CO2地质封存源汇匹配及安全性评价进展

doi:10.13809/j.cnki.cn32-1825/te.2023.03.001

Abstract

Abstract:

CCUS is an important technical means to achieve the carbon neutrality goal. At present, China is in the implementation stage of the “dual carbon” goal, and there is still a lack of mature technical system in the economic boundary assessment, source-sink optimization and safety monitoring of geological sequestration of CO₂. This paper summarizes the development process of China's CO₂ geological sequestration technique from three aspects, economic boundaries of sequestration technology, source-sink matching technology, and sequestration safety and monitoring, reviews the economic costs of CCUS technology in the capture, transportation, injection and burial period, and further summarizes the current technical and economic boundaries and influencing factors of each period. In addition, by summarizing the current development status of CCUS source-sink matching technology at home and abroad, the source-sink characteristics and distribution of China have been clarified, and further development directions for source sink matching optimization technology have been proposed. Finally, by summarizing the safety risk assessment and burial monitoring techniques for geological sequestration of CO₂, it is clear that economically efficient, effective, and quantitative monitoring methods are the focus of future research.

Key words: geological sequestration of CO₂, sequestration technique and economic boundaries, source-sink matching, safety risk assessment technology, CO₂ leakage monitoring technology

CLC Number:

TE122

LI Shilun,TANG Yong,DUAN Shengcai,QIN Jiazheng,CHEN Yinuo,LIU Yaxin,ZHENG Peng,ZHAO Guoqing. Progress in source-sink matching and safety evaluation of CO₂ geological sequestration[J].Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(3): 269-297.

Figures/Tables 7

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Comparison of different leakage monitoring methods of CO2[36]"

监测方法	被测对象	测量类型	测量位置	定位功能	检测精度	区分CO₂来源	泄漏量获得	测量周期
IRGA（红外气体分析仪检测技术）	CO₂体积分数	点测量	地表以上	可确定单点位置	正负 0.2 mL/m3	不能	间接得到	定期或连续
LOIR（长程开放路径红外探测和调制激光检测技术）	CO₂沿程平均体积分数	线测量（几十米至几千米）	地表以上	可根据单个装置位置定位	小于 1 mL/m3	不能	间接得到	定期或连续
AC（集聚气室检测方法）	CO₂小空间平均通量密度	小空间测量/cm²	地表及地表浅层	可根据单个气室位置定位	满量程的正负10 %以内	不能	直接得到	定期或连续
EC（涡量相关监测方法）	CO₂大空间平均通量密度	大空间监测（几平方米到几千平方米）	地表以上	可根据大气条件估算定位	正负 5 %~30 %	不能	直接得到	定期或连续
测井微震法	地下流体流动状态	地质层大范围扫描（几平方米到几百平方米）	地表以下	可根据波动图像判断定位		能	不能得到	定期
无线传感器网络	依赖传感器节点功能	超大范围（几千平方米）	地表以上	精确定位	依赖节点设计	依赖算法	直接得到	连续
LJDAR （激光雷达检测技术）	CO₂大空间平均体积分数	大空间距离（几米到几千米）	地表以上	可根据仪器位置定位	小于 1 mL/m3	不能	间接得到	定期或连续
超光谱成像	地面植被生长状况	大范围（整个大陆面积）	地表以上	可根据成像判断	误差小于20 %	能	不能得到	定期
示踪剂法	示踪剂含量	点测量	地表以上	可根据取样位置定位	依赖示踪剂检测精度	能	间接得到	定期
碳同位素检测	碳同位素值 $（ δ 13 C 、 δ 14 C$ ）	点测量	地表以上或地表浅层	可根据取样位置定位	最大精度可达0.06 %	$δ 13 C$ 能， $δ 14$ C不能	间接得到	定期

