Effect of pore size distribution on dissociation temperature depression

Subscriber access provided by Queen Mary, University of London

Article

Effect of pore size distribution on dissociation temperature depression and phase boundary shift of gas hydrate in various fine-grained sediments Taehyung Park, Joo Yong Lee, and Tae-Hyuk Kwon Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b00074 • Publication Date (Web): 23 Mar 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on March 24, 2018

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 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 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 46 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

1

Effect of pore size distribution on dissociation temperature

2

depression and phase boundary shift of gas hydrate in various

3

fine-grained sediments

4

5

6 7 8 9

Taehyung Park1, Joo Yong Lee2 and Tae-Hyuk Kwon1* 1

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and

Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, 34141, Korea 2

Oil & Gas Research Center, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM),

Daejeon, 34132, Korea.

10 11

Corresponding Author

12

* Tae-Hyuk Kwon, Ph.D, Corresponding Author

13

Assistant Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,

14

Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, 34141, Korea

15

Tel: +82-42-350-3628

16

Email: [email protected]

Fax: +82-42-869-3610

17 18 19 20 21 22

Number of words: Number of tables: Number of figures:

4633 (without References, Figures or Tables) 1 9

23

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

24

Abstract

25

Capillarity in small, confined pores has a pronounced effect on depression of dissociation

26

temperature of gas hydrates, known as the Gibbs-Thomson effect. However, this effect remains

27

poorly understood in natural fine-grained sediments with wide pore size distributions. This study

28

investigated the effect of pore size distributions of fine-grained sediments on the dissociation

29

temperature of gas hydrate. Gas hydrate was synthesized under partially water-saturated

30

conditions in nano-sized silica gels and in various natural fine-grained sediment samples,

31

including sand, silt, diatoms, a diatom-sand mixture, and clayey sediment. The synthesized

32

hydrate samples were thermally dissociated under isochoric conditions, while the melting

33

temperature depression and the shifted phase boundaries were monitored. We observed the

34

dissociation temperature depression of approximately 0.1–0.3°C in silt, 0.2–0.4°C in the diatom

35

sample, and 1.2–1.5°C in clayey silt, while no temperature depression was observed in sand. In a

36

particular case of diatom-sand mixture, the dual porosity condition with the submicron-scale

37

internal pores of diatoms and the macro-pores of sands, rendered dual phase boundaries, one

38

with a ~0.4°C temperature depression and one with no depression, respectively. Despite the wide

39

ranges of pore size, gas hydrates were preferentially formed in smaller pores; which comprise

40

less than 40% of the cumulative pore volumes. This was because the initial water loci

41

exacerbated the Gibbs-Thomson effect in partially water-saturated conditions. Our results

42

provide clear experimental evidence on and novel insights into the effect of pore size

43

distributions of fine-grained sediments on the dissociation behavior and phase boundaries of gas

44

hydrates, both in the presence of free gas, or in water-limiting conditions that exhibit a

45

considerable Gibbs-Thomson effect.

46

2


Page 2 of 46

Page 3 of 46 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

47

Introduction

48

Gas hydrates are ice-like crystalline structures comprised of hydrogen-bonded water cages

49

containing gas molecules.1 Natural gas hydrates are considered to be potential energy resources

50

due to the vast amount accumulated on continental margins and in permafrost regions.2-4 At the

51

same time, they act as a carbon sink in the global carbon cycle,5 and as potential triggers and/or

52

accelerators of geological hazards.6-9 Furthermore, the natural occurrence of carbon dioxide

53

(CO2) hydrate in CO2 reservoirs in the deep ocean10 has aroused interest in a gas hydrate

54

production method involving a CH4-CO2 replacement; gas hydrates are a possible solution to the

55

problem of geologic CO2 storage.11-14 In all cases, gas hydrate dissociation reactions are

56

unavoidably involved, understanding of the dissociation behavior of gas hydrates in natural

57

sediments is thus essential. Accordingly, there have been extensive studies to understand the

58

chemo-thermo-mechanical changes during the dissociation of gas hydrates in natural sediments,

59

such as the phase changes,15, 16 pore water chemistry changes,17 and heat and mass transfer.18-20

60

The majority of natural gas hydrates are reportedly hosted in fine-grained sediments, in locations

61

such as Blake Ridge, the eastern coast of India (NGHP), Cascadia Margin, offshore Peru,

62

Okushiri Ridge, Ulleung Basin (UB), Orca Basin, Sea of Okhotsk, Atwater Valley in Gulf of

63

Mexico, and Hydrate Ridge.21-24 Such fine-grained sedimentary environments affect the

64

formation and dissociation of gas hydrates in various ways, through the influence of negatively

65

charged clay surfaces,25, 26 the release of adsorbed cations into pore water,27, 28 and the capillarity

66

generated by small pore sizes.25, 29-34 In particular, gas hydrates that are confined in small pores

67

are influenced by the capillary effect, which shifts the thermodynamic phase boundary to lower

68

temperatures (or higher pressures). This phenomenon is called melting point depression (or

69

dissociation temperature depression), often referred to as the Gibbs-Thomson effect.16, 29-33, 35-38 3


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

70

Water molecules in confined small pores have a lower activity than unconfined molecules; their

71

lowered activity requires greater thermodynamic driving forces to form and stabilize clathrate

72

gas hydrates. Therefore, gas hydrates in small pores are stable under higher pressures and lower

73

temperatures than those found in large pores. In turn, they dissociate at lower temperatures,

74

having the phase boundary shifted. As a result, it has been reported that submicron sediment pore

75

sizes cause the uplift of the base of the methane hydrate stability zone (MHSZ), and decrease its

76

thickness.39, 40 The prediction of the temperature depression of the hydrate phase boundary in

77

clay-rich sediments is critical to understanding the formation and dissociation of gas hydrates in

78

those sediments, as their small pore size affects the phase boundary, location of the base of the

79

MHSZ, hydrate morphology, and properties of hydrate-bearing sediments.

80

The dissociation temperature depression and phase boundary shift of gas hydrates in small pores

81

have been studied by using artificially synthesized porous silica gels, due to their well-controlled

82

and narrow range of pore diameters.29-32, 35-37 Natural fine-grained sediments can have a wide

83

pore size distribution over more than one order of magnitude. This is most apparent when the

84

sediment is composed of various particles, including sand, silt, and clay-sized particles, or where

85

coarse-grained sediments contain diatoms, which have their own sub-micron scale internal

86

pores.21,

87

offshore Japan, showed pore size distributions ranging from 10 nm to 1 µm and ~10 nm to 10

88

µm, respectively.40, 41 However, a limited number of studies have been conducted using natural

89

fine-grained sediments that have a wide pore size distribution; the dissociation behavior of gas

90

hydrates in such sediments remains poorly examined.

