The FluidFlower Validation Benchmark Study for the Storage of CO₂
Name
11242_2023_Article_1977.pdf
Size
6.85 MB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
45396942b9eab3d73847e6ddbf79ab0b
Author(s)
Flemisch, Bernd
Nordbotten, Jan M.
Fernø, Martin
Juanes, Ruben
Both, Jakub W.
Class, Holger
Delshad, Mojdeh
Doster, Florian
Ennis-King, Jonathan
Franc, Jacques
Date Issued
August 18, 2023
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Citation
Flemisch, Bernd, Nordbotten, Jan M., Fernø, Martin, Juanes, Ruben, Both, Jakub W. et al. 2023. "The FluidFlower Validation Benchmark Study for the Storage of CO₂."
Version
Final published version
Abstract
Abstract
Successful deployment of geological carbon storage (GCS) requires an extensive use of reservoir simulators for screening, ranking and optimization of storage sites. However, the time scales of GCS are such that no sufficient long-term data is available yet to validate the simulators against. As a consequence, there is currently no solid basis for assessing the quality with which the dynamics of large-scale GCS operations can be forecasted. To meet this knowledge gap, we have conducted a major GCS validation benchmark study. To achieve reasonable time scales, a laboratory-size geological storage formation was constructed (the “FluidFlower”), forming the basis for both the experimental and computational work. A validation experiment consisting of repeated GCS operations was conducted in the FluidFlower, providing what we define as the true physical dynamics for this system. Nine different research groups from around the world provided forecasts, both individually and collaboratively, based on a detailed physical and petrophysical characterization of the FluidFlower sands. The major contribution of this paper is a report and discussion of the results of the validation benchmark study, complemented by a description of the benchmarking process and the participating computational models. The forecasts from the participating groups are compared to each other and to the experimental data by means of various indicative qualitative and quantitative measures. By this, we provide a detailed assessment of the capabilities of reservoir simulators and their users to capture both the injection and post-injection dynamics of the GCS operations.
MIT Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Terms of Use
Creative Commons Attribution
Persistent DSpace Link
DOI of Published Version
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-023-01977-7