Table 3

References 51

[1]	ZHANG C Y, YU B, CHEN J M, et al. Green transition pathways for cement industry in China[J]. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2021, 166: 105355. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105355
[2]	LI X Y, GAO X, XIE J J. Comparison and clarification of China and US CCUS technology development[J]. Atmosphere, 2022, 13(12): 2114. doi: 10.3390/atmos13122114
[3]	李士伦, 汤勇, 侯承希. 注CO₂提高采收率技术现状及发展趋势[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2019, 9(3): 1-8.
	LI Shilun, TANG Yong, HOU Chengxi. Present situation and development trend of CO₂ injection enhanced oil recovery technology[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2019, 9(3): 1-8.
[4]	胡永乐, 郝明强. CCUS产业发展特点及成本界限研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2020, 10(3): 15-22.
	HU Yongle, HAO Mingqiang. Development characteristics and cost analysis of CCUS in China[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2020, 10(3): 15-22.
[5]	蔡博峰, 李琦, 张贤, 等. 中国二氧化碳捕集利用与封存 (CCUS)年度报告(2021)——中国 CCUS 路径研究[R]. 武汉: 生态环境部环境规划院, 中国科学院武汉岩土力学研究所, 2021.
	CAI Bofeng, LI Qi, ZHANG Xian, et al. China carbon dioxide capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) annual report (2021)——China CCUS pathway study[R]. Wuhan: China Academy of Environmental Planning, Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2021.
[6]	AMINU M D, NABAVI S A, ROCHELLE C A, et al. A review of developments in carbon dioxide storage[J]. Applied Energy, 2017, 208: 1389-1419. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.09.015
[7]	桑树勋, 刘世奇, 陆诗建, 等. 工程化CCUS全流程技术及其进展[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2022, 12(5): 711-725.
	SANG Shuxun, LIU Shiqi, LU Shijian, et al. Engineered full flowsheet technology of CCUS and its research progress[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2022, 12(5): 711-725.
[8]	IRLAM L. The costs of CCS and other low-carbon technologies in the United States: 2015 update[R]. Australia: Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Canberra, 2015.
[9]	顾锋. 江苏地区液相CO₂注入工艺及经济可行性评价[J]. 石化技术, 2022, 29(5): 66-67.
	GU Feng. Liquid phase CO₂ injection technology and economic feasibility evaluation in Jiangsu area[J]. Petrochemical Industry Technology, 2022, 29(5): 66-67.
[10]	刘牧心, 梁希, 林千果. 碳中和背景下中国碳捕集、利用与封存项目经济效益和风险评估研究[J]. 热力发电, 2021, 50(9): 18-26.
	LIU Muxin, LIANG Xi, LIN Qianguo. Economic analysis and risk assessment for carbon capture, utilization and storage project under the background of carbon neutrality in China[J]. Thermal Power Generation, 2021, 50(9): 18-26.
[11]	张贤, 李阳, 马乔, 等. 中国碳捕集利用与封存技术发展研究[J]. 中国工程科学, 2021, 23(6): 70-80.
	ZHANG Xian, LI Yang, MA Qiao, et al. Development of carbon capture, utilization and storage technology in China[J]. Strategic Study of CAE, 2021, 23(6): 70-80.
[12]	王香增, 杨红, 王伟, 等. 延长油田低渗透油藏提高采收率技术进展[J]. 油气地质与采收率, 2022, 29(4): 69-75.
	WANG Xiangzeng, YANG Hong, WANG Wei, et al. Technical advancements in enhanced oil recovery in low permeability reservoirs of Yanchang Oilfield[J]. Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 2022, 29(4): 69-75.
[13]	黄程, 霍丽如, 吴辰泓. 基于非常规油气开发的CO₂资源化利用技术进展及前景[J]. 非常规油气, 2022, 9(1): 1-9.
	HUANG Cheng, HUO Liru, WU Chenhong. Progress and prospect of CO₂ resource utilization technology based on unconventional oil and gas development[J]. Unconventional Oil & Gas, 2022, 9(1): 1-9.
[14]	VIKARA D, SHIH C Y, LIN S M, et al. US DOE's economic approaches and resources for evaluating the cost of implementing carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS)[J]. Journal of Sustainable Energy Engineering, 2017, 5(4): 307-340. doi: 10.7569/JSEE.2017.629523
[15]	MORGAN D, REMSON D, GUINAN A, et al. Comparative analysis of transport and storage options from a CO₂ generating source perspective[C]// Paper NETL-PUB-21240 presented by NETL at 9th Trondheim Conference on CO₂ Capture, Transport and Storage, Trondheim, 2017.
[16]	LANE J, GREIG C, GARNETT A. Uncertain storage prospects create a conundrum for carbon capture and storage ambitions[J]. Nature Climate Change, 2021, 11(11): 925-936. doi: 10.1038/s41558-021-01175-7
[17]	MAJUMDAR A, DEUTCH J. Research opportunities for CO₂ utilization and negative emissions at the gigatonne scale[J]. Joule, 2018, 2(5): 805-809. doi: 10.1016/j.joule.2018.04.018
[18]	袁士义, 马德胜, 李军诗, 等. 二氧化碳捕集、驱油与封存产业化进展及前景展望[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2022, 49(4): 828-834. doi: 10.11698/PED.20220212
