DOCSLIB.ORG

Enhanced Coal Bed Methane Recovery Worldwide Application and CO2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Enhanced Coal Bed Methane Recovery Worldwide Application and CO2 ENHANCED COAL BED METHANE RECOVERY WITH CO2 SEQUESTRATION Report Number PH3/3 August 1999 This document has been prepared for the Executive Committee of the Programme. It is not a publication of the Operating Agent, International Energy Agency or its Secretariat. Title: Enhanced Coal Bed Methane Recovery with CO2 Sequestration Reference number: PH3/3 Date issued: August 1998 Other remarks: Background to the Study This study considers the global potential for using CO2 to enhance coalbed methane recovery, with simultaneous CO2 sequestration in the coal. Field tests indicate that carbon dioxide can be injected successfully into deep unminable coal seams and achieve these twin objectives. This process, called CO2 enhanced coalbed methane recovery (CO2-ECBM), has the potential to sequester large volumes of carbon dioxide while improving the efficiency and profitability of gas recovery. This report defines the criteria which can be used to classify coal fields in terms of their potential for coalbed methane production and the extent to which that production would be enhanced using CO2 injection to enhance methane recovery. It assesses the geological properties of coalbeds which will determine their ability to release methane and adsorb CO2. It catalogues the world’s major coal areas in terms of their potential for enhanced methane recovery using CO2. From this and from previous analyses of the potential global capacity for coalbed methane production, an assessment is made of the global potential for enhanced gas recovery (EGR) using CO2 and for the carbon sequestration potential of the process. Also, the study assesses the broad economics of enhanced recovery of coalbed methane for a range of carbon dioxide storage costs. As with previous studies by the IEAGHG covering sequestration, the CO2 is delivered to site and power generation and capture are not considered. The study was carried out by Advanced Resources International, Inc. from Arlington, Virginia, USA. Results and Discussion The following areas are described in the report • Technical background • American and Canadian demonstrations • Burlington Resources CO2 - ECBM pilot • Sources of carbon dioxide • Reservoir screening criteria for CO2 - ECBM • Costs and sequestration potential for CO2-ECBM Technical Background Coal forms by the compaction of plant material. Gases, including methane, are generated during this process and are either adsorbed onto the coal surface or are dispersed into the pore spaces around the coal seam. The amount of gas formed depends on the rank of the coal. In addition, the maturation process releases large amounts of water so that the coalbeds formed are often water saturated. The surface area of the coal on which the methane is adsorbed is very large (20-200 m2/g) and, if saturated, i coalbed methane reservoirs can have five times the amount of gas as that contained in a conventional sandstone gas reservoir of comparable size. A number of patents have been issued during the past twenty years relating to the process of injecting carbon dioxide into methane-bearing coal seams. Each of these patents is based on the principle that CO2 adsorbs more readily onto the coal matrix compared to methane. Injected CO2 is preferentially adsorbed (and remains sequestered within the seam) at the expense of the coalbed methane, which is simultaneously desorbed and thus can be recovered as free gas. Because laboratory isotherm measurements demonstrate that coal can adsorb roughly twice as much CO2 by volume as methane, the working assumption is that the ECBM process stores 2 moles of CO2 for every 1 mole of CH4 desorbed. However, the physical chemistry of this process has not yet been fully defined, and there remains the possibility that there are other physical processes active within the reservoir which could alter this ratio. Coalbed methane (CBM) is conventionally recovered by means of reservoir pressure depletion which is a simple, but inefficient, process recovering typically only about 50% of the gas in place. Hydraulic fracture stimulation is used to assist recovery but, even so, because permeability is normally low, many well drillings are required to achieve adequate gas flow. New technologies have been proposed for enhanced coalbed methane recovery (ECBM) to recover a larger fraction of gas in place. The two principle variants of ECBM are • inert gas stripping using nitrogen injection and • displacement desorption employing carbon