Carbon Sequestration Rules Emerge

Just a few years ago uttering the words “carbon sequestration” at a party would result in raised eyebrows and puzzled looks: “Carbon what?”

Today, however, the term rolls smoothly off politicians’ tongues: Al Gore gave it positive mention in his film “An Inconvenient Truth,” and the Bush administration’s energy strategy depends on it to harness the energy in the nation’s vast coal resources while minimizing carbon emissions to the atmosphere.

A primary focus of the U.S. government’s current research effort is the long-term storage of carbon in geologic formations, including depleted oil and gas reservoirs, unmineable coal seams and deep saline formations. President Bush’s fiscal year 2009 budget request for carbon sequestration programs within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is $149 million.

There are other methods of carbon sequestration: Increasing soil carbon content by changing crop tilling practices, for example, is currently in use with good results. Injecting CO2 into the oceans is being studied, but faces both technological and public acceptance hurdles. Geologic sequestration provides the greatest hope for storing large volumes of CO2 close to the point sources producing it.

However, geologic sequestration also faces technological challenges – after all, the current goal of DOE’s Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships’ (RCSP) large-scale, multi-year demonstrations is to inject in a single well up to one million tons of CO2 annually.

That is roughly equivalent to the volume of the Empire State Building – and a commercial plant would emit several times this amount.

Talk about that at a party and eyebrows will really pop up. Even if we can solve the technical challenges, public acceptance remains an issue.

Fortunately, the petroleum industry’s long experience of safely injecting CO2 into the subsurface for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) is helping solve both the technological and public acceptance challenges facing geologic sequestration.

Recognizing this fact, the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC) formed a “Geological CO2 Sequestration Task Force” in 2002 to investigate the technical, policy and regulatory issues surrounding safe and effective geologic sequestration.

The Phase I study was funded by DOE through its National Energy Technology Laboratory. The task force included members from IOGCC member states and affiliates, state oil and gas regulators, DOE, the RCSPs, state geologists and other experts.

The principal result of Phase I was recognition that states that regulate oil and natural gas production and the sub-surface storage of natural gas have both the requisite knowledge and experience to safely regulate geologic sequestration.

They also have regulatory frameworks in place that, with some modification, could apply to geologic sequestration.

In 2006 the task force resumed work on Phase II, again funded by DOE. Representatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Bureau of Land Management and an environmental group joined the task force for this study.

Phase II’s goal was to prepare a guidance document for states wanting to create a geologic sequestration regulatory framework. The report includes a model statute, model rules and regulations with explanatory text to implement the statute, and a report addressing legal questions on subsurface ownership and injection rights. The guidance document is available at the IOGCC Web site.

At the federal level the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also is reviewing the regulatory needs for carbon sequestration. Specifically, its focus is ensuring that injecting large volumes of CO2 into the subsurface does not damage drinking water sources.

The Safe Drinking Water Act places this responsibility with EPA, and is implemented through the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program. In many states the local regulatory bodies implement the UIC program on behalf of EPA. This is known as having “primacy.”

In other states this responsibility is shared by state regulators and EPA, or handled exclusively by the federal agency.

The UIC program has several well classes with different regulations for each class:

  • Class I – hazardous waste.
  • Class II – oil and gas operations, including CO2-based EOR and enhanced gas recovery, EGR.
  • Class III – mining.
  • Class IV (no longer used).
  • Class V – experimental, non-hazardous.

In March 2007 EPA issued guidance to states with primacy to permit geologic sequestration demonstration projects as Class V experimental wells. This facilitated permitting for the RCSP demonstration projects.

Shortly thereafter EPA launched a formal rule-making process to regulate long-term geologic sequestration. The agency formed a working group consisting of EPA, DOE and state officials, and fast-tracked their activities. EPA expects to issue a rule proposal for public comment this summer.