	YUAN Shiyi, MA Desheng, LI Junshi, et al. Progress and prospects of carbon dioxide capture, EOR-utilization and storage industrialization[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2022, 49(4): 828-834. doi: 10.11698/PED.20220212
[19]	王喜平, 唐荣. 燃煤电厂碳捕集、利用与封存商业模式与政策激励研究[J]. 热力发电, 2022, 51(8): 29-41.
	WANG Xiping, TANG Rong. Research on business model and policy incentives for carbon capture, utilization and storage in coal-fired power plants[J]. Thermal Power Generation, 2022, 51(8): 29-41.
[20]	ZHANG C Y, YU B, CHEN J M, et al. Green transition pathways for cement industry in China[J]. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2021, 166: 105355. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105355
[21]	ABDRLAAL M, ZEIDOUNI M. Injection data analysis using material balance time for CO₂ storage capacity estimation in deep closed saline aquifers[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2022, 208: 109385. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2021.109385
[22]	张冰, 梁凯强, 王维波, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地深部咸水层 CO₂有效地质封存潜力评价[J]. 非常规油气, 2019, 6(3): 15-20.
	ZHANG Bing, LIANG Kaiqiang, WANG Weibo, et al. Evaluation of effective CO₂ geological sequestration potential of deep saline aquifer in Ordos Basin[J]. Unconventional Oil & Gas, 2019, 6(3): 15-20.
[23]	唐良睿, 贾英, 严谨, 等. 枯竭气藏 CO₂ 封存潜力计算方法研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(6): 858-863.
	TANG Liangrui, JIA Ying, YAN Jin, et al. Study on calculation method of CO₂ storage potential in depleted gas reservoir[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2021, 11(6): 858-863.
[24]	YU S, HORING J, LIU Q, et al. CCUS in China's mitigation strategy: insights from integrated assessment modeling[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2019, 84: 204-218. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.03.004
[25]	李海峰, 王强. CCUS中CO₂利用和地质封存研究[J]. 现代化工, 2022, 42(10): 86-90.
	LI Haifeng, WANG Qiang. Study on utilization and geological storage of CO₂ in CCUS[J]. Modern Chemical Industry, 2022, 42(10): 86-90.
[26]	王锐, 李阳, 吕成远, 等. 鄂尔多斯盆地深部咸水层CO₂驱水与封存潜力评价方法研究[J]. 非常规油气, 2021, 8(5): 50-55.
	WANG Rui, LI Yang, LYU Chengyuan, et al. Study on potential evaluation method on CO₂ EWR and storage for deep saline layers in Ordos Basin[J]. Unconventional Oil & Gas, 2021, 2021, 8(5): 50-55.
[27]	李娜娜, 赵晏强, 秦阿宁, 等. 国际碳捕集、利用与封存科技战略与科技发展态势分析[J]. 热力发电, 2022, 51(10): 19-27.
	LI Nana, ZHAO Yanqiang, QIN Aning, et al. Analysis of international carbon capture, utilization and storage strategy and scientific development trend[J]. Thermal Power Generation, 2022, 51(10): 19-27.
[28]	GÜR T M. Carbon dioxide emissions, capture, storage and utilization: Review of materials, processes and technologies[J]. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2022, 89: 100965. doi: 10.1016/j.pecs.2021.100965
[29]	王建军. HB地区燃煤电厂CCUS源汇匹配管网优化设计[D]. 成都: 成都理工大学, 2021.
	WANG Jianjun. Optimal design of CCUS source sink matching pipe network for coal fired power plants in North China[D]. Chengdu: Chengdu University of Technology, 2021.
[30]	刘牧心, 肖茗月, 梁希, 等. 缺乏地质封存条件地区开展 CCUS 项目集群化建设的可行性研究: 以江西省为例[J]. 热力发电, 2021, 50(12): 132-138.
	LIU Muxin, XIAO Mingyue, LIANG Xi, et al. Feasibility study on cluster construction of CCUS projects in areas lacking geological storage conditions: A case study of Jiangxi Province[J]. Thermal Power Generation, 2021, 50(12): 132-138.
[31]	ZHANG X, LI K, WEI N, et al. Advances, challenges and perspectives for CCUS source-sink matching models under carbon neutrality target[J]. Carbon Neutrality, 2022, 1(1): 12. doi: 10.1007/s43979-022-00007-7
[32]	田辉, 郭辛阳, 宋雨媛, 等. 基于化学热力学的耐二氧化碳腐蚀水泥水化产物控制[J]. 钻采工艺, 2021, 44(2): 86-89.
	TIAN Hui, GUO Xinyang, SONG Yuyuan, et al. Control of hydration products of CO₂ resistant cements based on chemical thermodynamics[J]. Drilling & Production Technology, 2021, 44(2): 86-89.
[33]	王维波, 汤瑞佳, 江绍静, 等. 延长石油煤化工CO₂捕集、利用与封存(CCUS)工程实践[J]. 非常规油气, 2021, 8(2): 1-7.
	WANG Weibo, TANG Ruijia, JIANG Shaojing, et al. The engineering practice of CO₂ capture, utilization and storage(CCUS)in coal chemical industry of Yanchang Petroleum[J]. Unconventional Oil & Gas, 2021, 8(2): 1-7.
[34]	王晓桥, 马登龙, 夏锋社, 等. 封储二氧化碳泄漏监测技术的研究进展[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2020, 27(2): 23-34.
	WANG Xiaoqiao, MA Denglong, XIA Fengshe, et al. Research progress on leakage monitoring technology for CO₂ storage[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2020, 27(2): 23-34.