dioxide injection. Simulation and early demonstration projects by Amoco indicate that nitrogen injection ECBM is capable of recovering 90% or more of gas in place (N2-ECBM works using a different physical process - by lowering the partial pressure of methane to promote desorption). The CO2-ECBM process is less well documented but likewise shows significant promise for enhanced coalbed methane recovery. For the past three years, Burlington Resources along with their partner Amoco have been operating a 13-well CO2-ECBM demonstration in the San Juan Basin in the Southwestern United States. Initial results show improvement in methane recovery in some wells with minimal breakthrough of CO2. American and Canadian demonstrations Substantial CBM activity has taken place in the US over the last 15 years with current annual CBM production of 14 Mt CH4, 90% of which comes from the San Juan Basin in Colorado and the Black Warrior basin in Alabama. Estimates of CBM resources in the US range from 6-13 Gt CH4 and Canadian resources are of the same order of magnitude. Except for an experimental demonstration scheme in the USA (see below), all CBM production in the world uses primary, natural drive technology which is capable, at current economics, of recovering only a fraction of the potential CBM resource. However, development of proven US gas recovery systems, to incorporate ECBM techniques, is a clear route forward. An economic analysis and ‘proof of concept’ study is currently taking place of ECBM in Alberta, Canada; this involves use of CO2 both for more efficient release of methane and also as a means of sequestering CO2. A practical research project has been established under the Implementing Agreement of the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme to enable international collaboration to support this work. Burlington Resources CO2 ECBM demonstration Burlington Resource's Allison Unit field contains the world's first (and to date only) experimental ii CO2-ECBM recovery demonstration. The Allison Unit is located within the northern portion of the San Juan Basin, in northern New Mexico close to the Colorado border (Figure 1). The San Juan Basin is by far the most prolific coalbed methane development, currently accounting for over 75% of total worldwide CBM production and nearly 5% of the USA’s natural gas production. It is also the most thoroughly studied from a reservoir standpoint. Prior to CO2 injection, the Allison Unit had been considered a sub-average performer, with gas production rates less than half that of San Juan Basin Fairway wells but it was still economically viable. Another reason for selecting the demonstration location was its proximity to a major carbon dioxide pipeline that crosses the basin (Figure 1). Figure 1. Location of the Burlington Resources CO2ECBM demonstration in the San Juan Basin, USA. The Allison Unit demonstration comprises four CO2-injection wells and nine methane production wells. The report suggests that the enhanced production achieved by Burlington, in its best well, is illustrative of "best practice" CO2-ECBM, at least during the current preliminary development of this technology. Future R&D and operational experience should be expected to lead to further improvements in recovery. CO2 Sources A variety of CO2 sources, both natural and anthropogenic, may be used for CO2-ECBM recovery operations. Naturally occurring, high-pressure CO2 from underground reservoirs is currently the lowest cost source. The Allison demonstration utilises naturally occurring CO2 produced at the McElmo Dome field in southwestern Colorado and transported by pipeline across the San Juan Basin 3 to the Permian Basin of West Texas. Delivered cost is approximately $0.012/m ($0.50/Mcf) of CO2. A second option is to utilise anthropogenic sources of CO2that currently are being vented to the atmosphere. For example, in the San Juan Fairway, the natural CO2 concentration of produced coal 3 seam gas is 6 to 12%. Approximately 4.3 million m /day (150MMcfd) of CO2 is currently separated from produced CBM and vented to enable the gas to meet pipeline specifications in the San Juan Basin. Finally, and of particular relevance to the control of potential greenhouse gas emissions, industrial CO2 may also be used as injectant in ECBM operations. Potential industrial CO2 sources include primarily coal- or gas-fired power plants and other large industrial plants. Industrial CO2 is not readily available in the San Juan Basin, but could be a viable source in other coalbed methane basins. Unlike relatively pure natural formation CO2 sources, however, industrial emissions require processing to