Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247

GHGT-11

Long-term behavior of CO2 stored on a large scale in the

Utsira Formation, the North Sea, Norwegian Continental
Shelf
Pham V.T.H.1*, Halland E. K.1, Tappel, I. M.1, Gjeldvik I. T.1,
Riis F.1, Aagaard, P2
1
Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, Stavanger, Norway
2
University of Oslo, Dept. of Geosciences, P.O.Box 1047 Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway

Abstract

Subsurface storage of CO2 has a long history on the Norwegian continental shelf; in the Sleipner Field
(North Sea) since 1996 and the in Snøhvit field (Barents Sea) since 2008. Several studies have pointed out the large
carbon storage potential on the Norwegian continental shelf, especially in deep saline aquifers. The Norwegian
Petroleum Directorate (NPD) has, for the last two years, interpreted relevant data on the Norwegian continental shelf
in order to classify potential sites for CO2 storage. The CO2 storage atlas for the Norwegian North Sea indicates
possible storage sites, and estimated storage capacity.
The Utsira Formation is considered to be a part of a saline aquifer together with Skade Formation. The
Skade & Utsira Formations are distal deposits in a great delta-complex, with sands coming from the west throughout
Miocene and up into the Pliocene. On British sector sands in Miocene are named Hutton sands (informal).
To estimate the capacity of CO2 storage in the Utsira formation, a reservoir model covering 1400 km2 in the
south part and located in the Norwegian sector, was built to simulate the long-term behaviour of CO2 injection. The
simulations estimated the amount of CO2 which can be injected into the formations. They also illustrated the
distribution of the CO2 plume in the reservoir formations.
With a bottom-hole pressure (BHP) change constraint of 10 bars and no water production, more than 145
Mt CO2 could be injected and stored in the segment model with 4 or 5 injection wells and 50 years injection period.
There are no indications that CO2 will migrate to the shallower parts of the formation in the west after 8000 years of
simulation.

© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

© 2013 The
Selection Authors.
and/or Published
peer-review underbyresponsibility
Elsevier Ltd.of GHGT
Keywords: CO2 storage; Utsira Formation; compositional simulation

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +47 518 76416

E-mail address:

1876-6102 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of GHGT
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.440
 V.T.H. Pham et al. / Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247 5241

1. Introduction
The Utsira Formation and the underlying Skade Formation forms the main part of a large
Miocene-Pliocene aquifer related to the sandy deltaic complex came from the UK side and into the
Norwegian sector in the northern North Sea [1, 3, 6, 7]. The Utsira/Skade aquifer is one of 10 aquifers
which was evaluated as suitable for CO2 storage in the northern North Sea by Halland et al.,[3]. The
aquifer is located in the northern North Sea, and has the potential for storing gigatonnes of CO2. In the
Sleipner Field (North Sea), one megaton of CO2 has been injected per year, since 1996 according to
Statoil.
Valuable lessons have been learned from earlier case-studies from offshore CO2 storage
operations. Lindeberg and Bergmo [12] performed numerical modelling to better understand the long-
term behaviour and distribution pattern of the CO2 plume in the Utsira formation, in the North Sea. At the
Sleipner storage site, CO2 plume behaviour has been monitored and calibrated against 4D-seismic data
[13]. In the different studies related to CO2 storage in the Utsira Formation, the storage capacity of the
entire Utsira formation has been estimated to be between 20 to 60 Gt CO 2 [14] and over 42 Gt CO2 [1].
Singh et al., [8] have suggested that taking into account gravity segregation and/or modifying the
simulation input data, could improve the match with observations for black-oil and compositional models.
Bergmo study [15] concluded that the required 125 million tons CO2 could easily be injected into this
part of Utsira formation. The Utsira formation thus appears to provide a particularly robust CO2 storage
site.
The purpose of this study was to estimate the capacity of CO2 storage and long-term behaviour
of CO2 in the Utsira formation based on the research in the southern part of Utsira formation. The study
was set up to test if large volumes of CO 2 can be injected within the aquifer. A regional reservoir model
covering 1400 km2 of the Utsira south depocentre was built to simulate the long-term behaviour of CO2
injection. The injectivity could be constrained as well as the amount of CO2 which could be injected into
the formation. The output of the simulations could also increase our understanding of the distribution of
the CO2 plume in the reservoir formations after 8000 years.

2. Geological Overview

The Utsira Formation is

deposited in upper Miocene and
lower Pliocene and consists of
shallow marine sandstones
deposited in a narrow strait with
tidal inlet from the Møre basin in
the North [16]. The sands of the
Utsira Formation display a
complex architecture, and the
elongated sand body extends some
450 km NS and 90 km WE [2, 3,
17], fig 1a.

