Subscriber access provided by University of Colorado Boulder
Article
Effect of coal rank on CO2 adsorption induced coal matrix swelling with different CO2 properties and reservoir depths Ashani Savinda Ranathunga, M. S.A. Perera, Pathegama Gamage Ranjith, T.D. Rathnaweera, and Xiaogang Zhang Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • Publication Date (Web): 24 Apr 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on April 28, 2017
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Energy & Fuels is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
1
Energy & Fuels
Cover Page
2 3
Manuscript Title:
4
Effect of coal rank on CO2 adsorption induced coal matrix swelling with different CO2 properties
5
and reservoir depths
6 7
Authors’ names:
8
A.S. Ranathunga1, M.S.A. Perera2,3*, P.G. Ranjith1, T.D. Rathnaweera1 and X.G. Zhang1
9
1
Deep Earth Energy Laboratory, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Building 60,
10
Melbourne, Victoria, 3800, Australia.
11
2
12
Melbourne, Victoria, 3010, Australia.
13
3
14
University, Building 60, Melbourne, Victoria, 3800, Australia.
Department of Infrastructure Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Building 176,
Adjuct Researcher, Deep Earth Energy Laboratory, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash
15 16
Corresponding author:
17
Dr Mandadige Samintha Anne Perera
18
Department of Infrastructure Engineering,
19
The University of Melbourne,
20
B209, Building 175, Melbourne, Victoria,
21
3010, Australia.
22
Phone: +61-3-9035 8649
23
Fax: +61-3-9035 8649
24
E-mail:
[email protected] 25
1
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
26
Abstract
27
Although the greater adsorption potential of carbon dioxide (CO2) in coal is an appealing fact in
28
relation to the long-term safe storage of CO2 in coal seams, the resulting coal structure
29
modification, particularly through coal matrix swelling, adds many uncertainties to the process. To
30
date, many studies have been initiated, particularly on the effects of injecting CO2 and reservoir
31
properties on this swelling process and the associated reservoir permeability depletion. These
32
influences are largely dependent on the maturity of the coal mass and its structure, including the
33
cleat system. However, minor attention has been given to date to the effect of coal rank on CO2
34
adsorption-induced coal matrix swelling and was therefore, investigated in the present study. The
35
volumetric strain of the Australian brown coal samples for both CO2 and N2 under various
36
confinements (tri-axial) and injections was measured at 35 0C constant temperature to investigate
37
the influence of CO2 properties and reservoir depth on CO2 adsorption-induced swelling in coal and
38
was compared with the results in literature to obtain the effect of coal rank.
39
Based on the experimental evaluation of coal matrix swelling under various CO2 and
40
reservoir conditions, super-critical CO2 adsorption leads to greater coal matrix swelling in coal, and
41
the degree of swelling is dependent on reservoir depth and coal maturity. This coal matrix swelling
42
reduces with increasing reservoir depth, due to the associated reduction in CO2 sorption capacity
43
into coal. However, this also depends on the pore pressure conditions, and lower effective stresses
44
leading to greater swelling reduction, regardless of coal rank. The potential of N2 to recover the
45
swelled areas was tested by permeating the coal mass with N2 at different pressures and for different
46
durations (24, 48 and 72 hours). The results show a greater potential for recovery at lower effective
47
stresses for any coal type and for longer durations of N2 flooding.
48 49
Keywords: CO2 phase and pressure, coal matrix swelling, coal rank, N2 flooding, reservoir depth
50
2
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 2 of 35
Page 3 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
51
1. Introduction
52
The storage of CO2 in deep un-mineable coal seams is currently identified as a potential approach to
53
the minimization of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere. Numerous research studies
54
therefore been commenced on this method, particularly related to the alteration of coal seam
55
properties (hydro-mechanical properties) upon CO2 injection. According to these studies, CO2 has
56
greater potential to be adsorbed into the coal mass compared to the existing CH4 in the coal matrix,
57
which confirms the greater storage potential for CO2 in underground coal reservoirs 1.
1-19
have
58
Generally, CO2 enhanced coal bed methane recovery (CO2-ECBM) is carried out in deep
59
coal seams, where CO2 is in its super-critical state (beyond the critical temperature of 31.80C and
60
critical pressure of 7.38 MPa) due to the high temperatures and pressure conditions at such depths
61
20
62
inherent chemical and physical characteristics (liquid-type densities and viscosities) 21. In the CO2
63
adsorption process in coal, CO2 first flows through the macro-pores (butt and face cleats) and
64
adsorbs inside the fracture walls. Then it slowly diffuses into the micro-pores (pores in the coal
65
matrix) and adsorbs into the micro pores 2. However, during this CO2 adsorption into the coal
66
matrix process, a strain is induced between the coal matrix and the adsorbing CO2 layer, which is
67
commonly known as coal matrix swelling 3, 4, 22.
. Interestingly, super-critical CO2 has greater adsorption potential than sub-critical CO2 due to its
68
Coal matrix swelling reduces the pore spaces available for gas movement, resulting in
69
reduced overall permeability 23. This is evident in field-scale projects, such as the San Juan basin,
70
USA and Ishikari basin, Japan, which showed around 50 to 70% reduction of CO2 injection
71
capacity within the first six months to one year 24, 25. Further, according to Botnen et al. 26, the initial
72
CO2 permeability of the Williston basin lignite coal seam in North Dakota was reduced by 10 times
73
within the first year as a result of coal matrix swelling. In addition, Gale
74
process can create significant stress on the cap rock, which may lead to a cap rock failure and hence
75
possible CO2 back-migration into the atmosphere. Therefore, it is clear that the effect of coal matrix
76
swelling on coal’s flow and strength characteristics is of crucial importance. 3
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
22
stated that this swelling
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
77
Day et al. 5, Hol et al. 8, Karacan 9, Pan et al.
Page 4 of 35
27
, Perera et al.
10
, Siriwardane et al.
28
, and
78
Zutshi and Harpalani 29 have studied this coal matrix swelling effect using tri-axial experiments on
79
high-rank coal, and Jasinge
80
rank coal. However, the studies carried out for low rank coal used only low injecting pressures and
81
examined only gas and liquid state of CO2. Although Anggara et al.
82
experiments on crushed lignite from Indonesia for super-critical CO2 (up to 10 MPa) and using coal
83
blocks of 30 x 10 x 10 mm3
84
swelling. The incorporation of this confining pressure effect is important for the correct
85
identification of the swelling effect in field stress environments. Therefore, a knowledge gap exists
86
on the effects of coal matrix swelling on permeability under super-critical conditions, especially for
87
low-rank brown coal in confined environments.
30
and Balan and Gumrah
11
conducted similar tri-axial tests on low-
13
conducted swelling
12
, they did not consider the effect of confining pressure on coal
88
The main purpose of this study is therefore to investigate the influence of CO2 phase
89
condition (sub-critical and super-critical) on coal matrix swelling and the corresponding alterations
90
in brown coal flow characteristics in various in-situ stress environments using Australian brown
91
coal (low rank). The results were then compared with the volumetric strain results for high rank
92
coal to obtain the effect of coal rank on this CO2 adsorption induced coal matrix swelling.