[35]	柏明星, 张志超, 白华明, 等. 二氧化碳地质封存系统泄漏风险研究进展[J]. 特种油气藏, 2022, 29(4): 1-11. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6535.2022.04.001
	BAI Mingxing, ZHANG Zhichao, BAI Huaming, et al. Progress in leakage risk study of CO₂ geosequestration system[J]. Special Oil & Gas Reservoirs, 2022, 29(4): 1-11. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6535.2022.04.001
[36]	武治强, 岳家平, 李强, 等. 套管与水泥环胶结界面水力密封完整性评价实验研究[J]. 中国海上油气, 2018, 30(6): 129-134.
	WU Zhiqiang, YUE Jiaping, LI Qiang, et al. Experimental study on the hydraulic seal integrity evaluation of casing-cement sheath bonding interface[J]. China Offshore Oil and Gas, 2018, 30(6): 129-134.
[37]	GILMORE K A, SAHU C K, BENHAM G P, et al. Leakage dynamics of fault zones: Experimental and analytical study with application to CO₂ storage[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2022, 931: A31. doi: 10.1017/jfm.2021.970
[38]	BAI M, SHEN A, MENG L, et al. Well completion issues for underground gas storage in oil and gas reservoirs in China[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2018, 171(6): 584-591. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2018.07.061
[39]	QIN J, SONG J, TANG Y, et al. Well applicability assessment based on fuzzy theory for CO₂ sequestration in depleted gas reservoirs[J]. Renewable Energy, 2023, 206: 239-250. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.01.090
[40]	NAMHATA A, SMALL M J, DILMORE R M, et al. Bayesian inference for heterogeneous caprock permeability based on above zone pressure monitoring[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2017, 57(1): 89-101. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.12.007
[41]	任伟建, 于雪, 霍凤财, 等. 基于贝叶斯网络的油田管道失效概率计算[J]. 吉林大学学报(信息科学版), 2021, 39(1): 66-76.
	REN Weijian, YU Xue, HUO Fengcai, et al. Calculation of failure probability of oil field pipeline based on Bayesian network[J]. Journal of Jilin University(Information Science Edition), 2021, 39(1): 66-76.
[42]	张延旭, 姜晶, 王涛, 等. 神经网络法在油藏封存CO₂效果预测中的应用[J]. 精细石油化工进展, 2018, 19(2): 29-32.
	ZHANG Yanxu, JIANG Jing, WANG Tao, et al. Application of artificial neural network in forecast of carbon dioxide storage in reservoir[J]. Advances in Fine Petrochemicals, 2018, 19(2): 29-32.
[43]	CAO C, LIU H J, HOU Z M, et al. A review of CO₂ storage in view of safety and cost-effectiveness[J]. Energies, 2020, 13(3): 600. doi: 10.3390/en13030600
[44]	LI Y H, SHEN C H, WU C Y, et al. Numerical study of CO₂ geological storage in saline aquifers without the risk of leakage[J]. Energies, 2020, 13(20): 5259. doi: 10.3390/en13205259
[45]	SHEN X, DONG W, WAN Y, et al. Numerical simulation of effects of microbial action on CO₂ geological storage in deep saline aquifers[J]. Natural Resources Research, 2021, 30: 1629-1648. doi: 10.1007/s11053-020-09780-7
[46]	POSTMA T J W. Prospects for large-scale implementation of carbon sequestration in basalt: Capacity, storage security and the rate of mineral trapping[D]. Princeton: Princeton University, 2022.
[47]	胡永乐, 郝明强, 陈国利, 等. 中国CO₂驱油与封存技术及实践[J]. 石油勘探与开发, 2019, 46(4): 716-727. doi: 10.11698/PED.2019.04.10
	HU Yongle, HAO Mingqiang, CHEN Guoli, et al. Technologies and practice of CO₂ flooding and sequestration in China[J]. Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2019, 46(4): 716-727. doi: 10.11698/PED.2019.04.10
[48]	张宗檩, 吕广忠, 王杰. 胜利油田CCUS技术及应用[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2021, 11(6): 812-822.
	ZHANG Zonglin, LYU Guangzhong, WANG Jie. CCUS and its application in Shengli Oilfield[J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2021, 11(6): 812-822.
[49]	AJAYI T, GOMES J S, BERA A. A review of CO₂ storage in geological formations emphasizing modeling, monitoring and capacity estimation approaches[J]. Petroleum Science, 2019, (5): 1-36.
[50]	杨天方, 薛晓军, 付联名. 地层压力监测方法改进及在钻井中的应用[J]. 钻采工艺, 2021, 44(2): 1-4. doi: 10.3969/J. ISSN.1006-768X.2021.02.01
	YANG Tianfang, XUE Xiaojun, FU Lianming. Improvement of formation pressure monitoring method and its application in drilling[J]. Drilling & Production Technology, 2021, 44(2): 1-4. doi: 10.3969/J. ISSN.1006-768X.2021.02.01
[51]	吴保玉, 宋振云, 陈平. 气井井筒CO₂腐蚀及结垢监测实验研究[J]. 钻采工艺, 2021, 44(1): 77-81. doi: 10.3969/J. ISSN.1006-768X.2021.01.17
	WU Baoyu, SONG Zhenyun, CHEN Ping. Experimental study on CO₂ corrosion and scaling monitoring in gas wells[J]. Drilling & Production Technology, 2021, 44(1): 77-81. doi: 10.3969/J. ISSN.1006-768X.2021.01.17