22

For instance, the sediments cored from the Kumano Basin and Nankai Trough,

4


Page 4 of 46

Page 5 of 46 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

91

In this study, we investigated the Gibbs-Thomson effect and the dissociation temperature

92

depression of CO2 hydrate in fine-grained sediments with pore sizes ranging over two orders of

93

magnitude. CO2 hydrate was synthesized under water-limiting conditions in various sediment

94

samples, including porous silica gels, sand, silt, diatoms, a diatom-sand mixture, and clayey

95

sediment from Ulleung Basin, offshore Korea. Then, the hydrates in these sediments were

96

thermally dissociated while the pressure and temperature traces were monitored. The dissociation

97

temperature depression was identified and correlated to the pore size distribution of the host

98

sediments using the Gibbs-Thomson model. The implication of the observations and results are

99

discussed with respect to the occurrence of hydrate in the presence of free gas, the base of

100

MHSZ, and the dissociation behavior during hydrate production.

101

5


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

102

2

Materials and Methods

103

2.1

Description of the sediment samples used

104

In this study, two artificial porous samples and five natural sediment samples were used. We first

105

prepared two porous silica gels (SG; Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) with a narrow range

106

of pore sizes and mean pore diameters of 6 nm and 15 nm, hereafter denoted as 6SG and 15SG,

107

respectively. These control samples were chosen to validate the Gibbs-Thomson model and the

108

corresponding input parameters to determine the melting temperature shift. Five natural

109

sediments were prepared: fine quartz sand (Ottawa F110, U.S. Silica, Frederick, MD, USA),

110

crushed silica silt (Sil-Co-Sil, U.S. Silica, Frederick, MD, USA.), diatoms (Celite 545, Sigma-

111

Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA), a mixture of diatom and sand at a 1:9 mass ratio, and a fine-

112

grained sediment core (UBGH1-10B-2b) retrieved from hydrate deposits in the Ulleung Basin,

113

East Sea, offshore Korea, hereafter referred to as sand, silt, diatoms, sand-diatom mixture, and

114

UB sediment, respectively. The basic index and physical properties of the prepared samples,

115

including mean particle diameter (D50), specific surface area (Sa), and porosity, are listed in

116

Table 1. More details of the sand and the silt samples can be found in Kwon et al.,38 and details

117

of the UB sediment are available in Kim et al.42

118

The particle size distributions of the sediment samples were analyzed using a laser light

119

scattering analyzer (Saturn DigiSizer 5200, Micromeritics, Norcross, GA, USA), as shown in

120

Figure 1. The specific surface areas were measured using the nitrogen (N2) adsorption dry

121

method (TriStar II 3020, Micromeritics, Norcross, GA, USA) and the methylene blue adsorption

122

wet method43. Pore size distributions of the samples were estimated using mercury intrusion

123

porosimetry (MIP; MicroActive AutoPore V 9600, Micromeritics, Norcross, GA, USA) for

6


Page 6 of 46

Page 7 of 46 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

124

meso-to-macro pores larger than 10 nm, and the Barrett-Joyner-Halenda (BJH) N2

125

adsorption/desorption method for nano-sized pores smaller than 20 nm, as shown in Figure 2.

126

The pore sizes of 6SG and 15SG were obtained from the BJH method (Figure 2a), and the pore

127

size distribution of the natural sediments (silt, diatoms, and UB sediment) were estimated by

128

integrating both the MIP and BJH results to identify the broad range of the pore size

129

distribution.44 The pore size distribution of the sand and sand-diatom mixture was estimated by

130

MIP only, owing to a minimal presence, or lack of, of nano-sized pores in those samples (Figure

131

2b).

132

Samples 6SG and 15SG had mean particle diameters (D50) of approximately 250 µm and 560

133

µm, and mean pore diameters of 6.5 nm and 16.2 nm, respectively. The sand (D50 = 120 µm)

134

represents coarse-grained sediments or sandy sediments frequently found in natural hydrate

135

deposits. The silt (D50 = 28 µm) was chosen to represent silty sediments in formations containing

136

hydrate with a low specific surface area and low plasticity (e.g., Nankai Trough, Japan and

137

Shenhu, South China Sea).45,

138

plasticity, D50 = 4.8 µm, a clay fraction greater than 20%, and a high specific surface area of ~90

139

m2/g (Table 1). The pore sizes of the silt and UB sediment differ by approximately one order of

140

magnitude, with the majority of pores falling into the ranges of 0.1–10 µm and 0.01–1 µm,

141

respectively. The diatom samples (D50 = 66.7 µm) had pores smaller than the sand, and had a low

142

specific surface area, similar to the silt. However, the diatoms showed a pore size distribution of

143

0.1–10 µm, in which two distinctive peaks were observed; one in the range of 100–400 nm,

144

which were of their internal pores, and the other in the range of 1–10 µm, from their particle size.

145

The diatom sample was selected in this study because many hydrate-containing formations in

146

deep oceans are reported to contain diatomaceous sediment.21, 47

46

The UB sediment represents clay-rich sediments with high

7


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

147

The morphology and microstructures of the sediment grains were imaged using a scanning

148

electron microscopy (SEM; Magellan 400, FEI Company, Hillsboro, OR, USA). Figure 3 shows

149

some representative images of the samples. The presence of nano-sized pores in 6SG, 15SG, and

150

the diatom sample can be seen in Figures 3a, 3b, and 3h. The SEM images of the UB sediment

151

confirmed that the cored UB sample contained clay minerals (Figure 3f) and diatoms (Figure 3g)

152

with nano-scale intrapores (~10 to 100 nm).

153 154

2.2

Experimental setup

155

In this study, CO2 (research-graded with 99.9% purity, Sam-O Gas Co., Daejeon, Korea) was

156

used to form gas hydrates. CO2 was selected as a suitable analogue for CH4 hydrate because of

157

the similarities between CO2 hydrate and CH4 hydrate, such as their crystal structures and

158

physicochemical characteristics. Both CO2 hydrate and CH4 hydrate form structure I hydrates,

159

and the size of CO2 and CH4 gas molecule are similar (4.36 and 5.12 Å, respectively).1 A

160

cylindrical polycarbonate high pressure column with a height of 80 mm, an outer diameter of 19

161

mm, an inner diameter of 6.4 mm, and an inner volume of 3.18 cm3 was fabricated to synthesize

162

and dissociate CO2 hydrate in the porous samples, as shown in Figure 4. One resistance

163

temperature detector (RTD; PT100; Hankook Electric Heater, Daejeon, Korea) was inserted into

164

the center of the polycarbonate column to monitor the temperature of the samples. In addition,

165

two pressure transducers (PX302; Omega Engineering, INC., Norwalk, CT, USA) were installed

166

to monitor the pressure inside, while the inlet (CO2 gas injection part) and outlet (CO2 gas

167

purging part) pressures were monitored to confirm that they were in a similar range. The pressure

168

inside the column, the CO2 gas pressure in particular, was regulated by a pressurized CO2

169

cylinder. The temperature was controlled by submerging the column in a temperature-controlled 8


Page 8 of 46

Page 9 of 46 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

170

bath (RW3-2025; Jeio Tech, Daejeon, Korea). The temperature and pressure inside the column

171

were logged with a data acquisition unit (34970A; Keysight Technologies, Santa Rosa, CA,

172

USA) over the course of the hydrate formation and dissociation experiments.