remove water, SOx, and other constituents. Industrial CO2 also requires compression. Nevertheless, iii potential future restrictions on emissions could make industrial CO2 a cost-effective source. For example, an industrial emitter may find it economically attractive to pay a CBM operator to sequester CO2. Under this scenario, handling and disposing of CO2 injectant could actually became a revenue stream for a CBM operation, rather just than a cost. Reservoir Screening Criteria Reservoir screening criteria are essential for locating favorable areas for the successful application of CO2-ECBM. This study has developed a preliminary list of reservoir characteristics that are likely to be important for CO2-ECBM application. These are: • Homogeneous Reservoir: The coal seam reservoir(s) should be laterally continuous and vertically isolated from surrounding strata. • Simple Structure: The reservoir should be minimally faulted and folded. • Adequate Permeability: Although a minimum permeability cannot be specified, preliminary simulation indicates that at least moderate permeability is necessary for effective ECBM (1 to 5 mDarcy).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Hydrology of Coalbed Methane Reservoirs and the Interplay of Gas, Water, and Coal in CBM Production
    University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Coalbed Methane Development in the Intermountain West (April 4-5) 2002 4-4-2002 The Hydrology of Coalbed Methane Reservoirs and the Interplay of Gas, Water, and Coal in CBM Production Leslie Nogaret Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/coalbed-methane-development- intermountain-west Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons, Hydraulic Engineering Commons, Hydrology Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Citation Information Nogaret, Leslie, "The Hydrology of Coalbed Methane Reservoirs and the Interplay of Gas, Water, and Coal in CBM Production" (2002). Coalbed Methane Development in the Intermountain West (April 4-5). https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/coalbed-methane-development-intermountain-west/9 Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School. Leslie Nogaret, The Hydrology of Coalbed Methane Reservoirs and the Interplay of Gas, Water, and Coal in CBM Production, in COALBED METHANE DEVELOPMENT IN THE INTERMOUNTAIN WEST (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 2002). Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School. References Lyons, W.S., 2002, Seismic Assists Geologic Interpretation and Development Program in the Ferron Bowles, J., 2001, Phillips’ CBM Outlook, A.G. Edwards, Coalbed Methane Play, presentation to the Rocky March 14, 2001, Coal Bed Methane Energy Mountain Section of SEPM, February 26, 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Contaminants Associated with Coal Bed Methane
    Contaminant Report Number: R6/721C/05 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE REGION 6 CONTAMINANTS PROGRAM Assessment of Contaminants Associated with Coal Bed Methane-Produced Water and Its Suitability for Wetland Creation or Enhancement Projects USFWS - Region 6 - EC Report - R6/721C/05 ABSTRACT Extraction of methane gas from coal seams has become a significant energy source in the Powder River Basin of northeastern Wyoming. In Wyoming, coalbed methane (CBM) gas is extracted by drilling wells into coal seams and removing water to release the gas. Each CBM well produces an average of 10 gallons per minute (gpm) of water and a maximum of 100 gpm. Disposal of CBM produced water is accomplished by direct discharge to surface drainages, and also by a variety of other treatment and disposal methods. Untreated CBM produced water discharged to surface drainages is the primary method of disposal provided that the CBM produced water meets Wyoming water quality standards. Water failing to meet water quality standards cannot legally be discharged into surface drainages and is alternately discharged into closed containment ponds for soil-ground water infiltration and evaporation. In 2000 and 2001, we collected and analyzed water from CBM discharges and receiving waters and sediment and biota from CBM produced water impoundments. In 2002, we collected and analyzed water from CBM closed containment impoundments. All the samples were analyzed for trace elements. The biota included pondweed (Potamogeton vaginatus), aquatic invertebrates, fish, and tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum). One CBM produced water discharge exceeded the chronic criterion for iron and several CBM produced water discharges exceeded the acute criterion for copper.