93
Next, an effort was made to investigate the potential of N2 as a possible catalyst for CO2
94
sorption induced swelling recovery in coal. According to Day et al. 5, N2 remains as a free gas
95
because, it has much lower adsorption potential than CO2 in the coal matrix. This causes for a
96
reduction of the partial pressure of CO2, due to the created imbalance between the sorbed and free
97
gas phases 1. Hence, it results in a release of adsorbed CO2 from coal matrix which may partially
98
recover the reversible swelling by the physical sorption of CO2 16. These released CO2 will migrate
99
to distant locations in the coal seam and will adsorb into the coal matrix
31
. Since N2 flows
100
selectively through cleats with high permeability, the CO2 adsorbed in low-permeability regions of
101
the coal matrix still remains 16. For an example, according to a study done by Perera et al. 21, the co-
102
injection of N2 and CO2 (40% N2 + 60% CO2) has caused for a CO2 breakthrough of around 32% of 4
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 5 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
103
the total CO2 injected at the end of 50 years of CH4 production. Hence, the use of N2 as a possible
104
catalyst for the enhancement of CO2-adsorption induced permeability reduction is favourable.
105
Kiyama et al. 16 and Perera et al. 32 investigated the prescribed potential of N2 to recover the 16
32
106
coal matrix swelling in high rank coals. According to Kiyama et al.
107
swelling recovery is higher at lower effective stresses due to the higher N2 flow rates as it has the
108
ability to desorb more CO2 molecules from the coal mass. Therefore, it would be interesting to
109
check whether this phenomenon can be applied to low rank coal and was investigated by
110
Ranathunga et al.
111
high rank coal where lower effective stresses have higher potential of pressurised N2 to partially
112
recover CO2 adsorption-induced coal matrix swelling. However, N2 was flooded only for 24 hours
113
during the study by Ranathunga et al.
114
flooding duration on the degree of CO2 permeability enhancement. Hence, further attention has
115
been paid on the importance of offering more time for alternative N2 permeation for greater
116
swelling recovery in this study by flooding N2 for 48 and 72 hours.
117
2. Experimental methodology
118
Natural brown coal samples (low rank) obtained from the Hazelwood coal mine located at Morwell
119
in South Gippsland, Victoria were utilised to investigate the influence of CO2 properties and
120
reservoir depth on the CO2 adsorption induced coal matrix swelling in low rank coal. These samples
121
had an average moisture content of 57% (on a wet basis), a fixed carbon content around 48% (on a
122
dry basis), volatile matters of 50.3% (on a dry basis) and an average bulk density of 1110 kg/m3.
123
The samples were cored, cut and end ground to 38 mm in diameter and 76 mm high from large coal
124
blocks and the detailed procedure of sample preparation can be found in Ranathunga et al. 34.
33
and Perera et al.
, the
using Victorian brown coal (low rank). They observed a similar behavior as in
33
and is also important to investigate the influence of N2
125
The high-pressure tri-axial test rig available in the Deep Earth Energy Laboratory (DEERL)
126
was used conduct permeability tests on the brown coal samples. The experiments were conducted at
127
three different confinements (11, 14 and 17 MPa) representing different depths and different CO2
128
inlet pressures (6-14 MPa). All these permeations were done under undrained conditions in order to 5
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 6 of 35
129
achieve higher CO2 pressures throughout the specimen. N2 was injected into the coal sample before
130
and after CO2 injection at various pressures to identify the alterations created by CO2 injection in
131
the coal matrix; this could be done due to the comparatively less adsorptive nature of N2 than CO2.
132
After the second N2 injection, CO2 was permeated again to check how the alternative N2 flow may
133
affect the volumetric strain of the brown coal sample. A summary of the testing programme is
134
showed in Figure 1 and the more details of the testing programme is mentioned in Ranathunga et
135
al.33.
136 Reservoir depth
Injecting gas properties
1st N2 injection
1st CO2 injection
2nd N2 injection
2nd CO2 injection
Pc = 11 MPa Pi = 6 ~ 9 MPa
1st N2 injection
1st CO2 injection
2nd N2 injection
2nd CO2 injection
Pc = 14 MPa Pi = 6 ~ 12 MPa
1st N2 injection
1st CO2 injection
2nd N2 injection
2nd CO2 injection
Pc = 17 MPa Pi = 6 ~ 14 MPa
137 138
Figure 1. Experimental program for tri-axial flow studies (here Pc is confining pressure and Pi is the
139
injection pressure)
140
Further, the influence of N2 permeation duration on swelling recovery was also studied by
141
flooding N2 for different time periods: 48 and 72 hours on swelled coal samples under 6 MPa (sub-
142
critical) and 8 MPa (super-critical) CO2 pressures.
143
During this complete test series, the volumetric strain in the coal sample was recorded using
144
an advanced data acquisition system at one second intervals to quantify the CO2 adsorption-induced 6
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 7 of 35
145
coal matrix swelling of the brown coal specimens in various stress environments. The volumetric
146
strain was calculated using the volume change data given by a syringe pump (see Eq. [1]) which
147
was used to apply the confining pressure. When the sample swells, the excess oil volume inside the
148
cell is pumped out towards the syringe pump and when the sample shrinks oil is sent towards the
149
sample from the pump.
150
Eq. [1] was used to calculate the volumetric strain in the coal sample under various injection
151
conditions.
152
Volumetric strain of the sample (εv) =
153
where, Vinitial is the initial pump volume for the respective test condition (stable pump volume after
154
applying the confining pressure), Vt is the pump volume at time t and ∆Vx is the oil volume change
155
(pumped in or out from the syringe pump). Therefore, negative volumetric strains represent sample
156
shrinkage (Vinitial > Vt) and positive volumetric strains represent sample swelling (Vinitial < Vt). The
157
whole test series was conducted at 35 0C (> 31.8 0C is the critical temperature of CO2) constant
158
temperature to obtain the super-critical condition of the injected CO2 when the pressure goes
159
beyond 7.38 MPa (the critical pressure of CO2). The volumetric strain variations of the coal samples
160
for 8 MPa CO2 and N2 injections under 11, 14 and 17 MPa confinements are shown in Figure 2.
± ∆
× 100% ∶ ∆ = −
Volumetric strain (%)
2.5
0 Pc = 11 MPa Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa
-2.5
Pc = 11 MPa Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa
4
2
0
-2
-5 0
161
[1]
6
5 Volumetric strain (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
5
10 15 Time (h)
20
0
5
10 15 Time (h)
(b) CO2 injection
(a) N2 injection
7
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
20
Energy & Fuels
162
Figure 2. Volumetric strain variation of brown coal samples for 8 MPa (a) N2 and (b) CO2 injection
163
under various confining pressures (here Pc is confining pressure)
164
3. Results and Discussion
165
3.1.
166
According to Figure 2, CO2 flow through low rank brown coal causes clear coal matrix swelling
167
(positive volumetric strain) compared to N2, and the matrix swelling gradually increases over time,
168
regardless of confinement (see Figure 2). The influence of CO2 phase and pressure on coal matrix
169
swelling was therefore studied first.
Effect of sub- and super-critical CO2 adsorption on low-rank coal matrix swelling
170
Figure 3 shows the variation of observed volumetric strain developed in the tested low rank
171
brown coal with CO2 and N2 flows in various confining stress environments. Note that here CO2
172
density is used instead of CO2 pressure to characterize the volumetric strain data, because gas
173
density more precisely represents the injecting CO2 properties due to its dependency on both
174
temperature and pressure 5. The density of CO2 was calculated for each injection condition (35 0C
175
and 6 to 14 MPa injection pressures) using the REFPROP data base
176
comparison, the sample volume increase or coal matrix swelling is denoted by positive volumetric
177
strains and the sample volume decrease or coal matrix shrinkage is denoted by negative volumetric
178
strains in Figure 3.