173

174

2.3

Experimental procedures

175

Pre-wetted sediment sample preparation. All samples were pre-wetted with deionized water

176

(DIW) at a pre-determined water content to achieve partially water-saturated conditions. Then,

177

the pre-wetted samples were hand-tamped in the column to be approximately 8 cm high. The

178

porosities of the packed samples are listed in Table 1.

179

CO2 hydrate formation. The column was flushed with pure CO2 gas several times to remove the

180

residual air inside. CO2 gas was then injected and pressurized to 3 MPa at 8°C. Thereafter, the

181

temperature of the column was lowered to within the hydrate thermodynamic stability zone. The

182

temperature was lowered to −2°C for the 6SG and 15SG samples, and to 1°C for the other

183

samples. Upon confirmation of hydrate nucleation, exhibited by an exothermal temperature rise,

184

the pressure and temperature were maintained for more than 24 h to allow sufficient time for

185

CO2 hydrate formation and growth.

186

Stepwise thermal dissociation of CO2 hydrate. After the completion of the hydrate formation

187

process, the temperature of the column was increased in steps of 1°C every 5 h, while the

188

constant volume condition was maintained with no mass flux (i.e., isochoric heating). When the

189

temperature exceeded the dissociation temperature (or equilibrium temperature), CO2 hydrates

190

started to melt and release free CO2 gas, thus increasing the pressure. Such step-wise heating

9


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

191

continued until no distinct pressure increase was observed, which indicated the complete

192

dissociation of CO2 hydrate, referred to as the first heating cycle. The temperature and pressure

193

were logged every 10 s over the course of the experiments. As a result, the pressure and

194

temperature traces obtained during hydrate dissociation indicate the thermodynamic phase

195

equilibrium of the CO2 hydrate in the sample. Again, the reaction column was cooled to form

196

CO2 hydrate (i.e., cooling cycle). To confirm the consistency and repeatability of the experiment

197

results, the aforementioned, step-wise thermal dissociation procedure was repeated, referred to as

198

the second heating cycle. Figure 5 shows the typical temperature and pressure traces obtained

199

from the first heating, through cooling, and to the second heating cycle.

200

10


Page 10 of 46

Page 11 of 46 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

201

3

Results and Analyses

202

3.1

Results of porous silica glass: Validation of Gibbs-Thomson model

203

Natural, gas hydrate-bearing clayey sediments are expected to have nano-scale pores that affect

204

the formation and dissociation behavior of gas hydrates. The capillarity exerted by small pores

205

hinders water molecules from associating with other water molecules, hence requiring lower

206

temperatures, or higher pressures, for hydrate formation. This can be represented by the reduced

207

water activity, which is a measure of the energy state (i.e., chemical potential) of the water

208

molecules. Therefore, to identify the effects of nano-scale pore size on gas hydrate dissociation,

209

CO2 hydrate stability tests with nano-sized porous silica gels (6SG, 15SG) were performed to

210

validate the Gibbs-Thomson model in phase boundary calculations.

211

Figure 6a shows the pressure-temperature (PT) traces of 6SG and 15SG, which are shifted

212

toward lower temperatures compared to the bulk phase boundary (when the gas hydrates are

213

unconfined). This confirms the depression of the CO2 hydrate dissociation temperature by small

214

pores of the silica gels, as corroborated by many previous studies.29, 31, 33 Temperature shifts

215

(∆Tdep) of ~5°C and ~2°C were observed for the 6SG and 15SG samples, respectively (Figure

216

6a). The PT traces of the first and second heating cycles were found to be consistent, as both

217

traces were in line with each other and relatively parallel to the bulk phase boundary (Figure 6b).

218

The dissociation temperature depression (∆Tdep) can be modeled using the Gibbs-Thomson

219

equation, as follows.31, 33, 38:

220

2  γ m cos θ ∆Tdep = −  hw h d  ρ h 0 L f

  ⋅ Tbulk 

for cylindrical shaped gas hydrates

11


(1)

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

221

and

222

4  γ m cos θ ∆Tdep = −  hw h d  ρ h 0 L f

  ⋅ Tbulk 

for spherical shaped gas hydrates,

Page 12 of 46

(2)

223

where γ hw is the interfacial tension between CO2 hydrate and water, mh is the molar mass of the

224

CO2 hydrate, ρh0 is the density of CO2 hydrate, L f is the latent heat of dissociation of CO2

225

hydrate, and Tbulk is the equilibrium temperature of CO2 hydrate in a bulk condition with no

226

confinement. Herein, due to the pore morphologies of the samples, the morphologies of gas

227

hydrates are assumed to be cylindrical crystals in artificial porous silica gels, and spherical

228

crystals in natural sediment samples.

229

The phase boundaries for various pore sizes, calculated by the Gibbs-Thomson equation, were

230

superimposed on the experimentally obtained phase boundaries of CO2 hydrate for 6SG and

231

15SG in Figure 6b. Herein, the properties of CO2 hydrate were assumed to be equal to those

232

gathered from previous literature,16, 33 that is: γ hw = 0.030 N/m, mh = 174 g/mol, cos θ = 1, ρh0

233

= 1065 kg/m3, and L f = 65.2 kJ/mol. It appears that the PT traces during hydrate dissociation in

234

6SG and 15SG fell within the phase boundaries of the 6–7 nm and 14–15 nm pores, respectively

235

(Figure 6b). This agrees well with the BJH porosimetry results of 6SG and 15SG in Figure 2a.

236

Thus, these results for 6SG and 15SG validate our method for identifying the phase boundary of

237

CO2 hydrate in confined pores, and confirm the use of the Gibbs-Thomson equation and the

238

physical parameters to predict the thermodynamic phase boundary of CO2 hydrate in nano-scale

239

pores.

240

12


Page 13 of 46 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

241

3.2

Results of sand and silt: Coarse- versus Fine-grained sediments

242

Figure 7a shows the PT traces of the sand and silt samples, which highlights the dissociation

243

behavior of coarse-grained and fine-grained sediment, respectively. As expected, the PT traces of

244

CO2 hydrate formed in the sand sample follow the bulk phase boundary with no melting

245

temperature depression due to the sufficiently large pore sizes of sand, which are larger than 10

246

µm (Figure 2b). This result is consistent with previous works by Kwon et al.16, 38 and Jang and

247

Santamarina,48 which have shown that the melting temperature depression becomes observable

248

when the pore sizes are less than 1 µm.

