Premium
Kinetic modeling of laboratory CO 2 ‐exposure experiments performed on whole rock reservoir samples
Author(s) -
Fischer Sebastian,
De Lucia Marco,
Liebscher Axel
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
greenhouse gases: science and technology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.45
H-Index - 32
ISSN - 2152-3878
DOI - 10.1002/ghg.1415
Subject(s) - geochemical modeling , goethite , kaolinite , brine , dolomite , kinetic energy , dissolution , chemistry , mineralogy , adsorption , physics , organic chemistry , quantum mechanics
Mineralogical and geochemical observations from laboratory CO 2 ‐exposure experiments on reservoir rocks are compared with predictions from geochemical modeling that was performed using PHREEQC software. The Pitzer‐based Eq 3/6 thermodynamic database, provided by Quintessa Ltd., was applied. For kinetic modeling, a Lasaga‐type rate equation was implemented and different models were parameterized taking kinetic rate law parameters from literature. Based on previous modeling studies a modified inverse modeling approach is presented here. This comprises several different Fe‐proxies and improved statistical ranking preferences that were implemented in particular to better match modeled and measured concentrations of dissolved K + , Fe 2+ and Al 3+ . Compared to the previous approach, the presented modeling results are in good (better) agreement with experimental data. Systematic discrepancies between modeling and observation still occur regarding K‐bearing mineral phases and corresponding K + brine concentrations. Despite missing correlation between K + and Cl − concentrations, potential reasons for these discrepancies may be increased K + brine concentrations during the experiments due to dissolution of K‐rich salt(s), such as sylvite. Much better matches were generated for dissolved Fe 2+ concentrations. Goethite mainly controls the chemical behavior of dissolved Fe 2+ in kinetic simulations. Based on both the available equilibrium and kinetic modeling results, the ultimate fate of dissolved Al 3+ and the analysis of Al‐bearing mineral phases potentially controlling dissolved Al 3+ brine concentrations cannot be conclusively determined. The overall best ranked kinetic model comprises anhydrite, dolomite, goethite, K‐feldspar and kaolinite. Despite minor inconsistencies dissolved Fe 2+ , Al 3+ and Si 4+ were in particular much better reproduced by the best ranked kinetic models.