Detection and impacts of leakage from sub-seafloor deep geological carbon dioxide storage

Fossil fuel power generation and other industrial emissions of carbon dioxide are a threat to global climate1, yet many economies will remain reliant on these technologies for several decades2. Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) in deep geological formations provides an effective option to remove these emissions from the climate system3. In many regions storage reservoirs are located offshore4, 5, over a kilometre or more below societally important shelf seas6. Therefore, concerns about the possibility of leakage7, 8 and potential environmental impacts, along with economics, have contributed to delaying development of operational CCS. Here we investigate the detectability and environmental impact of leakage from a controlled sub-seabed release of CO2. We show that the biological impact and footprint of this small leak analogue (<1 tonne CO2 d−1) is confined to a few tens of metres. Migration of CO2 through the shallow seabed is influenced by near-surface sediment structure, and by dissolution and re-precipitation of calcium carbonate naturally present in sediments. Results reported here advance the understanding of environmental sensitivity to leakage and identify appropriate monitoring strategies for full-scale carbon storage operations.

A novel sub-seabed CO2 release experiment informing monitoring and impact assessment for geological carbon storage

Carbon capture and storage is a mitigation strategy that can be used to aid the reduction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. This process aims to capture CO2from large point-source emitters and transport it to a long-term storage site. For much of Europe, these deep storage sites are anticipated to be sited below the sea bed on continental shelves. A key operational requirement is an understanding of best practice of monitoring for potential leakage and of the environmental impact that could result from a diffusive leak from a storage complex. Here we describe a controlled CO2release experiment beneath the seabed, which overcomes the limitations of laboratory simulations and natural analogues. The complex processes involved in setting up the experimental facility and ensuring its successful operation are discussed, including site selection, permissions, communications and facility construction. The experimental design and observational strategy are reviewed with respect to scientific outcomes along with lessons learnt in order to facilitate any similar future.

Developments since 2005 in understanding potential environmental impacts of CO2 leakage from geological storage

This paper reviews research into the potential environmental impacts of leakage from geological storage of CO2 since the publication of the IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage in 2005. Possible impacts are considered on onshore (including drinking water aquifers) and offshore ecosystems. The review does not consider direct impacts on man or other land animals from elevated atmospheric CO2 levels. Improvements in our understanding of the potential impacts have come directly from CO2 storage research but have also benefitted from studies of ocean acidification and other impacts on aquifers and onshore near surface ecosystems. Research has included observations at natural CO2 sites, laboratory and field experiments and modelling. Studies to date suggest that the impacts from many lower level fault- or well-related leakage scenarios are likely to be limited spatially and temporarily and recovery may be rapid. The effects are often ameliorated by mixing and dispersion of the leakage and by buffering and other reactions; potentially harmful elements have rarely breached drinking water guidelines. Larger releases, with potentially higher impact, would be possible from open wells or major pipeline leaks but these are of lower probability and should be easier and quicker to detect and remediate.

Detection and impacts of leakage from sub-seafloor deep geological carbon dioxide storage

Fossil fuel power generation and other industrial emissions of carbon dioxide are a threat to global climate1, yet many economies will remain reliant on these technologies for several decades2. Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) in deep geological formations provides an effective option to remove these emissions from the climate system3. In many regions storage reservoirs are located offshore4, 5, over a kilometre or more below societally important shelf seas6. Therefore, concerns about the possibility of leakage7, 8 and potential environmental impacts, along with economics, have contributed to delaying development of operational CCS. Here we investigate the detectability and environmental impact of leakage from a controlled sub-seabed release of CO2. We show that the biological impact and footprint of this small leak analogue (<1 tonne CO2 d−1) is confined to a few tens of metres. Migration of CO2 through the shallow seabed is influenced by near-surface sediment structure, and by dissolution and re-precipitation of calcium carbonate naturally present in sediments. Results reported here advance the understanding of environmental sensitivity to leakage and identify appropriate monitoring strategies for full-scale carbon storage operations.

Mineralogy of selected geological deposits from the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland as possible capping materials for low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities

Solid low-level radioactive waste (LLW) is currently being disposed at a number of facilities in the United Kingdom (UK). The safety of these facilities relies to some extent on the use of engineered barriers, such as a cap, to isolate the waste and protect the environment. Generally, the material used as the barrier layer within such a cap should be of low permeability and it should retain this property over long timescales (beyond a few decades normally required for facilities containing non-radioactive wastes). The objective of this research is to determine the mineralogy of selected geological deposits from the UK and Ireland as part of a larger project to examine their suitability as a capping material, particularly on LLW sites. Mineral transformations, as a result of future climate change, may impact on the long-term performance of the cap and even the disposal facility. X-ray diffraction (XRD) was carried-out on the sand, silt and clay fractions of the London Clay, Belfast Upper Boulder Clay, Irish Glacial Till, Belfast Sleech, and Ampthill Clay geological deposits. Minerals were present that could pose both positive and negative effects on the long-term performance of the cap. Smectite, which has a high shrink swell potential, may produce cracks in London Clay, Belfast Upper Boulder Clay and Ampthill Clay capping material during dry, hotter periods as a possible consequence of future climate change; thus, resulting in higher permeability. Ampthill Clay and Belfast Sleech had elevated amounts of organic matter (OM) at 5.93% and 5.88%, respectively, which may also contribute to cracking. Over time, this OM may decompose and result in increased permeability. Gypsum (CaSO4) in the silt and sand fractions of Ampthill Clay may reduce the impact of erosion during wetter periods if it is incorporated into the upper portion of the cap. There are potential negative effects from the acidity created by the weathering of pyrite (FeS2) present in the silt and sand fractions of Belfast Sleech and Ampthill Clay that could impede the growth of grasses used to stabilize the surface of the capping material if this material is used as part of the vegetative soil layer. Additionally, acidic waters generated from pyrite weathering could negatively impact the lower lying capping layers and the disposal facility in general. However, the calcium carbonate (CaCO3) present in the silt and sand fractions of these deposits, and dolomite (CaMg(CO3)2) in Belfast Sleech, may counter act the acidity.

Geological fakes and frauds

Some geological fakes and frauds are carried out solely for financial gain (mining fraud), whereas others maybe have increasing aesthetic appeal (faked fossils) or academic advancement (fabricated data) as their motive. All types of geological fake or fraud can be ingenious and sophisticated, as demonstrated in this article. Fake gems, faked fossils and mining fraud are common examples where monetary profit is to blame: nonetheless these may impact both scientific theory and the reputation of geologists and Earth scientists. The substitution or fabrication of both physical and intellectual data also occurs for no direct financial gain, such as career advancement or establishment of belief (e.g. evolution vs. creationism). Knowledge of such fakes and frauds may assist in spotting undetected geological crimes: application of geoforensic techniques helps the scientific community to detect such activity, which ultimately undermines scientific integrity.