249

On the other hand, CO2 hydrate formed in the silt sample was observed to dissociate at a lower

250

temperature than the bulk phase boundary, with a temperature depression (∆Tdep) of ~0.2–0.4°C.

251

The PT traces were placed between the predicted phase boundaries of 200 nm and 600 nm pores

252

(Figure 7b). The morphology of hydrate in silt was assumed to be spherical rather than

253

cylindrical because the majority of pores in fine-grained sediments are open-ended and are

254

mutually connected (Equation 2). This implies that gas hydrate was formed in the pores of ~200–

255

600 nm diameter and melted at the lower dissociation temperature. From the MIP analysis

256

(Figure 2b), the pore size of the silt sample was estimated to range from 100 nm to 20 µm.

257

Accordingly, it appears that CO2 hydrate was preferentially formed in small pores, likely due to

258

the capillarity caused by the water-limiting conditions (or excess gas conditions). Furthermore, it

259

was observed that the pressure began to increase near the phase boundary of the 200 nm pores

260

and gradually converged onto the phase boundary of the 600 nm pores, confirming that the

261

hydrates in smaller pores dissociate earlier as the temperature increases (see 1st heating of silt in

262

Figure 7b).

13


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

263

3.3

Results of Ulleung Basin sediment, diatoms, and sand-diatom mixture: Implications

264

to natural fine-grained sediment

265

Figure 8 shows the PT traces of the UB sediment, diatoms, and sand-diatom mixture. CO2

266

hydrate formed in the UB sediment dissociated at a lower temperature than the bulk phase

267

boundary, showing a pronounced dissociation temperature depression (∆Tdep) of ~1.3–1.6°C.

268

Assuming a spherical hydrate morphology, it was found that most of the CO2 hydrate

269

dissociation occurred between the phase boundaries for 45 nm and 55 nm pores. This indicates

270

that gas hydrate was formed in the pores of approximately 45–55 nm for the UB sediment, which

271

exhibited the melting temperature depression when dissociated.

272

It was also found that CO2 hydrate formed in the diatom sample and in the sand-diatom mixture

273

sample underwent melting temperature depression due to the capillarity caused by small pores

274

(Figures 8b and 8d). The temperature depressions (∆Tdep) were ~0.2–0.4°C in the diatoms and

275

0.4–0.5°C in the sand-diatom mixture, implying that the sizes of hydrate-containing pores are

276

~150–600 nm. It was interesting to note that for the sand-diatom mixture, there was a noticeable

277

pressure increase following the bulk phase boundary (as denoted in Figure 8d). This shows that

278

CO2 hydrate was also formed in the pores of sand that were unaffected by capillarity due to their

279

large size, though the majority of the hydrate was formed in the small internal pores offered by

280

diatoms.

281

14


Page 14 of 46

Page 15 of 46 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

282

4

Discussion

283

4.1.

Analysis on sizes of hydrate-containing pores

284

The PT traces obtained during hydrate dissociation facilitated the estimation of the diameter of

285

hydrate-containing pores, as depicted in Figures 6-8. The normalized temperature depression

286

(∆Tdep/T) over the course of CO2 hydrate dissociation was plotted against the corresponding pore

287

diameter based on the Gibbs-Thomson equation. Then, the cumulative pore size distribution of

288

each sample, obtained from MIP and/or N2 adsorption methods, was superimposed, as shown in

289

Figure 9. This allowed us to examine the range of pore sizes where CO2 hydrate was formed in

290

each sample.

291

As shown in Figure 9a and 9b, CO2 hydrate formed in the dominant pores of the silica gel

292

samples. While the pore diameter of the 6SG sample mostly ranged from 4–20 nm, the hydrate-

293

containing pores were ~6–7 nm in diameter. These pores correspond to approximately 38–58%

294

of the cumulative pore size distribution, and comprise the middle of the pore size range (Figure

295

9a). It was found that hydrate was formed in these medium-sized pores in the 6SG sample.

296

Likewise, while the pores of 15SG sample ranged from 10–25 nm, most of the hydrates was

297

formed in the pores of ~14–16 nm, which correspond to the 50–75% range in the cumulative

298

pore size distribution. The experimental results of both silica gels indicated that the sediments

299

with a narrow pore size range are expected to preferentially contain gas hydrates in the dominant

300

pores.

301

The silt sample had a relatively wide pore size range (100 nm to 100 µm); however, the hydrate

302

was formed in pores of ~200–600 nm. These pores comprise just 2–7% of the cumulative

303

distribution, as shown in Figure 9c. This corroborates the fact that the excess gas condition (or

304

water-limiting condition) forces water to reside in small pores due to capillarity prior to hydrate

15


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

305

nucleation. Hence, this condition leads to nucleation of CO2 hydrate in place of water in small

306

pores, despite the fact that confined small pores reduce the water activity and inhibit gas hydrate

307

nucleation. Similarly, the hydrate-containing pores in the UB sediment and diatom samples were

308

also found to be fairly small, with diameters of 45–55 nm and 150–600 nm, respectively (Figures

309

9d and 9e). These pores correspond to the lower range (15–18%) of pore sizes in the UB

310

sediment sample and 3–40% in the diatom sample, confirming the preferential formation of gas

311

hydrates in small pores.

312

In contrast, it appears that the hydrate-containing pores in the sand-diatom mixture sample have

313

a wide size distribution, from 150 nm to tens of microns, although most of the hydrate was

314

formed in small pores less than 1 µm. As can be seen in Figure 2b, the pore size distribution of

315

the sand-diatom mixture sample is presumed to exhibit two dominant pore size regimes; sub-

316

micron pores that are present in diatomaceous grains, and macro-pores formed by sand-diatom

317

skeletal structures. We presume that some hydrate crystals were formed in the macro-pores

318

larger than 1 µm, which is supported by the dissociation of the PT trace following the bulk phase

319

boundary without the Gibbs-Thomson effect, as observed in Figure 8d. It was concluded that in

320

fine-grained sediments, with a wide pore size distribution and under water-limiting condition,

321

gas hydrates preferentially form in small pores over large pores, due to the initial loci of water.

322

In turn, the thermodynamic phase boundaries of such hydrates are heavily affected by the

323

capillarity-induced Gibbs-Thomson effect.