    [Show full text]
  • T U R G a Y E R T E K I N, B.Sc, M.Sc., Ph.D
    T U R G A Y E R T E K I N, B.Sc, M.Sc., Ph.D. ● P E N N S T A T E U N I V E R S I T Y ● U N I V E R S I T Y P A R K , P A 1 6 8 7 0 ● ● (8 14 ) 8 6 5 - 6 0 8 2 ● Professor Emeritus Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering E DUC A T I ON Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, B.Sc., 1969, Petroleum Engineering Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey, M.Sc., 1971, Petroleum Engineering Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA, Ph.D., 1978, Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering A C A D E M IC A N D A D M INIST R A T IVE P O S ITION S July 2017 to present Professor Emeritus of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering The Pennsylvania State University July 2013 to July 2017 Head, John and Willie Leone Family Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering, the George E. Trimble Chair in Earth and Mineral Sciences, the Pennsylvania State University May 2013 to May 2014 Co-Director, Institute of Natural Gas Research (INGaR), Pennsylvania State University July 2001 to Present Professor of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering and George E. Trimble Chair in Earth and Mineral Sciences, Pennsylvania State University July 1998 to June 2001 Associate Head, Department of Energy and Geo-Environmental Engineering July 1987 to Present Professor of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, Pennsylvania State University July 1984 to January 2015 Chairman of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, Pennsylvania State University July 1983 to July 1984 Associate Professor of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, Pennsylvania State University
    [Show full text]
  • (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 8,505,620 B2 Zupanick (45) Date of Patent: *Aug
    US00850562OB2 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 8,505,620 B2 Zupanick (45) Date of Patent: *Aug. 13, 2013 (54) METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR ACCESSING (58) Field of Classification Search SUBTERRANEAN DEPOSTS FROM THE USPC .............................................. 166/50, 52, 245 SURFACE AND TOOLS THEREFOR See application file for complete search history. (75) Inventor: Joseph A. Zupanick, Beckley, WV (US) (56) References Cited (73) Assignee: Vitruvian Exploration, LLC, Houston, U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS TX (US) 54,144 A 4, 1866 Hamar 274,740 A 3/1883 Douglass (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this (Continued) patent is extended or adjusted under 35 U.S.C. 154(b) by 0 days. FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS AU 85,49964 A 11, 1986 This patent is Subject to a terminal dis CA 2210866 1, 1998 claimer. (Continued) (21) Appl. No.: 11/982,249 OTHER PUBLICATIONS (22) Filed: Oct. 31, 2007 McCray, Arthur, et al., “Oil Well Drilling Technology.” University of Oklahoma Press, 1959, Title Page, Copyright Page and pp. 315-319 (65) Prior Publication Data (7 pages). US 2008/OO60806A1 Mar. 13, 2008 (Continued) Primary Examiner — John Kreck Related U.S. Application Data (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm — Fish & Richardson P.C. (60) Continuation of application No. 10/630,345, filed on Jul. 29, 2003, which is a continuation-in-part of (57) ABSTRACT According to one embodiment, a system for accessing a Sub (Continued) terranean Zone from the surface includes a well bore extend ing from the Surface to the Subterranean Zone, and a well bore (51) Int. C. pattern connected to the junction and operable to drain fluid E2IB 43/00 (2006.01) from a region of the Subterranean Zone to the junction.