(a)
Pc = 14 MPa
Volumetric Strain (%)
8
8 12 9 10
6 4
7
8 9 10 1214
6
2
7 7
8
200
400
6 6
0 0
179
9
Pc = 17 MPa
10
35
. For the purposes of
(b)
Pc =11 MPa
12 Volumetric Strain (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 8 of 35
Pc = 11 MPa
2.0
Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa
1.5
6
1.0
6 6
0.5
7
7 7
8
8 8
9
9
10
10
12
14
12
9
0.0 600
4
800
CO₂ density (kg/m3)
8
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
8 12 N₂ density (kg/m3)
16
Page 9 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
180
Figure 3. Variation of volumetric strain under 11, 14 and 17 MPa confinements during (a) first CO2
181
injection and (b) first N2 injection (here the hollow data points represent the super-critical CO2
182
conditions and the data labels denote the respective injection pressures)
183
As shown in Figure 3(a), the volumetric strain of coal for CO2 flow increases with
184
increasing CO2 density/pressure, regardless of confinement. For example, 6 to 7 MPa and 8 to 9
185
MPa CO2 pressure increments causes around 1.96% and 3.68% volumetric strain increments under
186
11 MPa confining pressure. Importantly, under the same pressure conditions, N2 injection exhibits
187
only around 0.08% (6 to 7 MPa) and 0.11% (8 to 9 MPa) volume changes, which are insignificant
188
compared to the CO2 effect. The other important fact is that the increase of volumetric strain under
189
super-critical CO2 permeation is comparatively higher than for low-pressure CO2 permeation. For
190
instance, 8 to 9 MPa (super-critical) CO2 permeation causes coal mass swelling around 1.7% greater
191
than the swelling caused by 6 to 7 MPa (sub-critical) CO2 permeation (see Figure 3) under 11 MPa
192
confining pressure.
193
The coal matrix swelling occurs due to the sorbed volume of the adsorbate 36, and hence this 15
194
sorbed volume is proportional to the amount of coal matrix swelling
195
greater adsorption capacity due to its highly chemically reactive nature
196
greater coal matrix swelling. In order to elaborate this CO2 phase effect, the average pore pressure
197
(here, the average pore pressure is taken as the mean value of the upstream and the steady-state
198
downstream pressures) conditions for the different CO2 injections under the three confining
199
pressures (11, 14 and 17 MPa) were plotted against the upstream CO2 pressures in Figure 4.
200
According to Figure 4, the average pore pressure has a similar behaviour to strain variation where
201
sample is under super-critical condition at higher CO2 pore pressures for all the confinements. For
202
example, when considering the same pressure conditions discussed before where pressure changes
203
from 6 to 7 MPa (sub-critical) and 8 to 9 MPa super-critical under 11 MPa in situ stress, the average
204
pore pressure of the sample is 5.96 MPa (< 7.38 MPa – critical pressure of CO2) and 7.51 MPa (>
205
7.8 MPa – critical pressure of CO2 (see Figure 4). Hence, the super-critical CO2 throughout the 9
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
. Super-critical CO2 has a 7
and therefore causes
Energy & Fuels
206
brown coal specimen during 8 to 9 MPa super-critical gas injections is the main reason for higher
207
swelling than for sub-critical CO2. Similarly, Perera et al.
208
increase for 5 MPa sub-critical CO2 injection and around 50% strain increment for 8 MPa super-
209
critical CO2 flows for high-rank coal (Australian bituminous coal). This shows that the greater coal
210
matrix swelling observed under super-critical CO2 permeation is applicable to any coal seam,
211
regardless of its rank. Therefore, the sorbed volume is proportional to the sorption-induced swelling
212
and larger amount of sorbed volume adsorbed at super-critical conditions allow higher swelling at
213
higher CO2 pressures.
10
observed around 14% radial strain
214
Averaage pore pressure in the coal sample (MPa)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 10 of 35
12
Pc = 11 MPa Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa critical pressure of CO₂
10
8
6 Sub-critical region 4 5
215
Super-critical region
7
9
11
13
15
Upstream CO₂ pressure (MPa)
216
Figure 4. Average pore pressure variation in the coal sample during the first CO2 injection (after 24
217
hours of injection)
218
Further, this higher coal matrix swelling super-critical CO2 causes for greater permeability
219
reduction. In the case of low rank coal, Ranathunga et al. 33 found around 20% greater reduction in
220
coal mass permeability for the same CO2 pressure conditions discussed before (from 6 - 7 MPa to 8
221
- 9 MPa) for similar type of low rank coal under 11 MPa confinement. Hence, around 2% increase
222
in swelling causes the reduction of the permeability by 10 times, which confirms the influence of
223
adsorbing CO2 properties on coal mass swelling and the associated permeability for low-rank coal. 10
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 11 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
224
For high-rank coal, Pan et al. 27, observed around 16% greater reduction of permeability from 1 to 3
225
MPa (sub-critical) to 7 to 13 MPa (super-critical) pore pressure variation when the pressure
226
difference between the confining pressure and pore pressure 2 MPa under a swelling increment of
227
around 1.5%. Interestingly, both high and low rank coals display around 10 times reduction of
228
permeability according to the relevant swelling strain increment. However, it should be noted that,
229
the pressure conditions considered are not the same and hence the magnitude of 10 may vary.
230
Nevertheless, both low and high rank coal are subjected to greater flow reductions due to the
231
enhanced swelling during super-critical CO2 flow.
232
When comparing the swelling rate with time, according to Figure 2, CO2 absorption-induced
233
swelling occurs at a maximum rate within the first 7 to 8 hours for 6 MPa CO2 injection under 11
234
MPa confining pressure for the tested brown coal. In comparison with the swelling behaviour
235
reported in the research literature for high-rank coal, Perera et al.
236
strain increment within the first 3 to 4 hours of sub-critical CO2 injection under 10 MPa
237
confinement. Unlike the intact coal samples used in the present study, the fractured black coal used
238
by Perera et al.
239
related highly dense cleat system and that may have caused a quicker occurrence of maximum
240
swelling compared to the intact brown coal. In relation to the other two confinements considered
241
(14 and 17 MPa), the maximum swelling rate was seen within the first 11 to 12 hours for 14 MPa
242
confinement and within the first 17 to 18 hours for 17 MPa confinement. The maximum swelling
243
rates for these in-situ stresses (11, 14 and 17 MPa) are 0.36, 0.1 and 0.03, respectively. According
244
to these values, the swelling rate reduces with increasing confining pressure. Similar behavior was
245
observed by Perera et al.
246
swelling rates of around 0.0006 (~3-4 hours) and 0.00042 (~6-7 hours) for 10 and 15 MPa
247
confinements respectively. According to Hol et al. 8, CO2 adsorption capacity reduces at high
248
effective stresses, which explains the reason for the observed reduced volumetric swelling effect at
249
greater confining pressures. This reduction of coal matrix swelling with increasing confinement is
10
10
observed a maximum radial
has more provision for CO2 permeation through the sample due to the maturity
10
for high ranked Australian bituminous coal and found maximum
11
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
250
important in field-scale applications, because this represents the influence of coal seam reservoir
251
depth on its swelling characteristics. This is therefore considered in detail in the following section.
252
3.2.