324

16


Page 16 of 46

Page 17 of 46 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

325

4.2. Implications for hydrate systems with free gas

326

It has been generally accepted that the Gibbs-Thomson effect prevails in submicron-scale pores

327

and causes the preferential formation of gas hydrates in sandy layers over clay-rich fine-grained

328

sediments.25, 40 This is valid in many hydrate deposits because two-phase equilibrium conditions

329

with no free gas are mostly established above the base of the MHSZ, or above the bottom

330

simulating reflector (BSR). In such hydrate regions with advective, but dissolved, methane

331

fluxes (i.e., Blake Ridge), methane hydrate is expected to form and fill the large pores of sandy

332

sediments, or grow as grain-displacing hydrates in clay-rich sediments.49 However, some field

333

evidence has also suggested the presence of free gas within the regional MHSZ.50-54 A free

334

methane gas phase has often been found in the vicinity of gas vents, where a water-limiting

335

condition is expected, such as Hydrate Ridges offshore Oregon,51, 54, 55 Shenhu area, South China

336

Sea,56 Keathley Canyon Block 151 in northern Gulf of Mexico,57 Krishna‐Godavari Basin

337

offshore India,58 and Mackenzie Delta.59 When the host sediments in these environments are rich

338

in diatoms, clay, silt or ash, hydrate nucleation can take place in small pores due to the capillarity

339

induced by the water-limiting condition. As we observed in our tests, hydrate dissociation is,

340

therefore, presumed to exhibit a considerable Gibbs-Thomson effect with a maximum

341

dissociation temperature depression of ~0.5°C in silt- and diatom-rich sediments, and ~1.5°C in

342

clay-rich sediments.

343

The presence of three-phase equilibrium (vapor, liquid, hydrate) in hydrate deposits has been

344

suggested in some deep sediments near the BSR. The BSR is considered to be an interface

345

between overlying hydrate-bearing sediment and underlying gassy sediment.60 Previous studies

346

have pointed out that the free gas saturation near the BSR varied between 1% and 2% in well 955

347

at Blake Ridge51 and at the IODP Site C0002 in Kumano Basin, offshore Japan.40 In these 17


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

348

conditions, gas hydrates can be disseminated and the Gibbs-Thomson effect can be pronounced.

349

In fact, the frequent mismatch between the depths of the BSR and BMHSZ can be explained by

350

the presence of clay-dominated sediment and the resultant Gibbs-Thomson effect.25, 40 This is

351

also consistent with our observation of the depression of the dissociation temperature in the clay-

352

rich UB sediment sample.

353

Furthermore, the physical properties of hydrate-bearing fine-grained sediments are undergoing

354

continued investigation, and in many of the lab experiments, hydrate-bearing sediments can be

355

synthesized from water-limiting conditions.42, 50, 61, 62 It is worth noting that the gas hydrates

356

formed in fine-grained sediments can exhibit a considerable dissociation temperature depression

357

due to the Gibbs-Thomson effect, as we observed in this study.

358

18


Page 18 of 46

Page 19 of 46 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

359

5

Conclusions

360

This study investigated the Gibbs-Thomson effect on the dissociation temperature depression

361

and the phase boundary of gas hydrates in fine-grained sediments, which have wide pore size

362

distributions of over more than one or two orders of magnitude. In fine-grained sediments with

363

free gas and limited water, gas hydrates preferentially form in smaller pores, less than 1 µm,

364

despite the thermodynamically unfavorable conditions due to the capillarity-induced Gibbs-

365

Thomson effect. Meanwhile, the experimental result of the sand-diatom mixture indicates that

366

even coarse-grained sediments with some diatoms can exhibit the Gibbs-Thomson effect, due to

367

the presence of submicron-scale internal pores of diatoms. It appears that dual porosity, formed

368

by the submicron diatom pores and macro-pores of the sand, is likely to produce dual phase

369

boundaries, one with a dissociation temperature depression and one without. Our experimental

370

results indicate the critical role of the pore size distribution range of fine-grained sediments in

371

governing the dissociation behavior and phase boundary of gas hydrates, in the presence of free

372

gas or in water-limiting conditions.

373 374

Acknowledgments

375

This research was supported by a grant (17CTAP-C129729-01) from Technology Advancement

376

Research Program (TARP) funded by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of Korean

377

government, by the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) and

378

the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea

379

(20152520100760), and by the MOTIE through the Project “Gas Hydrate Exploration and

380

Production Study” under the management of the Gas Hydrate Research and Development

381

Organization (GHDO) of Korea and the Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources

382

(KIGAM). The data presented in this paper can be found in the text, figures or in the table, and 19


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

383

the data can be requested to the author by email ([email protected]).

388 389

References

390

(1) Sloan, E. D. Gas hydrates: review of physical/chemical properties. Energy Fuels 1998, 12,

391

191-196.

392

(2) Makogon, Y.; Holditch, S.; Makogon, T. Natural gas-hydrates—A potential energy source for

393

the 21st Century. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2007, 56, 14-31.

394

(3) Milkov, A. V. Global estimates of hydrate-bound gas in marine sediments: how much is really

395

out there? Earth-Sci. Rev. 2004, 66, 183-197.

396

(4) Kvenvolden, K. A. Methane hydrate—a major reservoir of carbon in the shallow geosphere?

397

Chem. Geol. 1988, 71, 41-51.

398

(5) Dickens, G. R. Rethinking the global carbon cycle with a large, dynamic and microbially

399

mediated gas hydrate capacitor. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2003, 213, 169-183.

400

(6) Fischer, D.; Mogollón, J. M.; Strasser, M.; Pape, T.; Bohrmann, G.; Fekete, N.; Spiess, V.;

401

Kasten, S. Subduction zone earthquake as potential trigger of submarine hydrocarbon seepage.

402

Nature Geosci. 2013, 6, 647-651.

403

(7) Hornbach, M. J.; Saffer, D. M.; Holbrook, W. S. Critically pressured free-gas reservoirs

404

below gas-hydrate provinces. Nature 2004, 427, 142-144.

405

(8) Phrampus, B. J.; Hornbach, M. J. Recent changes to the Gulf Stream causing widespread gas

406

hydrate destabilization. Nature 2012, 490, 527-530.

407

(9) Rothwell, R.; Thomson, J.; Kahler, G. Low-sea-level emplacement of a very large Late

408

Pleistocene'megaturbidite'in the western Mediterranean Sea. Nature 1998, 392, 377.

409

(10) Inagaki, F.; Kuypers, M. M.; Tsunogai, U.; Ishibashi, J.-i.; Nakamura, K.-i.; Treude, T.;

410

Ohkubo, S.; Nakaseama, M.; Gena, K.; Chiba, H. Microbial community in a sediment-hosted

411

CO2 lake of the southern Okinawa Trough hydrothermal system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2006,

412

103, 14164-14169.

413

(11) Lee, S.; Lee, Y.; Lee, J.; Lee, H.; Seo, Y. Experimental verification of methane–carbon

414

dioxide replacement in natural gas hydrates using a differential scanning calorimeter. Environ.

415

Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 13184-13190.