It is important to note that the current EPA process has nothing to do with regulating carbon emissions – it’s about how to safely store them. Assuming we can solve the technical and public acceptance challenges, the question of whether large-scale carbon sequestration becomes reality is something lawmakers must still decide.

Comments (0)


Washington Watch

Washington Watch - David Curtiss

David Curtiss served as the Director of AAPG’s Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. from 2008-11.

Policy Watch

Policy Watch is a monthly column of the EXPLORER written by the director of AAPG's  Geoscience and Energy Office in Washington, D.C. *The first article appeared in February 2006 under the name "Washington Watch" and the column name was changed to "Policy Watch" in January 2013 to broaden the subject matter to a more global view.

View column archives

Editor's Note:

David Curtiss will be a presenter in the DPA forum “Energy Resources, Reserves and the Future Workforce: Policy and Labor in the Geosciences” at the AAPG Annual Convention and Exhibition in San Antonio.

The session will be held from 8-11:30 a.m. Tuesday, April 22.Curtiss’ topic will be the current initiatives in work force development in the geosciences.

Curtiss also will be available during the convention at the DPA booth located in the AAPG Center in the exhibits hall.

For more information on carbon sequestration-related reports and activity:

Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission report.

EPA overview of UIC program.

EPA overview of carbon sequestration rule making.

See Also: Book

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4386 Book
Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4486 Book

See Also: Bulletin Article

Reservoir properties of Upper Triassic–Middle Jurassic sandstones, Spitsbergen, are studied as part of a CO2 storage pilot project in Longyearbyen. The reservoir formations show large contrasts in sandstone compositions, with unexpected low permeability despite moderate porosity values. Petrographic analyses were performed to investigate the influence and distribution of diagenesis. It is concluded that, because of various compaction, cementation, and dissolution processes, the sandstone porosity is mainly isolated molds and micropores and associated with fibrous illite and chamosite, explaining the low permeability. Diagenesis and the distribution of quartz cement is influenced by lithofacies and detrital compositions. Mineralogically immature sandstones (De Geerdalen Formation) show a homogeneous distribution of quartz cement overgrowths on quartz grains, distributed interstitial to labile grains and other cements (e.g., late calcite). The main silica source was from the dissolution of adjacent feldspar and labile grains as part of the chemical compaction. In contrast, quartz-dominated sandstones (Knorringfjellet Formation) show a heterogeneous patchy distribution of quartz cement influenced by the sedimentary bioturbation pattern, with silica sourced also from dissolution at clay-rich microstylolites. Phosphatic beds at the base and top of the formation are strongly influenced by marine eogenesis and reworking processes and associated with concentration of iron-rich authigenic minerals. The highest porosity appears in sand-supported conglomerate where moldic clay-mineral ooids contributed to reduce quartz cementation. The stratigraphic change from mineralogical immature (Triassic) to mature (uppermost Triassic–Jurassic) sandstone compositions is detected in wide areas of the Barents Shelf and has considerable implications for the distribution of sandstone reservoir properties.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/diagenesis-and-quartz-cement-distribution.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3713 Bulletin Article

See Also: Field Seminar

Known worldwide for its spectacular geology, the key geological units in the stratigraphy of Oman are exposed in the Muscat area. It is only a short distance to some excellent outcrops ranging from the Permo-Triassic basement to the Permo-Triassic sequence and the Semail Ophiolite found in the oceanic crust and upper mantle emplaced on the autochthonous Mesozoic carbonate succession of the Oman margin during the Late Cretaceous.

Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/muscat-oman-field-trip-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 20942 Field Seminar

See Also: Workshop

This workshop brings together new technologies, practices, and procedures that can be applied to new and mature fields in order to revitalize them and increase / optimize recovery. The presentations will focus on case studies, research findings, and field applications for new and existing plays, including Texas, Gulf Coast region, and Latin America.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/gtw-revitalizing-reservoicrs-texas-gulf-coast-latin-12dec-2015-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 21310 Workshop