Fig. 1 (a) Utsira formation thickness

map shows two depocentres, one in the
north and one in the south (inside thick
black line); (b) studying area in the
model locates in the southern
depocentres of Utsira.
5242 V.T.H. Pham et al. / Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247

The Utsira-Skade aquifer is the distal part of a great Miocene-Pliocene delta-complex originating
from the west Shetland Platform [6, 7]. The central part of Utsira formation is thinner with more shaly
interbeds than in the depocentres. A prograding delta front in Upper Miocene/Lower Pliocene (top Utsira
level) is observed [2]. The two major sand depocentres, one in the north and one in the south, have been
mapped out, with thickness up to 400 m [3, 4], see fig 1a. The seal overlying the Utsira Formation is
Pliocene and Quaternary marine clay stones of the upper part of the Nordland Group[1].
The total reservoir rock volume of Utsira formation that is suitable for CO2 storage. This sand is
buried at depths deeper than 700 m and evaluated as suitable for storing CO2 is estimated to be about 2.5
1012 m3, and the pore volume is 5.26 1011 m3 [3].
The reservoir simulation model
The model area in this study (fig. 1b) was selected as a segment in the southern depocentres of
the Utsira Formation (fig. 1a). The model covers an area about 1400 km2.

Porosity and permeability:

In the model, porosity is in the range of 30-
35% for the Utsira sand. Average horizontal
permeability is from 0.1 for shale to 1000 mD for
good sand. Nett to gross is 0.7 [1] and 0.98 [5]. Nett
to gross value of 0.98 is selected for this study.
Relative permeability data: Relative
permeability curves for brine and supercritical CO2
phases were obtained from experiment data [8]. The
relative permeability curves were calculated to fit
mation water and
CO2 with irreducible water saturation Swi=0.11 and
critical saturation for water 0.386 (at the saturation
where flow of the phase ceases), and critical CO2
saturation 0.02 [8], see fig 2. Imbibition curve is
used to estimate amount of CO2 trapped as residual Fig. 2 Relative permeability curves [8] and imbibition
if critical CO2 saturation is assumed 0.3, fig 2. curve for CO2 with assuming at residual saturation is 0.3;
Drn: drainage and imb: imbibitions.
Formation water: For the water compositional calculations we used the initial NaCl and CaCl2
mol fractions in the reservoir water to correspond to reported formation waters from Egeberg and
Aagaard [18] and adjusted in [19], see table 1. Reservoir temperature is in the model constant at 30 °C.
Table 1. Formation water components

Components CO2 H2O NaCl CaCl2 Ca(HCO3)2

Mole fraction 0.001 0.951 0.046 0.001 0.001

For the numerical simulations the ECLIPSE300 - compositional simulator was used. Mutual CO2
solubility in brine is calculated based on Spycher et al., [20].
In the simulation model, the grid size is 400m×400m. The pore volume of Utsira sand in the
model is approximately 1.08 1011 m3.
Reservoir pressure is hydrostatic. The bottom-hole pressure (BHP) is constrained for increase
from 5 and 10 bars to 15 bars. The reason for that is the Utsira sand at shallow depth; the sand and the
seal does not resist large changes of pressure. An injection period of 50 years is applied for new wells and
the injection well at Sleipner which has been active from 1996.
 V.T.H. Pham et al. / Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247 5243

The base case applied for Utsira injection (UTSIRA) is for homogeneous sand and no contact of
the shallow aquifer. Three internal mudstone layers were placed within the Utsira sand to see trapping
effectiveness of the internal barriers (in the cases: UTSIRA_BARRIER1 and UTSIRA_BARRIER01,
table 2). Anisotropic sand model with different vertical permeability were also tested with cases of
Kv/Kh=0.5, 0.1 and 0.05, Kv: vertical permeability and Kh: horizontal permeability) while Kv/Kh=1 is
the base case. Hysteresis was included in the cases with homogeneous sand and internal mudstone to
estimate CO2 trapped by residual mechanism (cases with name has _HYS ). The initial injection rates
in one injection well are between 1900 and 4750 tonnes/day (from 2 million sm3/day to 5 million
sm3/day) CO2.

3. Results

Table 2. Summary of simulation cases, taking into account Sleipner/existing injection well from 1996
means the injection well from 1996 at Sleipner is one of injection wells. The injection wells in the model (except the existing the
well at Sleipner) are considered to start injection from 2015

BHP Injected
SIMULATION CASES DESCRIPTION constraint Volume, Mt
Homogeneous sand, 1 injection well
UTSIRA Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 43,0716
clay layers inside reservoir sand, clay perm*0.01
UTSIRA_BARRIER1 1 injection well, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 70,5822
clay layers inside reservoir sand, clay perm*0.001
UTSIRA_BARRIER01 1 injection well, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 70,5822
PermZ=PermX*0.5, clay perm*0.001
UTSIRA_BARRIER_KVKH05 1 injection well, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 70,5841
PermZ=PermX *0.1, clay perm*0.001
UTSIRA_BARRIER_KVKH01 1 injection well, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 70,4855
PermZ=PermX *0.05, clay perm*0.001
UTSIRA_BARRIER_KVKH005 1 injection well, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 70,4410