416

(12) House, K. Z.; Schrag, D. P.; Harvey, C. F.; Lackner, K. S. Permanent carbon dioxide storage 20


Page 20 of 46

Page 21 of 46 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

417

in deep-sea sediments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2006, 103, 12291-12295.

418

(13) Ohgaki, K.; Takano, K.; Sangawa, H.; Matsubara, T.; Nakano, S. Methane Exploitation by

419

Carbon Dioxide from Gas Hydrates—Phase Equilibria for CO2-CH4 Mixed Hydrate System—.

420

J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 1996, 29, 478-483.

421

(14) Lee, H.; Seo, Y.; Seo, Y. T.; Moudrakovski, I. L.; Ripmeester, J. A. Recovering methane

422

from solid methane hydrate with carbon dioxide. Angew. Chem. Int. Edit. 2003, 42, 5048-5051.

423

(15) Kimoto, S.; Oka, F.; Fushita, T.; Fujiwaki, M. A chemo-thermo-mechanically coupled

424

numerical simulation of the subsurface ground deformations due to methane hydrate

425

dissociation. Comput. Geotech. 2007, 34, 216-228.

426

(16) Kwon, T. H.; Cho, G. C.; Santamarina, J. C. Gas hydrate dissociation in sediments:

427

Pressure[temperature evolution. Geochem, Geophys, Geosys. 2008, 9, Q08019.

428

(17) Ussler III, W.; Paull, C. Effects of ion exclusion and isotopic fractionation on pore water

429

geochemistry during gas hydrate formation and decomposition. Geo-Mar. Lett. 1995, 15, 37-44.

430

(18) Wang, Y.; Feng, J.-C.; Li, X.-S.; Zhang, Y.; Li, G. Analytic modeling and large-scale

431

experimental study of mass and heat transfer during hydrate dissociation in sediment with

432

different dissociation methods. Energy 2015, 90, 1931-1948.

433

(19) Wang, Y.; Feng, J.-C.; Li, X.-S.; Zhang, Y. Experimental and modeling analyses of scaling

434

criteria for methane hydrate dissociation in sediment by depressurization. Appl. Energy 2016,

435

181, 299-309.

436

(20) Wang, Y.; Feng, J.-C.; Li, X.-S.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, Z.-Y. Fluid flow mechanisms and heat

437

transfer characteristics of gas recovery from gas-saturated and water-saturated hydrate reservoirs.

438

Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 2018, 118, 1115-1127.

439

(21) Dai, S.; Santamarina, J. C.; Waite, W. F.; Kneafsey, T. J. Hydrate morphology: Physical

440

properties of sands with patchy hydrate saturation. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2012, 117,

441

B11205.

442

(22) Waite, W. F.; Santamarina, J. C.; Cortes, D. D.; Dugan, B.; Espinoza, D.; Germaine, J.; Jang,

443

J.; Jung, J.; Kneafsey, T. J.; Shin, H. Physical properties of hydrate[bearing sediments. Rev.

444

Geophys. 2009, 47.

445

(23) Boswell, R. Is gas hydrate energy within reach? Science 2009, 325, 957-958.

446

(24) Boswell, R.; Collett, T. S. Current perspectives on gas hydrate resources. Energy. Environ.

447

Sci. 2011, 4, 1206-1215. 21


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

448

(25) Clennell, M. B.; Hovland, M.; Booth, J. S.; Henry, P.; Winters, W. J. Formation of natural

449

gas hydrates in marine sediments: 1. Conceptual model of gas hydrate growth conditioned by

450

host sediment properties. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 1999, 104, 22985-23003.

451

(26) Park, T.; Kwon, T. Effect of electric field on gas hydrate nucleation kinetics: Evidence for

452

the enhanced kinetics of hydrate nucleation by negatively charged clay surfaces. Environ. Sci.

453

Technol. 2018. 52, 3267-3274.

454

(27) Dickens, G. R.; Quinby[Hunt, M. S. Methane hydrate stability in pore water: a simple

455

theoretical approach for geophysical applications. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 1997, 102, 773-

456

783.

457

(28) Park, T.; Kyung, D.; Lee, W., Effect of organic matter on CO2 hydrate phase equilibrium in

458

phyllosilicate suspensions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 48, 6597-6603.

459

(29) Handa, Y. P.; Stupin, D. Y. Thermodynamic properties and dissociation characteristics of

460

methane and propane hydrates in 70-. ANG.-radius silica gel pores. J. Phys. Chem. 1992, 96,

461

8599-8603.

462

(30) Uchida, T.; Ebinuma, T.; Ishizaki, T. Dissociation condition measurements of methane

463

hydrate in confined small pores of porous glass. J. Phys. Chem. B. 1999, 103, 3659-3662.

464

(31) Uchida, T.; Ebinuma, T.; Takeya, S.; Nagao, J.; Narita, H. Effects of pore sizes on

465

dissociation temperatures and pressures of methane, carbon dioxide, and propane hydrates in

466

porous media. J. Phys. Chem. B. 2002, 106, 820-826.

467

(32) Uchida, T.; Takeya, S.; Chuvilin, E. M.; Ohmura, R.; Nagao, J.; Yakushev, V. S.; Istomin, V.

468

A.; Minagawa, H.; Ebinuma, T.; Narita, H. Decomposition of methane hydrates in sand,

469

sandstone, clays, and glass beads. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2004, 109, (B5).

470

(33) Anderson, R.; Llamedo, M.; Tohidi, B.; Burgass, R. W. Experimental measurement of

471

methane and carbon dioxide clathrate hydrate equilibria in mesoporous silica. J. Phys. Chem. B.

472

2003, 107, 3507-3514.

473

(34) Henry, P.; Thomas, M.; Clennell, M. B. Formation of natural gas hydrates in marine

474

sediments: 2. Thermodynamic calculations of stability conditions in porous sediments. J.

475

Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 1999, 104, 23005-23022.

476

(35) Smith, D. H.; Wilder, J. W.; Seshadri, K. Thermodynamics of carbon dioxide hydrate

477

formation in media with broad pore-size distributions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2002, 36, 5192-

478

5198. 22


Page 22 of 46

Page 23 of 46 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

479

(36) Seo, Y.; Lee, H.; Uchida, T. Methane and carbon dioxide hydrate phase behavior in small

480

porous silica gels: three-phase equilibrium determination and thermodynamic modeling.

481

Langmuir 2002, 18, 9164-9170.

482

(37) Li, X.-S.; Zhang, Y.; Li, G.; Chen, Z.-Y.; Yan, K.-F.; Li, Q.-P. Gas hydrate equilibrium

483

dissociation conditions in porous media using two thermodynamic approaches. J. Chem.

484

Thermodyn. 2008, 40, 1464-1474.