253
According to Figure 3, strain induced by CO2 sorption clearly reduces with increasing confinement
254
and is also confirmed by the reduction of average pressure variation in Figure 4. However, this
255
confining stress influence on coal matrix swelling is more significant at low confinements (11 to 14
256
MPa) compared to high confinements (14 to 17 MPa). For example, around 1.08% and 5.45% strain
257
reductions can be seen for 6 MPa (sub-critical) and 9 MPa (super-critical) CO2 permeation in the
258
coal mass under 11 to 14 MPa confining stress increment and only around 0.6% and 3.02% for 6
259
MPa (sub-critical) and 9 MPa (super-critical) CO2 permeation in the coal mass under 14 to 17 MPa
260
confining pressure increment. This higher swelling reduction under greater confinements is related
261
to the much-shrunken pore space that the coal mass undergoes at deeper coal seams, which reduces
262
flowrate along the coal mass. This result in lesser amount of sorbed volume of the sample causing a
263
reduction of coal matrix swelling upon higher depths. Further, the higher compressive forces
264
available at higher effective stresses may also restrict the volumetric swelling. According to Hol et
265
al. 8, at higher stress applications, the sorbed volume of CO2 will be expelled which causes a
266
reduction of sorption induced swelling. For example, after a series of experiments conducted on
267
high rank coal using various CO2 pressures (10 – 20 MPa) and in situ stresses (5 – 35 MPa), the
268
expelled amount of CO2 0.09, 0.195, 0.307, 0.372 and 0.420 ml for 5, 10, 20, 30 and 35 MPa in-situ
269
stresses respectively. Interestingly, this expelled CO2 volume is increased with the increasing in-situ
270
stress or depth of coal seam which further elaborates the reason behind the lower strain
271
developments at higher depths. Therefore, the increase in volumetric strain reduction is a combined
272
influence of the effective stress increment available under higher compressive forces and the lower
273
CO2 adsorption capacity. Hol et al.
274
stresses for high-rank coal and therefore the results of this study confirm that regardless of the rank
275
of the coal seam, it is subjected to a lower swelling effect if the depth of the seam is great.
Effect of reservoir depth on coal matrix swelling
8
confirmed this lower swelling effect under greater effective
12
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 12 of 35
Page 13 of 35
276
Interestingly, this reduction of strains is greater at higher injection pressures for both 11 to
277
14 MPa and 14 to 17 MPa stress increments. For instance, 1.71% increase in strain reduction was
278
observed from 7 to 8 MPa injection pressures for 11 to 14 MPa stress increase while 1.1% increase
279
in strain reduction was observed for the same injection pressures for a 14 to 17 MPa stress increase
280
(see Figure 3). This can be explained by the portion of the sample which undergoes different CO2
281
pressures under the respective conditions. The pore pressure development through the sample
282
length after 24 hours of CO2 injection was calculated considering a linear pressure development
283
trend along the sample from upstream to downstream using the upstream/injection pressure and the
284
downstream pressure at steady-state for the comparison purpose. Figure 5 shows the pressure
285
variation along the sample length calculated by the prescribed method for 7, 8 and 9 MPa CO2
286
injections for the three different confinements.
100%
80%
Sample length (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
60%
40%
20%
0% Pi = 7 & Pc = 11
Pi = 8 & Pc = 11
Pi = 9 & Pc = 11
Pi = 7 & Pc = 14
Pi = 8 & Pc = 14
Pi = 9 & Pc = 14
Pi = 7 & Pc = 17
Pi = 8 & Pc = 17
Pi = 9 & Pc = 17
CO₂ injection conditions
287
super-critical CO₂
sub-critical CO₂
288
Figure 5. CO2 pressure variation along the sample for 7, 8 and 9 MPa CO2 injection under 11, 14
289
and 17 MPa confining pressures (here Pi = injection pressure and Pc = confining pressure)
290 291
According to Figure 5, under the confinements considered here, 7 MPa CO2 injection (
7.38 MPa, the critical pressure of CO2) causes the sample
294
to undergo both sub- and super-critical CO2 adsorption. However, the portion of the sample under 13
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 14 of 35
295
super-critical CO2 adsorption is reduced with increasing confinement. For example, around 63%,
296
50% and 32% of the sample (assuming a linear variation from upstream to downstream) is
297
subjected to super-critical CO2 adsorption under 11, 14 and 17 MPa confinements, respectively. As
298
discussed previously, the coal mass has much reduced pore space under higher confinements and
299
therefore CO2 has less ability to transport through it, which results in reduced super-critical CO2
300
distributed area of the sample under greater confinements. Since super-critical CO2 creates much
301
greater swelling in the coal mass, the reduction of super-critical CO2 adsorbed in the coal mass
302
eventually reduces the degree of swelling. Therefore, when the confinement is increased from 11 to
303
14 MPa (1.71%) and 14 to 17 MPa (1.1%), a reduction in volumetric strain increment (swelling) is
304
shown for 7 to 8 MPa CO2 pressures in Figure 5. When 9 MPa CO2 permeates through brown coal,
305
around 100%, 100% and 87.5% of the sample is in super-critical condition (see Figure 5) under the
306
three confinements considered here. Which creates a strain reduction of 1.49% and 0.98% from 8 to
307
9 MPa CO2 pressure variation under 11 to 14 MPa and 14 to 17 MPa in-situ stress increments.
308
Therefore, as explained above, the greater CO2 sorbed volume in the sample due to the larger
309
proportion of super-critical CO2 creates much higher swelling with super-critical CO2 flooding.
310
In relation to permeability for these conditions, 7 to 8 MPa CO2 pressure increase causes
311
3.2% and 1.8% permeability reduction increments with 11 to 14 MPa and 14 to 17 MPa confining
312
stress increments, respectively, while 5.2% and 2.7% increase of permeability reduction for the
313
similar confinement increase was observed for 8 to 9 MPa super-critical CO2 permeation
314
confirms the influence of the effective stress changes on strain variations and its effect on CO2 flow.
315
Moreover, similar to the CO2 injection, the strain developed in the coal mass during N2
316
injection was also checked under changing confining stress environments and the results are shown
317
in Figure 3. According to the figure, 0.34% and 0.28% strain reductions occur for 6 and 9 MPa CO2
318
permeations when the confining stress increases from 11 to 14 MPa. In addition, the confinement-
319
created strain reductions are greater at greater confinements, producing strain reductions of 0.48%
320
for 6 MPa and 0.44% for 8 MPa with increasing confinement from 14 to 17 MPa. However, unlike 14
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
33
. This
Page 15 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
321
in CO2 flow, here the influence of N2 pressure on swelling reduction which occurs with increasing
322
confining pressure is negligible (see Figure 3). This is because, compared to CO2, N2 is a less
323
adsorptive, inert gas 7. Therefore, the expected volumetric strain increase for N2 with increasing
324
pore pressure is minimal. Hence, the strain variations observed in Figure 3 are mainly due to the
325
effective stress variation with in situ stresses.
326
3.3.