    [Show full text]
  • CLIMATE ACTION PLAN Websites
    CLIMATE ACTION PLAN Websites Climate action cuts across all sectors of our economy and is being addressed in multiple ways. Information on government actions related to climate action are also found in the following: h LiveSmart BC http://www.livesmartbc.ca/ h The BC Energy Plan: A Vision for Clean Energy Leadership http://www.energyplan.gov.bc.ca/ h The BC Bioenergy Strategy http://www.energyplan.gov.bc.ca/bioenergy/ h The Agriculture Plan: Growing a Healthy Future for BC Farmers http://www.al.gov.bc.ca/Agriculture_Plan/ h The Mountain Pine Beetle Action Plan http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/mountain_pine_beetle/ h Living Water Smart: British Columbia's Water Plan http://www.livingwatersmart.ca./ h The BC Air Action Plan http://www.bcairsmart.ca/ h The BC Transit Plan http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/Transit_Plan/index.html h Energy Efficient Building Strategy http://www.energyplan.gov.bc.ca/efficiency/ h BC Green Building Code http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/building/green/ h Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions http://www.pics.uvic.ca/ h Towns for Tomorrow http://www.townsfortomorrow.gov.bc.ca/ h Climate Action Secretariat http://www.climateactionsecretariat.gov.bc.ca/ BRITISH COLUMBIA’S Contents Message from the B.C. Government 1 Highlights 2 The Challenge 6 The Opportunity 10 The B.C. Climate Action Plan – Phase One 12 Section One: Setting the Course 13 Section Two: Acting in Every Sector 25 Acting in Every Sector: Transportation 26 Acting in Every Sector: Buildings 36 Acting in Every Sector: Waste 41 Acting in Every Sector: Agriculture 43 Acting
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter L—Coal-Bed Methane Gas-In-Place Resource Estimates
    Chapter L National Coal Resource Coal-Bed Methane Gas-In-Place Resource Assessment Estimates Using Sorption Isotherms and Burial History Reconstruction: An Example from the Ferron Sandstone Member Click here to return to Disc 1 Volume Table of Contents of the Mancos Shale, Utah By Todd A. Dallegge1 and Charles E. Barker1 Chapter L of Geologic Assessment of Coal in the Colorado Plateau: Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah Edited by M.A. Kirschbaum, L.N.R. Roberts, and L.R.H. Biewick U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1625–B* 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado 80225 * This report, although in the USGS Professional Paper series, is available only on CD-ROM and is not available separately U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contents Overview ...................................................................................................................................................... L1 What Is Coal-Bed Methane? ...................................................................................................................... 2 Importance of Coal-Bed Methane Production ........................................................................................ 2 How Much Coal-Bed Methane is Available?........................................................................................... 3 How Do Coal Beds Generate and Store Methane? ................................................................................ 4 Details About Coal Cleat....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Mine Methane Recovery: a Primer
    Coal Mine Methane Recovery: A Primer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency July 2019 EPA-430-R-09-013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was originally prepared under Task Orders No. 13 and 18 of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Contract EP-W-05-067 by Advanced Resources, Arlington, USA and updated under Contract EP-BPA-18-0010. This report is a technical document meant for information dissemination and is a compilation and update of five reports previously written for the USEPA. DISCLAIMER This report was prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). USEPA does not: (a) make any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe upon privately owned rights; (b) assume any liability with respect to the use of, or damages resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report; or (c) imply endorsement of any technology supplier, product, or process mentioned in this report. ABSTRACT This Coal Mine Methane (CMM) Recovery Primer is an update of the 2009 CMM Primer, which reviewed the major methods of CMM recovery from gassy mines. [USEPA 1999b, 2000, 2001a,b,c] The intended audiences for this Primer are potential investors in CMM projects and project developers seeking an overview of the basic technical details of CMM drainage methods and projects. The report reviews the main pre-mining and post-mining CMM drainage methods with associated costs, water disposal options and in-mine and surface gas collection systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Methane Hydrate Stability and Anthropogenic Climate Change
    Biogeosciences, 4, 521–544, 2007 www.biogeosciences.net/4/521/2007/ Biogeosciences © Author(s) 2007. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Methane hydrate stability and anthropogenic climate change D. Archer University of Chicago, Department of the Geophysical Sciences, USA Received: 20 March 2007 – Published in Biogeosciences Discuss.: 3 April 2007 Revised: 14 June 2007 – Accepted: 19 July 2007 – Published: 25 July 2007 Abstract. Methane frozen into hydrate makes up a large 1 Methane in the carbon cycle reservoir of potentially volatile carbon below the sea floor and associated with permafrost soils. This reservoir intu- 1.1 Sources of methane itively seems precarious, because hydrate ice floats in water, and melts at Earth surface conditions. The hydrate reservoir 1.1.1 Juvenile methane is so large that if 10% of the methane were released to the at- Methane, CH , is the most chemically reduced form of car- mosphere within a few years, it would have an impact on the 4 bon. In the atmosphere and in parts of the biosphere con- Earth’s radiation budget equivalent to a factor of 10 increase trolled by the atmosphere, oxidized forms of carbon, such as in atmospheric CO . 2 CO , the carbonate ions in seawater, and CaCO , are most Hydrates are releasing methane to the atmosphere today in 2 3 stable. Methane is therefore a transient species in our at- response to anthropogenic warming, for example along the mosphere; its concentration must be maintained by ongoing Arctic coastline of Siberia. However most of the hydrates release. One source of methane to the atmosphere is the re- are located at depths in soils and ocean sediments where an- duced interior of the Earth, via volcanic gases and hydrother- thropogenic warming and any possible methane release will mal vents.