Take into account Sleipner/existing injection well from 1996

clay tranz*0.001 inside the reservoir sand,
UTSIRA_4WELLS_2M_SLEIP_HYS_5 4 injection wells, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 5 102,4712
clay tranz*0.001 inside the reservoir sand,
UTSIRA_4WELLS_2M_SLEIP_HYS_10 4 injection wells, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 143,8830
clay tranz*0.001 inside the reservoir sand,
UTSIRA_5WELLS_2M_SLEIP_HYS_10 4 injection wells, Inj.rate 2MSm3/day 10 145,5822
clay tranz*0.001 inside the reservoir sand,
UTSIRA_5WELLS_5M_SLEIP_HYS_10 5 injection wells, Inj.rate 5MSm3/day 10 150,2998
clay tranz*0.001 inside the reservoir sand,
UTSIRA_5WELLS_5M_SLEIP_HYS_15 5 injection wells, Inj.rate 5MSm3/day 15 196,1161

PermZ=PermX*0.5, 4 injection wells, Inj.rate

UTSIRA_4WELLS_2M_SLEIP_HYS_5_KVKH05 2MSm3/day 5 76,2495
PermZ=PermX*0.5, 4 injection wells, Inj.rate
UTSIRA_4WELLS_2M_SLEIP_HYS_10_KVKH05 2MSm3/day 10 112,6151
PermZ=PermX*0.5, 5 injection wells, Inj.rate
UTSIRA_5WELLS_2M_SLEIP_HYS_10_KVKH05 2MSm3/day 10 114,9652
PermZ=PermX*0.5, 5 injection wells, Inj.rate
UTSIRA_5WELLS_5M_SLEIP_HYS_10_KVKH05 5MSm3/day 10 114,9884

UTSIRA_5WELLS_5M_SLEIP_HYS_15_KVKH05 PermZ*0.5, 5 injection wells, Inj.rate 5MSm3/day 15 151,2360

5244 V.T.H. Pham et al. / Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247

The results of base case

(UTSIRA) showed that the cumulative
CO2 volume injected was ca. 43.07
million tonnes (22 268 million Sm3, fig 3)
after 50 years. Injection rate decreases
from 1 900 tonnes/day to ca. 900
tonnes/day, fig 3. The average reservoir
pressure increases ca. 6 bars (please see
fig 3).
In the case which has clay layers
inside reservoir sand, CO2 plume could be
hindered to migrate upwards. The clay
layers inside reservoir sand play as
internal barriers, (fig 4a). More CO2 is
trapped as residual beneath clay layers Year
(red oval in fig 4a) and the mobile CO2
phase in the case with internal barriers Fig. 3 The injection profile of the base case UTSIRA,
injection in 50 years.
covers a smaller area than in the case
without internal barriers (fig 4b).

Fig. 4 CO2 plume in the cases with 5 injection wells, BHP constraint of 15 bars, injection rate is 5 MSm3
(c.a 2.5 times of the current injection rate at Sleipner now)
(a) with clay layers inside reservoir sand and (b) without internal and vertical barriers
 V.T.H. Pham et al. / Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247 5245

The CO2 migration is limited by the topography and fills up in surrounding local structures. There are no
indications that CO2 will migrate to any places where it may reach the shallow parts of the formation in
the west, fig 4.

To increase gas injection volume can be done by increasing injection rate and/or number of
injection wells and allowing higher BHP constraint with 5 bars, fig 5. BHP constraint is a main factor that
constrains the gas volume injected. With the pressure constraint, the CO2 volume does not increase a lot
by increasing number of wells. The other methods with increasing injection rate from 2 MSm3 to 5
MSm3 and adding 1 injection well are not significant effect, fig 5. From this result, producing water
while injecting CO2 could increase significant storage potential of the Utsira sand.

a) b)

Fig. 5 (a) Gas injection cumulative volume, (b) Average field pressure, BHP has more significant effect on gas injection cumulative
volume than number of injection wells and injection rate.