327
As discussed in previous sections, CO2 flow through the coal matrix causes considerable matrix
328
rearrangements, creating a negative impact on CO2 sequestration. Although this swelling effect
329
reduced with increasing reservoir depth, the swelling seems to happen at considerably higher rates
330
for super-critical injected CO2, which is the most common CO2 phase expected in potential
331
unmineable coal seams 37. This matrix swelling causes a reduction of injection capacities in many
332
field-scale CO2-ECBM projects, making the projects uneconomical (refer to Section 1). Hence,
333
appropriate precautions to reduce this swelling effect are necessary for reservoir productivity
334
enhancement in CO2-ECBM projects. As explained in section 1, the injection of a stream of N2 into
335
the swelled coal mass creates a considerable improvement in the permeability of coal by partially
336
reversing the CO2-induced coal matrix swelling specially at lower effective stresses. However, the
337
precise identification of this ability of N2 requires a comprehensive overview of the swelling
338
characteristics variation of the coal mass during this remediation process. In order to quantify the
339
ability of N2 flooding to partially recover CO2 adsorption-induced coal matrix swelling, the coal
340
sample was subjected to 24 hours of N2 flooding after each CO2 injection and the CO2 injection was
341
then repeated at the same pressure. For 6 and 8 MPa CO2 injection pressures the samples were also
342
subjected to an additional 48 hours of the third N2 flooding after the second CO2 injection, followed
343
by the third CO2 injection. Similarly, 72 hours of N2 flooding (fourth N2 flooding) for 6 and 8 MPa
344
CO2 injection pressures were carried out after the third CO2 injection followed by the fourth CO2
345
injection.
Potential of N2 to reverse CO2 induced coal matrix swelling
15
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
346
3.3.1. After 24 hours of N2 flooding
347
Figure 6 shows the swelling reduction observed with the second CO2 injection after 24 hours of N2
348
flooding for each CO2 injection pressure under the three different in-situ stresses considered here.
349
As the figure shows, under all three confinements, swelling recovery is gradually increased with
350
increasing injection pressure, confirming that high-pressure N2 flooding is more effective in
351
recovering the reversible swelling areas created by CO2. For example, the swelling recovery
352
percentages observed for 6 and 8 MPa CO2 injection pressures are around 1.3% and 8.9% under 11
353
MPa confinement, and 0.7% and 2.9% under 17 MPa confinement, respectively (see Figure 6).
354
According to Kiyama et al.
355
creating a partial pressure reduction in the sample, which contributes to the reduced swelling
356
percentage in the sample (refer to section 1). At higher pressures, N2 will flow at higher rates
357
creating a larger imbalance between sorbed and free gas and eventually the amount of partial
358
recovery of swelling is increased. Further, higher N2 permeations caused for higher shrinkages or
359
volumetric strain reductions of the tested brown coal sample as showed in Figure 3. For example, 6
360
to 9 MPa N2 pressure increment result in a shrinkage of around 0.17%, 0.19% and 0.22% during 11,
361
14 and 17 MPa in situ stresses respectively. This effect may also compensate the swelling of the
362
coal sample when considering the net volumetric strain from second N2 injection to second CO2
363
injection. However, further research is needed to confirm the dominating factor: higher flow rates
364
induced partial pressure reduction or higher specimen shrinkages at higher pressures, for N2
365
injection induced swelling recovery.
16
, N2 has the ability to desorb CO2 molecules from the pore faces by
366
16
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 16 of 35
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
Volumetric strain reduction/ Swelling recovery (%)
Page 17 of 35
20
18.5
18
16.5
16 14.0
14 12
11.2
10.5
10
8.9
Pc = 11 MPa
8.5
8.0
Pc = 14 MPa
8 6
4.6
4 2
1.31.0 0.7
2.6 1.41.2
Pc = 17 MPa
4.9
2.9
0 6
7
8 9 10 CO₂ injection pressure (MPa)
12
14
367 368
Figure 6. Volumetric strain reduction for second CO2 injection compared to first CO2 injection after
369
N2 flooding for 24 hours
370
However, this recovery rate reduces with increasing reservoir depth. For instance, 0.6% and
371
6% reductions in swelling recovery can be seen for 6 and 8 MPa CO2 floods with increasing
372
confinement from 11 to 17 MPa. This is because, at higher confinements, N2 flow ability through
373
the coal matrix slows down, which eventually gives less opportunity for swelling recovery for N2
374
(see Figure 6).
375
It should be noted that before the second CO2 injection, the sample has already been
376
subjected to swelling during the first CO2 injection. Hence, less matrix rearrangement can be
377
expected due to the second CO2 flow than the first 10. Under higher CO2 pressures, the coal matrix
378
undergoes considerable macro-molecular structural alterations due to the inherent chemical and
379
physical interactions of super-critical CO2 and coal pore walls 10, 17. Hence, the expected swelling at
380
higher injection pressures for the re-injection of CO2 will be less (see Figure 6). In addition, the
381
swelling is also reduced by reservoir depth, which causes much less swelling at higher
382
confinements for the second CO2 injection. Therefore, both N2 flooding and swelling reduction due
383
to the alteration in the coal matrix caused by previous CO2 flows and N2 flows collectively
384
influence the observed strain reductions during the second CO2 flow. 17
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels
385
Figure 7 shows the CO2 permeability increment against strain reduction with the second
386
CO2 flow, which confirms that the observed permeability increments after the N2 flood in
387
Ranathunga et al. 33 are clearly due to the net volumetric strain variations which occurred before the
388
second CO2 injection by the N2 flood. Further, for all three confinements, the CO2 permeability
389
increment against swelling recovery exhibits a perfect linear variation (y = x) with an overall
390
goodness fit of 0.99 (R2). This shows the ability of N2 to be used as a catalyst to improve coal mass
391
permeability by partially recovering CO2 adsorption-induced matrix swelling. 25 CO₂ permeability increase after N₂ flooding (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 18 of 35
20
y = 1.046x R² = 0.9895
y = 1.047x R² = 0.9927
15 y = 1.0069x R² = 0.9902 10
5
0 0 Pc = 11 MPa
392 393
5 10 15 Swelling recovery after N₂ flooding (%) Pc = 14 MPa
20
Pc = 17 MPa
Figure 7. CO2 permeability increase vs swelling recovery after N2 flooding
394 395
However, this method is only effective for low-rank coal under low confining stresses,
396
because the higher permeability at lower confining stresses allows higher N2 flowrates in to the coal
397
mass, which eventually reverses the swelling. Therefore, it can be expected that if N2 is injected
398
into the coal matrix for a longer time, the amount of swelling recovery will increase. The following
399
section discusses the swelling recovery by N2 after permeation for further 48 and 72 hours of brown
400
coal specimens.
18
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 19 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
401
3.3.2. Permeation of N2 for 48 and 72 hours
402
As described above, the duration of N2 flooding has a considerable influence on swelling recovery,
403
as it offers more opportunity for N2 to be involved in the recovery process. Figure 8 shows the CO2
404
permeability after flooding of N2 for 24, 48 and 72 hours of brown coal specimens at 6 and 8 MPa
405
CO2 injections. According to the figure, an increase in CO2 permeability occurs with increasing N2
406
flooding duration. For example, 6 MPa sub-critical CO2 permeability increases by around 9.4% and
407
13.1% when the N2 flooding duration is increased up to 48 and 72 hours during 11 MPa confining
408
pressure. Similarly, for 11 MPa confinement, 8 MPa super-critical CO2 permeability is increased by
409
10.5% and 17.7% for 48 hours and 72 hours N2 floods compared to 24 hours N2 flooding. As
410
explained previously, the longer durations allow more N2 to enter the coal matrix and a greater
411
amount of CO2 to desorb from the coal mass with the reduction of partial pressure, allowing an
412
increment in swelling recovery. Interestingly, this increment is reduced for higher confinements
413
(refer to Figure 8). For example, around 7.2% and 8.3% decrease compared to 11 MPa confinement
414
can be seen for 14 and 17 MPa confinements when N2 flooding duration is increased to 48 hours for
415
6 MPa CO2 injection. For similar conditions, around 4.9% (14 MPa confinement) and 7.1% (17
416
MPa confinement) reductions in CO2 permeability compared to 11 MPa confinement were observed
417
for 8 MPa CO2 flow after 48 hours of N2 flooding. In addition, the permeability increment is greater
418
for higher injection pressures (refer to Figure 8). For example, when the CO2 injection pressure is
419
increased from 6 to 8 MPa, around 4.6%, 4.7% and 1.2% increases in CO2 permeability increments
420
(compared to 24 hours of N2 permeation) were observed for 11, 14 and 17 MPa confining pressures,
421
respectively after 72 hours of N2 flooding. This can be explained by the volumetric strain variation
422
observed during these various N2 floods through the coal specimens.