    [Show full text]
  • Promotion Effects of Microwave Heating on Coalbed Methane
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Promotion efects of microwave heating on coalbed methane desorption compared with conductive heating Zhijun Wang1,2,3* & Xiaojuan Wang1,2 As a clean energy resource, coalbed methane (CBM) has drawn worldwide attention. However, the CBM reservoir has strong adsorption capacity and low permeability and thus requires stimulation. As a means to stimulate coalbed methane recovery, thermal injection faces geological and economic challenges because it uses conventional conductive heating (CH) to transfer heat. Realized by the conversion of the electromagnetic energy into the thermal energy, microwave heating (MH) may be a sound stimulation method. Although previous research suggested that MH had potential as a stimulation method for coalbed methane recovery, it is not clear if MH is superior to CH for enhancing coalbed methane recovery. This paper compares the efect of MH and CH on methane desorption from coal using purpose-built experimental equipment. To compare the MH and CH experimental results, the desorption temperature for each CH desorption test was set to the maximum temperature reached in the correlative MH desorption test. The results show that although the cumulative desorbed volume (CDV) of methane under MH was less than that desorbed by CH in the initial desorption stage, the fnal total CDV under MH for the three diferent power settings was ~ 12% to ~ 21% more than that desorbed by CH at the same temperatures. CH and MH both change the sample’s microstructure but MH enlarges the pores, decreases methane adsorption, promotes methane difusion, and improves permeability more efectively than CH. Rapid temperature rise and the changes in the coal’s microstructure caused by MH were the main reasons for its superior performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Methane Seeps Along Boundaries of Arc C Permafrost
    Geologic Methane seeps along boundaries of Arc6c permafrost thaws and melng glaciers . Walter Anthony, K.M. , et. al. Nature Geoscience. Vol 5. June 2012. DOI: 10.1038/NGEO1480 Objecves: • This study documents the first evidence of widespread geological methane seepage along boundaries of cryosphere retreat. • The study focused on the release of 14C-depleted methane from abundant gas seeps concentrated along boundaries of permafrost thaw and receding glaciers in Alaska and Greenland. • The authors combined a new method of aerial survey and ground truth to idenfy seep-induced melt-holes in ice covered water bodies in order to quanfy methane seeps in Alaska, to confirm the occurrence of anomalous seeps in Greenland, and to document for the first me the widespread occurrence of 14C- depleted methane seeps along boundaries of permafrost thaw and melng glaciers in the terrestrial Arcc. • Ground surface survey data and in situ measurements (ebullion flux measurements, gas collecon and isotope analyses) were used to map the occurrence of superficial and subcap methane seeps along a north/south transect in Alaska; in West Greenland, seeps were quanfied only by ground survey. • Over 150,000 seeps were mapped in Alaska and Greenland. New Science • Seeps were characterized by anomalously high methane fluxes, and in Alaska by ancient radiocarbon ages and stable isotope values that matched those of coal bed and thermogenic methane accumulaons. • In Greenland, younger seeps were associated with zones of ice-sheet retreat since the Lile Ice Age. • Examinaon of 6,700 lakes across Alaska revealed the occurrence of 77 previously undocumented subcap seep sites containing >150,000 highly ebullient macroseep vents.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalbed Methane--A Non- Conventional Energy Source