4. Discussion
Lindeberg et al., [12] estimated by simulation the storage capacity of the entire Utsira formation
to be between 20 to 60 Gt of CO2 in the area with depths up to 500 m below mean sea level. The area we
consider suitable for storing CO2 is deeper than 700m. The result in our study shows a smaller CO2
storage capacity than [14] because the different depth is considered in the each model. In the Gestco
report, over 42 Gt CO2 is estimated to be stored in the Utsira sand and the storage capacity of entire Skade
formation was estimated to 15 Gt [1] which is based on simple geological calculations, not by simulation.
Bergmo [15] also concluded that for suitable injection points, migration distance of the CO2
plume will most likely be 33 km from the injection point during a 5000 years period and there are no
indications that it will migrate to the shallow parts of the formation in the west [15]. The results in this
5246 V.T.H. Pham et al. / Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247

study also confirm that about 70 to 75% of the CO2 is dissolved into water after 8000 years (fig 14) and
that the CO2 plume could migrate 20 km from the injection well (fig 7).
The uncertainties will always relate to geological input in the geological model, the properties
are based on data from a few wells in a large area. Moreover, the numerical model consists of thousands
of grid cell that may be with the size from 50×50m to 500×500m. One cell contains only one value of a
property (a property, for example, such as porosity, permeability) by up scaling (averaging). The model
cannot describe detail feature of the geological nature objectives. We could see that there are large
uncertainties in parameters used due to lack of data.
Furthermore, additional simulation studies should be carried out with pressure management, i.e.
by including schemes of formation water extraction.

Summary
With a BHP change constraint of 10 bars and no water production, 145 Mt CO2 can be injected
in the segment with 4 or 5 injection wells and 50 years injection period. There are no indications that CO2
will migrate towards the shallow parts of the formation in the west.

Water production gives more significant storage potential in the Utsira sand than increase
number of injection wells with pressure management. Additional simulation studies should be carried out
with pressure management, i.e. by including schemes of formation water extraction.

Acknowledgements

The Authors greatly acknowledge the colleagues in NPD; Rita Rød, Christian Magnus, Wenche Johansen
and Tor Eidvin helping us to finish this study and participating in useful discussions that helped to
improve this paper.
 V.T.H. Pham et al. / Energy Procedia 37 (2013) 5240 – 5247 5247

References

[1] R. Bøe, C. Magnus, P. T. Osmundsen et al. 2 point sources and subsurface storagecapacities for CO2 in aquifers in
NGU Report 2002.10, pp. 132, 2002.
[2]
Pliocene sequences in the northern North Sea, Marine and Petroleum Geology, vol. 14, pp. 893-914, 1997/12//, 1997.
[3] E. K. Halland et al. 2 Norwegian Petroleum Directorate, 2011.
[4] P. Zweigel, R. Arts, A. E. Lothe et al. geology of the Utsira Formation at the first industrial-scale
underground CO2 Geological Society, London, Special Publications, vol. 233,
no. 1, pp. 165-180, January 1, 2004, 2004.
[5] R. A. Chadwick, P. Zweigel, U. Gregersen et al. 2 storage site: The Utsira

Energy, vol. 29, pp. 1371-1381, 2004/8//, 2004.

[6] -Eocene strata of the southern Viking Graben,northern North Sea; integrated
Norwegian Journal of Geology, vol. 87, pp. 391-450,
2007.
[7] eeding deposits in the
Marine and Petroleum Geology, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 591-606, 2007.
[8] V. Singh, A. Cavangh, H. Hansen et al.
Data From Sleipner, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2010.
[9] -- Energy, vol.
30, no. 11-12, pp. 2318-2333, 2005/9//, 2004.
[10] S. Bachu, D. Bonijoly, J. Bradshaw et al. 2 International
Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 430-443, 2007.
[11] 2 Elements - An International
Magazine of Mineralogy, Geochemistry, and Petrology, vol. 4, no. 5, 2008.
[12] -term fate of CO2 Greenhouse Gas Control
Technologies, Vols I and Ii, Proceedings, pp. 489-494, 2003.
[13] E. Lindeberg, P. Zweigel, P. Bergmo et al. 2 distribution pattern improved by geology and reservoir

Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, pp. 372-377, 2001.

[14] E. Lindeberg, J.-F. Vuillaume 2

Energy Procedia, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 2777-2784, 2009.

[15] P. E. S. Bergmo, A.-A. Grimstad, E. Lindeberg et al. n gas
Energy Procedia, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 2953-2959, 2009.
[16]
NPD Bulletin no. 5, pp. pp 65, 1989.
[17]
central and northen North Sea. In Hurst, A. (eds): Onshore -
Norwegian Geology Sosiety (NGF) and Norwegian Petroleum Sosiety (NPF) conference, Trondheim, 2002.
[18]
Applied Geochemistry, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 131-142, 1989/4//, 1989.
[19] P. Audigane, I. Gaus, I. Czernichowski-Lauriol et al. -dimensional reactive transport modeling of CO2 injection in
American Journal of Science, vol. 307, no. 7, pp. 974-1008, Sep, 2007.
[20] N. Spycher, K. Pruess, and J. Ennis- 2 H2O Mixtures in the geological sequestration of CO2. I. Assessment and

Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta, vol. 67, pp.

3015 - 3031, 2003.