423
According to Figure 8, the volumetric strain reduction is increased with N2 flooding time for
424
both 6 and 8 MPa CO2 injections. This observation confirms the higher permeability increments
425
(refer to Figure 8) when N2 flooding time is increased, because the increased coal mass swelling
426
recovery for longer N2 flow durations is subjected to enhanced permeability in the coal matrix. In 19
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels
427
addition, the volumetric strain reduction is gradually reduced with confining pressure, and this
428
reduction is comparatively higher for 8 MPa CO2 injection compared to 6 MPa. This indicates the
429
higher permeability increments shown for lower effective stresses compared to higher effective
430
stresses in Figure 8. The effective stress effects on low-rank coals due to the lower strength and
431
elastic modulus and higher shrinkage compressibilities of low-rank coal which result in a more
432
shrunken pore structure under higher stresses. Hence, although the N2 is flooded for a longer time,
433
the expected swelling recovery is restricted with lower flowrates at higher effective stresses. This
434
warrants more research using time durations for N2 flooding longer than 72 hours for low-rank
435
coals.
436 (a)
0.008 13.1%
CO₂ permeability (µD)
9.4% 0.006
0%
0.004
0%
0.002
2.2% 5.3% 0%
1.1% 2.9%
0 Pc = 11 MPa After 24 hrs of N₂ injection
(b)
Pc = 14 MPa After 48 hrs of N₂ injection
Pc = 17 MPa After 72 hrs of N₂ injection
0.012 17.7%
0.01 CO₂ permeability (µD)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 20 of 35
10.5% 0.008
0%
0.006 0.004 0%
0.002
5.6% 10% 0%
3.4% 4.1%
0 Pc = 11 MPa
437
After 24 hrs of N₂ injection
Pc = 14 MPa After 48 hrs of N₂ injection
20
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Pc = 17 MPa After 72 hrs of N₂ injection
Page 21 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
438
Figure 8. CO2 permeability after flooding N2 for 24, 48 and 72 hours for (a) 6 MPa CO2 and (b) 8
439
MPa CO2 injections during 11, 14 and 17 MPa confining pressures (here the data labels denote the
440
CO2 permeability increase compared to 24 hours of N2 flooding)
441 442
As discussed in section 1, Kiyama et al. 16 and Perera et al. 32 observed the higher swelling
443
recovery at specially at lower effective stresses for high rank coal similar to the low rank brown
444
coal due to the enhance N2 flowrates at lower effective stresses. Interestingly, Perera et al.
445
observed greater permeability increments in high-rank coals even under higher confining stress after
446
24 hours of N2 flooding. According to Perera et al. 32, the reduced flow rates under higher effective
447
stresses allows more time for N2 to interact with CO2 adsorbed coal and to recover more swelling
448
areas. As mentioned above, high-strength high-rank coals undergo less pore structure shrinkage due
449
to higher stresses than low-rank coals. Therefore, unlike for low rank coals, much higher
450
permeability increments with longer durations of N2 permeations at higher effective stresses can be
451
expected following the above-mentioned phenomena. Therefore, this needs to be confirmed by
452
further research for much longer N2 flooding durations for high rank coal.
32
453
Generally, this method is efficient at low confining stresses for both high and low rank coal.
454
Therefore, future research is needed to investigate the most effective applicability of N2 flooding for
455
the swelling recovery process. Several researchers
456
example, field and laboratory studies have implemented the injection of a CO2/N2 binary mixture to
457
recover coal mass swelling-induced permeability reductions
458
have been conducted on high-rank coals and have ignored low-rank coals. Hence, future research on
459
the effective use of CO2 and N2 mixtures to recover coal matrix swelling and related permeability
460
issues for low-rank coals is necessary.
461
4. Conclusions
462
This study provides a comprehensive understanding of CO2 adsorption-induced coal matrix
463
swelling, particularly for low-rank brown coal. The behaviour of volumetric swelling for different
21, 38-41
have tested various approaches. For
42, 43
21
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
. However, almost all the studies
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
464
CO2 injections at different confining stresses (depths) was studied and according to the results the
465
following conclusions can be drawn:
466
•
CO2 adsorption-induced coal matrix swelling is greater at higher CO2 pressures, particularly for
467
the super-critical phase condition of CO2 regardless of reservoir depth or the maturity of the
468
coal. This is mainly due to the greater adsorption potential of high pressure CO2, which is
469
significantly accelerated with the phase transition from sub- to super-critical.
470
•
Coal matrix swelling decreases with increasing reservoir depth or confining stress, which is
471
beneficial for field applications of CO2-ECBM, preferably in deep coal formations. However,
472
this also depends on the pore pressure conditions as lower effective stresses (lower
473
confinements and higher injection pressures) lead to greater swelling reduction, regardless of
474
coal maturity or rank.
475
•
regardless of pore pressure and reservoir depth.
476 477
Nitrogen (N2) exhibits comparatively inert behaviour in coal, producing negligible swelling,
•
However, the partial pressure depletion created by N2 in the coal mass has the ability to recover
478
CO2 adsorption-induced swelled areas in coal to some extent under lower effective stresses, and
479
is common for any coal type. Further, this ability to recover swelling can be imporved if N2
480
flooding is done for a sufficiently long period under a lower effective stress conditions, and it is
481
probable that a greater amount of N2 can enter the coal mass under such conditions.
482
Acknowledgement
483
The authors wish to express their appreciation of the funding provided by the Australian Research
484
Council (DE130100124) and the Postgraduate Publication Award (PPA) of Monash University.
485
References
486
1.
487
Skawiński, R., Considerations referring to coal swelling accompanying the sorption of gases and water. Archives of Mining Sciences 1999, 44, (3), 425-434.
22
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 22 of 35
Page 23 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
488
Energy & Fuels
2.
International Journal of Coal Geology 2007, 69, (4), 243-252.
489 490
3.
Mazumder, S.; Wolf, K. H., Differential swelling and permeability change of coal in response to CO2 injection for ECBM. International Journal of Coal Geology 2008, 74, (2), 123-138.
491 492
Pan, Z.; Connell, L. D., A theoretical model for gas adsorption-induced coal swelling.
4.
Vandamme, M.; Brochard, L.; Lecampion, B.; Coussy, O., Adsorption and strain: The CO2-
493
induced swelling of coal. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 2010, 58, (10), 1489-
494
1505.
495
5.
Journal of Coal Geology 2008, 74, (1), 41-52.
496 497
6.
7.
8.
504
Hol, S.; Peach, C. J.; Spiers, C. J., Applied stress reduces the CO2 sorption capacity of coal.
International Journal of Coal Geology 2011, 85, (1), 128-142.
