences Institute.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
This report describes the design and performance of the surface equipment used for CO2 storage and injection during the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) Validation Phase (Phase II) enhanced oil recovery (EOR) pilot test at the Mumford Hills, Indiana, test site (EOR II) from September 2009 through December 2010 and at the Sugar Creek, Kentucky, test site (EOR III) from May 2009 through May 2010. A total of 6,950 tons (6,300 tonnes) of CO2 were injected at the Mumford Hills site, and a total of 7,230 tons (6,560 tonnes) of CO2 were injected at the Sugar Creek site. The CO2 storage and injection equipment performance, design capacity, and lessons learned for both sites are presented and discussed in this report. Key conclusions and recommendations related to CO2 injection equipment at the Mumford Hills and Sugar Creek sites are as follows: 1. Equipment used for CO2 storage, pumping, and heating at these sites was designed and operated to better meet the performance and reliability requirements with less need for operator support and intervention than equipment used for the previous shorter duration MGSC Phase II Loudon "huff 'n' puff" (EOR I) and lower volume Tanquary enhanced coal bed methane test sites. The booster pump, main pump, and pressure control system were modified to allow for more reliable operation over the more extended test durations. 2. Delivery routes for CO2 and related weight limit restrictions on roads in winter weather can affect liquid CO2 injection tests such as those at the Mumford Hills and Sugar Creek sites. From an equipment perspective, allowing for more on-site storage tank capacity might reduce the impact of the winter weather-related weight limit restrictions. 3. Beyond the equipment normally required for water injection floods in the Illinois Basin, additional equipment required for CO2 injection includes a booster pump, pressure relief valves, an automated (as opposed to manual) surface pressure control system, a process heater, and alternate seal materials that are suitable for CO2 service. 4. Operation of CO2 injection equipment, particularly start-up of the equipment, requires additional operator attention and training beyond that needed for a normal water injection flood. 5. Storage tank reloading operations could have been simplified either by operating the storage tanks at lower pressure by reducing the pressure relief valve set point or by adding refrigeration systems to the CO2 storage tanks. Delivery personnel frequently had to vent CO2 from the storage tanks before refilling them in order to lower the pressure in the CO2 storage tanks.