485

(38) Kwon, T.-H.; Kim, H.-S.; Cho, G.-C. Dissociation behavior of CO2 hydrate in sediments

486

during isochoric heating. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 8571-8577.

487

(39) Liu, X.; Flemings, P. B. Capillary effects on hydrate stability in marine sediments. J.

488

Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2011, 116, (B7).

489

(40) Daigle, H.; Dugan, B. Pore size controls on the base of the methane hydrate stability zone in

490

the Kumano Basin, offshore Japan. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2014, 41, 8021-8028.

491

(41) Daigle, H.; Dugan, B. In Data report: Permeability, consolidation, stress state, and pore

492

system characteristics of sediments from Sites C0011, C0012, and C0018 of the Nankai Trough,

493

Proc. Integr. Ocean Drill. Program. 2011, 333 (2).

494

(42) Kim, H. S.; Cho, G. C.; Kwon, T. H. Effect of CO2 hydrate formation on seismic wave

495

velocities of fine[grained sediments. Geochem. Geophy. Geosy. 2013, 14, 1787-1799.

496

(43) Santamarina, J.; Klein, K.; Wang, Y.; Prencke, E. Specific surface: determination and

497

relevance. Can. Geotech. J. 2002, 39, 233-241.

498

(44) Daigle, H.; Johnson, A. Combining mercury intrusion and nuclear magnetic resonance

499

measurements using percolation theory. Transp. Porous. Med. 2016, 111, 669-679.

500

(45) Uchida, T.; Lu, H.; Tomaru, H. Subsurface occurrence of natural gas hydrate in the Nankai

501

Trough area: Implication for gas hydrate concentration. Resour. Geol. 2004, 54, 35-44.

502

(46) Wang, X.; Hutchinson, D. R.; Wu, S.; Yang, S.; Guo, Y. Elevated gas hydrate saturation

503

within silt and silty clay sediments in the Shenhu area, South China Sea. J. Geophys. Res. Solid

504

Earth 2011, 116, (B5).

505

(47) Kwon, T.-H.; Lee, K.-R.; Cho, G.-C.; Lee, J. Y. Geotechnical properties of deep oceanic

506

sediments recovered from the hydrate occurrence regions in the Ulleung Basin, East Sea,

507

offshore Korea. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 2011, 28, 1870-1883.

508

(48) Jang, J.; Santamarina, J. C. Hydrate bearing clayey sediments: Formation and gas

509

production concepts. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 2016, 77, 235-246. 23


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

510

(49) Daigle, H.; Dugan, B. Origin and evolution of fracture[hosted methane hydrate deposits. J.

511

Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2010, 115, (B11).

512

(50) Gei, D.; Carcione, J. M. Acoustic properties of sediments saturated with gas hydrate, free

513

gas and water. Geophys. Prospect. 2003, 51, 141-158.

514

(51) Ecker, C.; Dvorkin, J.; Nur, A. M. Estimating the amount of gas hydrate and free gas from

515

marine seismic data. Geophysics 2000, 65, 565-573.

516

(52) Wood, W. T.; Ruppel, C. Seismic and thermal investigations of the Blake Ridge gas hydrate

517

area: A synthesis, Proc. Ocean. Drill. Program Sci. Results 2000, 253-264.

518

(53) Ginsburg, G.; Soloviev, V. Methane migration within the submarine gas-hydrate stability

519

zone under deep-water conditions. Mar. Geol. 1997, 137, 49-57.

520

(54) Trehu, A. M.; Long, P. E.; Torres, M.; Bohrmann, G.; Rack, F.; Collett, T.; Goldberg, D.;

521

Milkov, A.; Riedel, M.; Schultheiss, P. Three-dimensional distribution of gas hydrate beneath

522

southern Hydrate Ridge: constraints from ODP Leg 204. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2004, 222, 845-

523

862.

524

(55) Milkov, A. V.; Dickens, G. R.; Claypool, G. E.; Lee, Y.-J.; Borowski, W. S.; Torres, M. E.;

525

Xu, W.; Tomaru, H.; Tréhu, A. M.; Schultheiss, P. Co-existence of gas hydrate, free gas, and

526

brine within the regional gas hydrate stability zone at Hydrate Ridge (Oregon margin): evidence

527

from prolonged degassing of a pressurized core. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2004, 222, 829-843.

528

(56) Guan, J.; Liang, D.; Wu, N.; Fan, S. The methane hydrate formation and the resource

529

estimate resulting from free gas migration in seeping seafloor hydrate stability zone. J. Asian.

530

Earth. Sci. 2009, 36, 277-288.

531

(57) Cook, A. E.; Goldberg, D.; Kleinberg, R. L. Fracture-controlled gas hydrate systems in the

532

northern Gulf of Mexico. Mar. Petrol. Geol. 2008, 25, 932-941.

533

(58) Lee, M.; Collett, T. Gas hydrate saturations estimated from fractured reservoir at site

534

NGHP[01[10, Krishna[Godavari basin, India. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 2009, 114, (B7).

535

(59) Wright, J.; Nixon, F.; Dallimore, S.; Henninges, J.; Côté, M. Thermal conductivity of

536

sediments within the gas-hydrate-bearing interval at the JAPEX/JNOC/GSC et al. Mallik 5L-38

537

gas hydrate production research well. Bull. Geol. Surv. Can. 2005, 585, 129.

538

(60) Haacke, R. R.; Westbrook, G. K.; Hyndman, R. D. Gas hydrate, fluid flow and free gas:

539

Formation of the bottom-simulating reflector. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 2007, 261, 407-420.

540

(61) Kneafsey, T. J.; Tomutsa, L.; Moridis, G. J.; Seol, Y.; Freifeld, B. M.; Taylor, C. E.; Gupta, 24


Page 24 of 46

Page 25 of 46 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

541

A. Methane hydrate formation and dissociation in a partially saturated core-scale sand sample. J.

542

Petrol. Sci. Eng. 2007, 56, 108-126.

543

(62) Sun, D.; Englezos, P. Storage of CO2 in a partially water saturated porous medium at gas

544

hydrate formation conditions. Int. J. Greenh. Gas. Con. 2014, 1-8.