502 503
Day, S.; Fry, R.; Sakurovs, R.; Weir, S., Swelling of Coals by Supercritical Gases and Its Relationship to Sorption. Energy & Fuels 2010, 24, (4), 2777-2783.
500 501
Day, S.; Fry, R.; Sakurovs, R., Swelling of moist coal in carbon dioxide and methane.
International Journal of Coal Geology 2011, 86, (2–3), 197-203.
498 499
Day, S.; Fry, R.; Sakurovs, R., Swelling of Australian coals in supercritical CO2. International
9.
Karacan, C. Ö., Swelling-induced volumetric strains internal to a stressed coal associated with CO2 sorption. International Journal of Coal Geology 2007, 72, (3), 209-220.
505
10. Perera, M. S. A.; Ranjith, P. G.; Choi, S. K.; Airey, D., The effects of sub-critical and super-
506
critical carbon dioxide adsorption-induced coal matrix swelling on the permeability of naturally
507
fractured black coal. Energy 2011, 36, (11), 6442-6450.
508
11. Balan, H. O.; Gumrah, F., Assessment of shrinkage–swelling influences in coal seams using
509
rank-dependent physical coal properties. International Journal of Coal Geology 2009, 77, (1–
510
2), 203-213.
511
12. Anggara, F.; Sasaki, K.; Rodrigues, S.; Sugai, Y., The effect of megascopic texture on swelling
512
of a low rank coal in supercritical carbon dioxide. International Journal of Coal Geology 2014,
513
125, 45-56. 23
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
514
13. Anggara, F.; Sasaki, K.; Sugai, Y., Swelling Measurements of a Low Rank Coal in Supercritical CO2. International Journal of Geosciences 2013, 4, (05), 863.
515 516
14. Anggara, F.; Sasaki, K.; Sugai, Y., The correlation between coal swelling and permeability
517
during CO2 sequestration: A case study using Kushiro low rank coals. International Journal of
518
Coal Geology 2016.
519
15. Battistutta, E.; van Hemert, P.; Lutynski, M.; Bruining, H.; Wolf, K.-H., Swelling and sorption
520
experiments on methane, nitrogen and carbon dioxide on dry Selar Cornish coal. International
521
Journal of Coal Geology 2010, 84, (1), 39-48.
522
16. Kiyama, T.; Nishimoto, S.; Fujioka, M.; Xue, Z.; Ishijima, Y.; Pan, Z.; Connell, L. D., Coal
523
swelling strain and permeability change with injecting liquid/supercritical CO2 and N2 at stress-
524
constrained conditions. International Journal of Coal Geology 2011, 85, (1), 56-64.
525
17. Pini, R.; Ottiger, S.; Burlini, L.; Storti, G.; Mazzotti, M., Role of adsorption and swelling on the
526
dynamics of gas injection in coal. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 2009, 114,
527
(B4), B04203.
528
18. Sakurovs, R.; Day, S.; Weir, S., Relationships between the critical properties of gases and their high pressure sorption behavior on coals. Energy & Fuels 2010, 24, (3), 1781-1787.
529 530
19. Durucan, S.; Ahsanb, M.; Shia, J.-Q., Matrix shrinkage and swelling characteristics of European coals. Energy Procedia 2009, 1, (1), 3055-3062.
531 532
20. Oldenburg, C. M., Geologic carbon sequestration: CO2 transport in depleted gas reservoirs. In
Gas Transport in Porous Media, Springer: 2006; pp 419-426.
533 534
21.
Perera, M.; Ranjith, P.; Ranathunga, A.; Koay, A.; Zhao, J.; Choi, S., Optimization of
535
enhanced coal-bed methane recovery using numerical simulation. Journal of Geophysics and
536
Engineering 2015, 12, (1), 90.
537
22.
Gale, J. J., Using coal seams for CO2 sequestration. Geologica Belgica 2004, 7, (3-4), 99-103.
538
23.
White, C. M.; Smith, D. H.; Jones, K. L.; Goodman, A. L.; Jikich, S. A.; LaCount, R. B.;
539
DuBose, S. B.; Ozdemir, E.; Morsi, B. I.; Schroeder, K. T., Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide in 24
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 24 of 35
Page 25 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
540
Coal with Enhanced Coalbed Methane Recovery: A Review. Energy & Fuels 2005, 19, (3),
541
659-724.
542
24.
Japan. International Journal of Coal Geology 2010, 82, (3), 287-298.
543 544
Fujioka, M.; Yamaguchi, S.; Nako, M., CO2-ECBM field tests in the Ishikari Coal Basin of
25.
Reeves, S. In Geological Sequestration of CO2 in Deep, Unmineable Coalbeds: An Integrated
545
Research and Commerical-Scale Field Demonstration Project, SPE Annual Technical
546
Conference and Exhibition, 2001; 2001.
547
26.
Botnen, L. S.; Fisher, D. W.; Dobroskok, A. A.; Bratton, T. R.; H. Greaves, K.; Robert
548
McLendon, T.; Steiner, G.; Sorensen, J. A.; Steadman, E. N.; Harju, J. A., Field Test of CO2
549
Injection and Storage in Lignite Coal Seam in North Dakota. Energy Procedia 2009, 1, (1),
550
2013-2019.
551
27.
Pan, Z.; Connell, L. D.; Camilleri, M., Laboratory characterisation of coal reservoir
552
permeability for primary and enhanced coalbed methane recovery. International Journal of
553
Coal Geology 2010, 82, (3), 252-261.
554
28.
Siriwardane, H.; Haljasmaa, I.; McLendon, R.; Irdi, G.; Soong, Y.; Bromhal, G., Influence of
555
carbon dioxide on coal permeability determined by pressure transient methods. International
556
Journal of Coal Geology 2009, 77, (1–2), 109-118.
557
29.
Zutshi, A.; Harpalani, S. In Matrix swelling with CO2 injection in a cbm reservoir and its
558
impact on permeability of coal, International Coalbed Methane Symposium, University of
559
Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 2004; 2004; pp 12-14.
560
30.
561 562 563
Jasinge, D. An investigation of the effect of carbon dioxide sequestration on the behaviour of brown coal. Monash University. Faculty of Engineering. Dept. of Civil Engineering, 2010.
31.
Reeves, S. R., Enhanced CBM recovery, coalbed CO2 sequestration assessed. The Oil and Gas
Journal 2003/07/14/, 2003, p 49+.
25
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
564
32.
Perera, M. S. A.; Ranjith, P. G.; Airey, D. W.; Choi, S. K., Sub- and super-critical carbon
565
dioxide flow behavior in naturally fractured black coal: An experimental study. Fuel 2011, 90,
566
(11), 3390-3397.
567
33.
Ranathunga, A. S.; Perera, M. S. A.; Ranjith, P. G., Super-critical carbon dioxide flow
568
behaviour in low rank coal: A meso-scale experimental study, Journal of CO2 Utilization 2017,
569
(under review).
570
34.
Ranathunga, A. S.; Perera, M. S. A.; Ranjith, P. G.; Bui, H., Super-critical CO2 saturation-
571
induced mechanical property alterations in low rank coal: An experimental study. The Journal
572
of Supercritical Fluids 2016, 109, 134-140.
573
35.
McLinden, M.; Klein, S.; Lemmon, E.; Peskin, A., REFPROP, Thermodynamic and transport
574
properties of refrigerants and refrigerant mixtures. NIST Standard Reference Database 1998,
575
23.