评价对象	指标	指标内涵
盆地	构造特征	构造必须稳定，地震活动少，如前陆盆地，内克拉通盆地等
	水动力条件	水动力系统应具有埋藏深、区域具有一定规模的特点，同时受控于地形、地貌起伏特征
	地热特征	冷盆比热盆更利于CO₂以高密度埋存，增加埋存量
	勘探程度	盆地勘探程度高，具有开发井等详细资料，可为CO₂泄漏监控提供可靠资料
地质体	构造条件	断层、裂缝不发育，斜坡带是有利区带
	盖层条件	为保证长期封存CO₂，盖层厚度、完整性条件非常重要
	规模条件	需具有区域规模
	埋深条件	埋深需要满足CO₂在地下处于临界或超临界状态，同时保证淡水资源的安全
	孔渗条件	需具备高孔隙度、高渗透率特征，以保证CO₂的注入和埋存
	流体性质	溶解埋存、矿化反应是CO₂地下埋存的重要形式，需考虑地层水的矿化度条件
	骨架矿物	储集层条件下CO₂与骨架矿物发生化学反应，形成新的稳定矿物，是CO₂安全埋存的重要形式，埋存量受骨架矿物成分控制

阶段	特点	泄漏路径	控制因素	地质安全界限
阶段	特点	泄漏路径	控制因素	距离断层一个井距以内	距离断层一个井距以外
CO₂驱油阶段	CO₂沿相对高渗透带优先流入采油井井底	开启断层、破裂盖层	断层的重开启压力、盖层的破裂压力	p_gi<p_fr， p_gi<p_cf	p_gi<p_cf
CO₂注入阶段	CO₂通过注入井注入储层	开启断层、破裂盖层、断层岩、盖层	断层的重开启压力、盖层的破裂压力、断层岩纵向封堵压力、盖层封堵压力	p_gi<min（p_fr，p_cf）， p<min（p_fvs，p_cf）	p_gi<min（p_cf，p_cs）
CO₂封存阶段	CO₂充满油藏储层	开启断层、破裂盖层、断层岩、盖层、溢出点	断层的重开启压力、盖层的破裂压力、断层岩纵向封堵压力、盖层封堵压力、油藏最大容量	p<min（p_fr，p_cs）， p<min（p_fvs，p_cs）， Q_s<Q_p

