Terrestrial impacts Implications for Site selection, Site characterisation, Monitoring and Remediation

Transcription

1 Terrestrial impacts Implications for Site selection, Site characterisation, Monitoring and Remediation David G Jones 1, A Annunziatellis 2, A. Barkwith 1, T. S. Barlow 1, S. E. Beaubien 2, A. Bond 3, N. Breward 1, P. Coombs 1, D. de Angelis 2, A. Gardner 1, V. Gemeni 4, S. Graziani 2, K. A. Green 1, S. Gregory 1, S. Gwosdz 5, S. Hannis 1, M. Høglind 6, N. Koukouzas 4, M. Krüger 5, S. Libertini 2, T.R. Lister 1, S. Lombardi 2, J. Lions 7, P. Maul 3, R. Metcalfe 3, C. Moni 6, D. Rasse 6, K. L. Smith 8, M. D. Steven 8,K. Thatcher, J.M. West 1 and F. Ziogou 4. 1 British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham NG12 5GG, UK. 2 Universita di Roma La Sapienza, Rome, Italy. 3 Quintessa, Henley, Berkshire, UK. 4 CERTH/Chemical Process and Energy Resources Institute, Thessaloniki , Greece. 5 Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, Hannover, Germany. 6 Bioforsk, Fr. A. Dahlsvei 20, 1432 Ås, Norway 8 BGRM, France 8 University of Nottingham, School of Geography, Nottingham, UK.

2 Terrestrial sites Context RISCS results can inform decisions regarding potential impacts of leakage Impacts of leakage on a terrestrial site will be site-specific

3 The terrestrial sites Grimsrud, Norway Laacher See, Germany Florina, Greece Latera, Italy ASGARD, England

4 Groundwater observations in southern Europe Gas vent

5 The terrestrial sites Site Selection No reason why storage could not take place in any RISCS environments (but consider Special Conservation Areas Natura 2000 sites). Low probability of leakage Careful site selection. Regulatory control Care in operation and monitoring Rapid dispersion is a consideration (urban vs agricultural areas)

6 (%) ASGARD: Effect of wind speed on atmospheric CO 2 concentration at the ground surface during shallow injection Fully mixed at 2 m (Weyburn) Fully mixed at 10 cm (ASGARD) (m s -1 )

7 The terrestrial sites Site Characterisation: Baselines Near Surface Habitats/land use Plant surveys Soil microbiology Soil gas concentrations and fluxes Atmospheric gas Aquifers potable water Geology and mineralogy Flow and recharge rates Chemistry (e.g. ph, conductivity, alkalinity, pco 2, redox, majors, traces)

8 Site Characterisation The terrestrial sites Contribution to EIA and risk assessment Accurate interpretation will need other information (e.g. weather data) May need to be carried out over several years (regulations, site specific)

9 Monitoring Purpose Demonstrate site performance Florina, Greece Develop public confidence Detect and quantify leakage and its significance Factors to be considered - Scale RISCS sites have shown leakage scale is metres to 10s metres Techniques must have resolution from km to m scale. Sensitivity to determine above background. Discriminate source

10 Weyburn alleged leakage Biogenic Near surface CO 2 Leakage Leakage Biogenic Injected & recycled CO 2 δ 13 C CO 2 ( ) From Beaubien et al 2013; Florina data from RISCS From Trium 2012

11 Monitoring Techniques Variety of techniques to assess surface Florina, Greece ecosystems/groundwater Large sites will need rapid areal survey techniques e.g. Hyperspectral (has limitations) Continuous monitoring at higher risk or sensitive locations (extend baselines) Use of reference sites Soil gas monitoring very useful Soil CO 2 concentrations above 10% should trigger inspection of site Different parameters for CO 2 and/or brine leakage in groundwaters

12 Monitoring: responses Timing needs to consider: ASGARD, England Seasonal effects seen at RISCS sites Land use Plant response is rapid (7-14 days for broadleaf in growing season). For plants short growing periods rapid impact on yield but over small area (undetected?) Microbial responses above ~20% CO 2. Long term changes at natural sites only. Monitoring will provide an idea of how long leakage has been occurring.

13 The terrestrial sites Monitoring Other Factors to be considered Bio-indicator plants may be useful for leak detection. Polygonum spp (Laacher See and Florina). Some crop plants (leaf colour change). RISCS could not determine impacts of CO 2 leakage on soil fertility. Polygonum spp

14 The terrestrial sites Remediation Recovery Plants recover from exposure to elevated CO 2 (grasses more rapid than broad leaf) Crop recovery will depend on e.g. stage in growth, length of exposure etc Microbes appear to recover to baseline levels at ASGARD Natural attenuation in aquifers depending on their characteristics

15 The terrestrial sites Remediation Little can be done until leak is stopped Economics will determine approach May have to accept lower crop yields until leakage stopped After leakage stopped, recovery period may be necessary before replanting Replanting with more tolerant grasses if economically viable (more study needed) Surface remediation best in fallow periods following harvest Ploughing (aeration) best for crop areas.

16 Remediation: groundwater Drill and remove gaseous CO 2 Pump and treat CO 2 -impacted water Use hydraulic barriers Allow natural attenuation 16

17 The terrestrial sites Conclusions All terrestrial sites need to consider potential impacts on surface ecosystems and ground waters (regulatory requirement and confidence building) Baseline and subsequent surveys to ascertain impacts (help in EIAs). Reference sites. Range of monitoring techniques available Need to monitor a number of parameters not just CO 2

18 The terrestrial sites Conclusions Impacts are expected to be small (c.f. climate change, extreme weather, pests) Impact will depend on when leak occurs Potential impacts of leakage on terrestrial ecosystems is manageable. Marginal terrestrial sites may be more sensitive (e.g. short growing period). Short term exposure-no impact on many crops. Recovery time unclear for pasture. Remediation is economic decision. More work - soil fertility & use of bioindicators.

19 Project partners CERTH RWE

20 Acknowledgements This presentation presents work by Bioforsk (Daniel Rasse, Christophe Moni, Mats Høglind), University of Nottingham (Mike Steven, Karon Smith), BGR (Martin Krueger, Simone Gwosdz), BRGM (Julie Lyons and colleagues), CERTH (Nikos Koukouzas, Fotini Zigou, Vasiliki Gemeni), Università di Roma La Sapienza (Salvatore Lombardi, Stan Beaubien, Stefano Graziani, Aldo Annunziatellis), Quintessa (Alex Bond, Philip Maul, Peter Robinson) and BGS (Julie West, Pat Coombs, Kay Green, Amanda Gardner, Simon Gregory, Bob Lister, Tom Barlow, Neil Breward, Sarah Hannis) and many other colleagues. RISCS is funded by the EC 7th Framework Programme and by industry partners ENEL I&I, Statoil, Vattenfall AB, E.ON and RWE. R&D partners are BGS, CERTH, IMARES, OGS, PML, SINTEF, University of Nottingham, Sapienza Università di Roma, Quintessa, CO2GeoNet, Bioforsk, BGR and ZERO. Three R&D institutes outside Europe participate in RISCS: CO2CRC from Australia, University of Regina from Canada and Montana State University from the USA as well as the IEAGHG R & D Programme. For more information please go to the website ( or contact the project coordinator David Jones ( dgj@bgs.ac.uk tel (0) ).