545 546

25


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

547

List of Table

548 549

Table 1. Physical and index properties of sediment samples used in this study

26


Page 26 of 46

Page 27 of 46 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

550 551

Energy & Fuels

Table 1. Physical and index properties of sediment samples used in this study Sample 6 nm silica gel (6SG)

Properties

15 nm silica gel (15SG) Sand

Silt

UB sediment

Diatom

Sand-diatom mixture (90%sand+10%diatom) 552 553 554 555 556 557

D50 = 247 µm Sa = 447 m2/g (dry), 1028 m2/g (wet) φ = 0.72 D50 = 555 µm Sa = 310 m2/g (dry), 872 m2/g (wet) φ = 0.70 D50 = 120 µm Sa = 0.02 m2/g φ = 0.46 D50 = 28 µm Sa = 0.85 m2/g (dry), 2.8 m2/g (wet) φ = 0.48 D50 = 5 µm Sa = 32 m2/g (dry), 90 m2/g (wet) φ = 0.62; PL = 46; LL = 62 D50 = 67 µm Sa = 1.8 m2/g (dry), 3.7 m2/g (wet) φ = 0.69 D50 = 123 µm Sa = 19 m2/g (dry) φ = 0.47

Note: D50 is the mean particle diameter; Sa is the specific surface area; φ is the porosity; PL is the plastic limit; and LL is the liquid limit. The specific surface area was measured by the gas adsorption method (or dry method) and/or the methylene blue adsorption method (or wet method; Santamarina et al., 2002).

27


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

558

List of Figures

559

Figure 1. Grain size distributions of the sediments used in the experiments.

560 561

Figure 2. Pore size distributions of (a) the artificial porous silica gels and (b) the natural sediments.

562 563

Figure 3. SEM images of artificial porous silica gels with 6 nm pores (a), 15 nm pores, sand (c), silt (d), UB sediment (e,f,g), and diatom (h).

564

Figure 4. A schematic drawing of the experimental setup.

565 566

Figure 5. The temperature and pressure traces of Sample SG15 during CO2 hydrate formation and dissociation.

567 568 569

Figure 6. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the 6SG and 15SG samples, and (b) the shifts of their phase boundaries during dissociation. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation.

570 571 572

Figure 7. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the sand and silt samples, and (b) the shifts of their phase boundaries during dissociation. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation.

573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584

Figure 8. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the UB sediment sample, (b) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the diatom and sand-diatom mixture samples, (c) the shifts of the phase boundaries of CO2 hydrate in the UB sediment sample, and (d) the shifts of the phase boundaries of CO2 hydrate in the diatom and sand-diatom mixture samples. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation. Figure 9. Sizes of hydrate-containing pores. The normalized dissociation temperature depression (∆Tdep/T) and the cumulative pore volume distribution versus the pore diameter: (a) 6SG, (b) 15SG, (c) silt, (d) UB sediment, (e) diatom, and (f) sand-diatom mixture. The solid lines were calculated from the Gibbs-Thomson model, and the dashed lines were redrawn from the results in Figure 2. The data points indicate the experiment data, and the shaded areas represent the sizes of pores containing CO2 hydrate.

585 586

28


Page 28 of 46

Page 29 of 46 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

587 588 589

Figure 1. Grain size distributions of the sediments used in the experiments.

29


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

590 591 592

Figure 2. Pore size distributions of (a) the artificial porous silica gels and (b) the natural sediments.

593 594

30


Page 30 of 46

Page 31 of 46 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

595

596 597 598

Figure 3. SEM images of artificial porous silica gels with 6 nm pores (a), 15 nm pores, sand (c), silt (d), UB sediment (e,f,g), and diatom (h).

31


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

599

600

Figure 4. A schematic drawing of the experimental setup.

601

32


Page 32 of 46

Page 33 of 46 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

602

603 604 605

Figure 5. The temperature and pressure traces of Sample SG15 during CO2 hydrate formation and dissociation.

33


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

606

607 608 609 610

Figure 6. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the 6SG and 15SG samples, and (b) the shifts of their phase boundaries during dissociation. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation.

34


Page 34 of 46

Page 35 of 46 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

611 612 613 614 615

Figure 7. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the sand and silt samples, and (b) the shifts of their phase boundaries during dissociation. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation.

35


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

616

617 618 619 620 621 622

Figure 8. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the UB sediment sample, (b) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the diatom and sand-diatom mixture samples, (c) the shifts of the phase boundaries of CO2 hydrate in the UB sediment sample, and (d) the shifts of the phase boundaries of CO2 hydrate in the diatom and sand-diatom mixture samples. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation.

36


Page 36 of 46

Page 37 of 46 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

623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630

Energy & Fuels

Figure 9. Sizes of hydrate-containing pores. The normalized dissociation temperature depression (∆Tdep/T) and the cumulative pore volume distribution versus the pore diameter: (a) 6SG, (b) 15SG, (c) silt, (d) UB sediment, (e) diatom, and (f) sand-diatom mixture. The solid lines were calculated from the Gibbs-Thomson model, and the dashed lines were redrawn from the results in Figure 2. The data points indicate the experiment data, and the shaded areas represent the sizes of pores containing CO2 hydrate.

37


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

Figure 1. Grain size distributions of the sediments used in the experiments. 321x246mm (300 x 300 DPI)


Page 38 of 46

Page 39 of 46 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

Figure 2. Pore size distributions of (a) the artificial porous silica gels and (b) the natural sediments. 643x246mm (300 x 300 DPI)


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

Figure 3. SEM images of artificial porous silica gels with 6 nm pores (a), 15 nm pores, sand (c), silt (d), UB sediment (e,f,g), and diatom (h). 162x237mm (300 x 300 DPI)


Page 40 of 46

Page 41 of 46 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

Figure 4. A schematic drawing of the experimental setup. 225x145mm (300 x 300 DPI)


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

Figure 5. The temperature and pressure traces of Sample SG15 during CO2 hydrate formation and dissociation. 500x208mm (300 x 300 DPI)


Page 42 of 46

Page 43 of 46 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

Figure 6. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the 6SG and 15SG samples, and (b) the shifts of their phase boundaries during dissociation. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation. 643x246mm (300 x 300 DPI)


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

Figure 7. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the sand and silt samples, and (b) the shifts of their phase boundaries during dissociation. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation. 643x246mm (300 x 300 DPI)


Page 44 of 46

Page 45 of 46 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

Figure 8. (a) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the UB sediment sample, (b) PT traces of CO2 hydrate formed in the diatom and sand-diatom mixture samples, (c) the shifts of the phase boundaries of CO2 hydrate in the UB sediment sample, and (d) the shifts of the phase boundaries of CO2 hydrate in the diatom and sand-diatom mixture samples. The superimposed dotted lines were predicted by the Gibbs-Thomson equation. 379x290mm (300 x 300 DPI)


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

Figure 9. Sizes of hydrate-containing pores. The normalized dissociation temperature depression (∆Tdep/T) and the cumulative pore volume distribution versus the pore diameter: (a) 6SG, (b) 15SG, (c) silt, (d) UB sediment, (e) diatom, and (f) sand-diatom mixture. The solid lines were calculated from the GibbsThompson model, and the dashed lines were redrawn from the results in Figure 2. The data points indicate the experiment data, and the shaded areas represent the sizes of pores containing CO2 hydrate. 209x240mm (300 x 300 DPI)


Page 46 of 46

Effect of pore size distribution on dissociation temperature depression

Recommend Documents