Progress in source-sink matching and safety evaluation of CO₂ geological sequestration

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 51

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

[1]	HE Dongbo, REN Lu, HAO Jie, LIU Xiaoping, CAO Qian. Quantitative evaluation system of geothermal resources based on analytic hierarchy process: A case study of middle-deep hydrothermal sandstone reservoir in Caofeidian of Hebei Province [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(6): 713-725.
[2]	YAN Lini, ZHU Hongquan, YE Sujuan, ZHU Li. Origin of “cake-like” fractures and its significance for gas exploration in the second member of Xujiahe Formation of Xinchang structural belt [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 559-568.
[3]	ZHENG Gongying, LYU Qibiao, YANG Yongjian, XU Shoucheng. Prestack seismic prediction of sandstone reservoirs in the fifth member of Xujiahe Formation in Dongfengchang area of Ziyang [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 569-580.
[4]	ZHANG Zhuang, ZHANG Shunli, HE Xiubin, XIE Dan, LIU Yanhua. Development characteristics of fractures in the second member of Xujiahe Formation in Hexingchang Gas Field, western Sichuan Depression and their main control factors of formation: A case study of Hexingchang Gas Field [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 581-590.
[5]	QIAN Yugui. Application of machine deep learning technology in tight sandstones reservoir prediction: A case study of Xujiahe Formation in Xinchang, western Sichuan Depression [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 600-607.
[6]	LIU Honglin,ZHOU Shangwen,LI Xiaobo. Application of PCA plus OPLS method in rapid reserve production rate prediction of shale gas wells [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 474-483.
[7]	SONG Dekang,LIU Xiaoxue,SHAO Zeyu,JIANG Zhenxue,HOU Lili,WANG Yuchao,HE Shijie,LIU Jipeng. Accumulation mode of Quaternary mudstone gas reservoir in Sanhu Depression, Qaidam Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 495-504.
[8]	SHEN Li,WANG Caizhi,NING Congqian,LIU Yingming,WANG Hao. Well-log lithofacies classification based on machine learning for Chang-7 member in Longdong area of Ordos Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(4): 525-536.
[9]	LI Guoyong. Key technology of fine description of complex fault block reservoir and its application [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(2): 152-162.
[10]	JIN Zhongkang,SUN Xiaoqing. Evaluation and recognition of rolling expansion potential of structural lithologic reservoir in MJZ Oilfield [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(2): 173-180.
[11]	HE Feng,FENG Qiang,CUI Yushi. Production schedule optimization of gas wells in W shale gas reservoir under controlled pressure difference based on numerical simulation [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(1): 91-99.
[12]	ZHANG Yixiao,LI Xiaobo,SHANG Genhua,LIU Hongguang,LI Qing,TAN Tao. Stress sensitive characteristics of fault-karst reservoir [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(1): 127-134.
[13]	WANG Xiaoming,CHEN Junbin,REN Dazhong. Research progress and prospect of pore structure representation and seepage law of continental shale oil reservoir [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(1): 23-30.
[14]	ZHAO Renwen,XIAO Dianshi,LU Shuangfang,ZHOU Nengwu. Comparison of reservoir characteristics between continental shale from faulted basin and marine shale under high-over mature stage: Taking Shahezi Formation in Xujiaweizi faulted basin and Longmaxi Formation in Sichuan Basin as an example [J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(1): 52-63.
[15]	LIANG Zhengzhong,XU Hongtao,LI Chang. Comparison of accumulation model of Chang-8 reservoirs between Huanxi-Pengyang area in southwestern Ordos Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2022, 12(6): 918-926.

Progress in source-sink matching and safety evaluation of CO2 geological sequestration

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 51

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

Progress in source-sink matching and safety evaluation of CO₂ geological sequestration