    COALBEDCOALBED METHANEMETHANE----AA NONNON-- CONVENTIONALCONVENTIONAL ENERGYENERGY SOURCESOURCE WHAT IS IT AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT ROBERT A. LAMARRE LAMARRE GEOLOGICAL ENTERPRISES Fueling The Future 25th Annual North American Conference of the USAEE/IAEE Sept. 20, 2005 Natural Gas Production, Consumption, and Imports, 1970 - 2025 (trillion cubic feet) 35 History Projections 30 Net Imports 25 Consumption 20 Natural Gas Net Imports, 2001 and 2025 (trillion cubic feet) 15 Production 6 5 4 10 3 2025 2 2001 1 5 0 Pipeline Liquefied Natural Gas 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 (EIA) Major Growth in Production from Unconventional Resources 12,000 Tight Gas 10,000 CBM Approx. 42% growth Conventional Gas expected across the 8,000 Rockies 6,000 4,000 2005 - 2010 Gas Production (mmcfd) Production Gas 2,000 CBM offers the greatest potential 0 with 116% volume growth 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 • Tight Gas - 2.3 bcfd in 2004 to 4.1 bcfd in 2010 • CBM - 1.8 bcfd in 2004 to 3.9 bcfd in 2010 • Conventional Gas - 2.5 bcfd in 2004 to 2.3 bcfd in 2010 Wood Mackenzie Woodmac.com Scott Tinker, Director Bureau of Economic Geology August 4, 2003 Why Natural Gas? Efficiency Scott Tinker, Director Bureau of Economic Geology August 4, 2003 QAd1023 NATURAL GAS IS A CLEAN BURNING FUEL PREFERRED ENERGY SOURCE COAL-FUELED ELECTRICITY-GENERATING PLANT AND CBM WELL IN UTAH METHANE GAS PRODUCED FROM UNDERGROUND COAL BEDS COALBEDCOALBED METHANEMETHANE ISIS FORMEDFORMED DURINGDURING THETHE CONVERSIONCONVERSION OFOF PEATPEAT TOTO COALCOAL Coal is formed from peat over time by heat and pressure Expelled By-Products • Water • Methane Pressure It all starts with • Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Organic Debris or • Peat in a Swamp Residual Products • Coal Coal • Methane Heat • CO2 TimeTime PEAT SWAMP ALL Consulting 2/04 PRESERVED TREE TRUNK COAL GAS CONTENTS OF VARIOUS ROCKY MTN.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Natural Gas Growing Importance, Current Challenges
    Natural Gas Series | October 2015 An introduction to natural gas Growing importance, current challenges. An introduction to natural gas Growing importance, current challenges. Natural gas has become a key resource for global energy needs and is abundant, versatile and clean burning. It is used in power generation, for industrial applications, buildings, and transportation. Though historically it has been extracted through conventional means, unconventional extraction processes play a part in regions such as North America. Natural gas is being traded globally, facilitated by investments in transport technology and increased global demand. Future demand for natural gas is likely to grow, especially for power generation, where it can be used to replace coal power and to fill power gaps created by intermittent renewable energy sources. The content of this summary is based upon the Introduction to Natural Gas FactBook. For the complete FactBook and other FactBooks by the A.T. Kearney Energy Transition Institute, please visit www.enery-transition-institute.com. 2 Summary FactBook | Natural Gas Series | October 2015 Permission is hereby granted to reproduce and distribute copies of this work for personal or nonprofit educational purposes. Any copy or extract has to refer to the copyright of the A.T. Kearney Energy Transition Institute. Having long been overlooked as an energy source, natural gas has become a crucial part of the energy mix in the past two decades Interest in natural gas has been bolstered Natural gas was, for an extended time, an unwanted Natural gas composition by-product of oil production. Without economic methods is highly variable and of bringing it to market, gas was mostly flared or released depends on the resource’s to the atmosphere.
    [Show full text]