576
36.
Ottiger, S.; Pini, R.; Storti, G.; Mazzotti, M.; Bencini, R.; Quattrocchi, F.; Sardu, G.; Deriu, G.,
577
Adsorption of pure carbon dioxide and methane on dry coal from the Sulcis Coal Province
578
(SW Sardinia, Italy). Environmental progress 2006, 25, (4), 355-364.
579
37.
CO2. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 2015, 33, (4), 1009-1016.
580 581
Vishal, V.; Singh, T. N., A Laboratory Investigation of Permeability of Coal to Supercritical
38.
Connell, L.; Sander, R.; Pan, Z.; Camilleri, M.; Heryanto, D., History matching of enhanced
582
coal bed methane laboratory core flood tests. international journal of coal Geology 2011, 87,
583
(2), 128-138.
584
39.
coalbed methane recovery by gas injection. Transport in Porous Media 2008, 73, (2), 141-159.
585 586
Jessen, K.; Tang, G.-Q.; Kovscek, A. R., Laboratory and simulation investigation of enhanced
40.
Reznik, A. A.; Singh, P. K.; Foley, W. L., An analysis of the effect of CO2 injection on the
587
recovery of in-situ methane from bituminous coal: an experimental simulation. Society of
588
Petroleum Engineers Journal 1984, 24, (05), 521-528.
26
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 26 of 35
Page 27 of 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
589
Energy & Fuels
41.
Zhou, F.; Hussain, F.; Cinar, Y., Injecting pure N 2 and CO 2 to coal for enhanced coalbed
590
methane: experimental observations and numerical simulation. International Journal of Coal
591
Geology 2013, 116, 53-62.
592
42.
Mavor, M.; Gunter, W.; Robinson, J. In Alberta multiwell micro-pilot testing for CBM
593
properties, enhanced methane recovery and CO2 storage potential, SPE Annual Technical
594
Conference and Exhibition, 2004; 2004.
595
43.
Reeves, S.; O'Neill, P. In Preliminary results from the broad meadow pilot, project Bowen
596
basin Australia, Proc. 1989 Coalbed Methane Symposium, Univ. Ala. School of Mines and
597
Energy Development and Gas Research Inst., Tuscaloosa, AL, 1989; 1989; pp 273-291.
27
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Reservoir depth
Page 28 of 35
Injecting gas properties
1st N2 injection
1st CO2 injection
2nd N2 injection
2nd CO2 injection
Pc = 11 MPa Pi = 6 ~ 9 MPa
1st N2 injection
1st CO2 injection
2nd N2 injection
2nd CO2 injection
Pc = 14 MPa Pi = 6 ~ 12 MPa
1st N2 injection
1st CO2 injection
2nd N2 injection
2nd CO2 injection
Pc = 17 MPa Pi = 6 ~ 14 MPa
Figure 1. Experimental program for tri-axial flow studies (here Pc is confining pressure and Pi is the injection pressure)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 29 of 35
6
2.5
0 Pc = 11 MPa Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa
-2.5
Volumetric strain (%)
5 Volumetric strain (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
Pc = 11 MPa Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa
4
2
0
-2
-5 0
5
10 15 Time (h)
20
0
(a) N2 injection
5
10 15 Time (h)
20
(b) CO2 injection
Figure 2. Volumetric strain variation of brown coal samples for 8 MPa (a) N2 and (b) CO2 injection under various confining pressures (here Pc is confining pressure)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels
(b)
Pc =11 MPa
12
Pc = 14 MPa
9
Pc = 17 MPa
10 8
8 12 9 10
6 4
7
8 9 10 1214
6
2
6 6
0 0
7 7
200
Volumetric Strain (%)
(a) Volumetric Strain (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 30 of 35
Pc = 11 MPa
2.0
Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa
1.5
6
1.0
6 6
0.5
7
7 7
8
8 8
9
9
10
10
12
14
12
9
8
0.0 400 600 CO₂ density (kg/m3)
800
4
8 12 N₂ density (kg/m3)
Figure 3. Variation of volumetric strain under 11, 14 and 17 MPa confinements during (a) first CO2 injection and (b) first N2 injection (here the hollow data points represent the supercritical CO2 conditions and the data labels denote the respective injection pressures)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
Averaage pore pressure in the coal sample (MPa)
Page 31 of 35
12
Pc = 11 MPa Pc = 14 MPa Pc = 17 MPa critical pressure of CO₂
10
Super-critical region
8
6 Sub-critical region 4 5
7
9
11
13
15
Upstream CO₂ pressure (MPa)
Figure 4. Average pore pressure variation in the coal sample during the first CO2 injection (after 24 hours of injection)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels
100%
80%
Sample length (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 32 of 35
60%
40%
20%
0% Pi = 7 & Pc = 11
Pi = 8 & Pc = 11
Pi = 9 & Pc = 11
Pi = 7 & Pc = 14
Pi = 8 & Pc = 14
Pi = 9 & Pc = 14
Pi = 7 & Pc = 17
Pi = 8 & Pc = 17
Pi = 9 & Pc = 17
CO₂ injection conditions super-critical CO₂
sub-critical CO₂
Figure 5. CO2 pressure variation along the sample for 7, 8 and 9 MPa CO2 injection under 11, 14 and 17 MPa confining pressures (here Pi = injection pressure and Pc = confining pressure)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
Volumetric strain reduction/ Swelling recovery (%)
Page 33 of 35
20
18.5
18
16.5
16 14.0
14 12
11.2
10.5
10
8.9
8.5
Pc = 11 MPa 8.0
Pc = 14 MPa
8 6
4.6
4 2
1.31.0 0.7
2.6 1.41.2
Pc = 17 MPa
4.9
2.9
0 6
7
8 9 10 CO₂ injection pressure (MPa)
12
14
Figure 6. Volumetric strain reduction for second CO2 injection compared to first CO2 injection after N2 flooding for 24 hours
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Energy & Fuels
25 CO₂ permeability increase after N₂ flooding (%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 34 of 35
20
y = 1.046x R² = 0.9895
y = 1.047x R² = 0.9927
15 y = 1.0069x R² = 0.9902 10
5
0 0
5 10 15 Swelling recovery after N₂ flooding (%) Pc = 11 MPa
Pc = 14 MPa
20
Pc = 17 MPa
Figure 7. CO2 permeability increase vs swelling recovery after N2 flooding
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 35 of 35
(a)
0.008 13.1%
CO₂ permeability (μD)
9.4% 0.006
0%
0.004
0%
0.002
2.2% 5.3% 0%
1.1% 2.9%
0 Pc = 11 MPa After 24 hrs of N₂ injection
(b)
Pc = 14 MPa After 48 hrs of N₂ injection
Pc = 17 MPa After 72 hrs of N₂ injection
0.012 17.7%
0.01 CO₂ permeability (μD)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Energy & Fuels
10.5% 0.008
0%
0.006
0.004 0%
0.002
5.6% 10% 0%
3.4% 4.1%
0 Pc = 11 MPa After 24 hrs of N₂ injection
Pc = 14 MPa After 48 hrs of N₂ injection
Pc = 17 MPa After 72 hrs of N₂ injection
Figure 8. CO2 permeability after flooding N2 for 24, 48 and 72 hours for (a) 6 MPa CO2 and (b) 8 MPa CO2 injections during 11, 14 and 17 MPa confining pressures (here the data labels denote the CO2 permeability increase compared to 24 hours of N2 flooding)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment