1:45 PM - 3:15 PM
[HSC04-P03] A multi-criteria screening workflow for offshore CO2 storage site
Keywords:Geological CO2 storage, Decision-making under uncertainty, Multi-criteria, Site screening
For the implementation of Carbon dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS), several decision-making processes under large uncertainties are exists (Lane et al., 2021). This paper outlines a multi-criteria evaluation workflow for screening offshore geological storage site. This methodology considers various but dispersive data, such as, geologic characteristics, potential risks, logistics, and costs. The storage part has large uncertainties, meanwhile capture and transportation parts are rather definitive when the amount of CO2 and the distance between the source and sink is determined. Therefore, we presume capture and transportation parts as scenario base, but other parameters concerning storage part are thought to have distributions.
As the first screening of storage sites, critical criteria of the reservoir, such as depth, thickness, existence of seal, porosity of the reservoir, should be evaluated. These criteria are selected to eliminate risk of CCS. When any criteria were not satisfied, the storage site should be excluded from further study. For the secondary screening, reservoir quality, risks of the storage and costs feasibility should be considered. As the reservoir quality, area of the potential reservoir, geological settings, and injectivity should be investigated. Seismic activities and distance from major faults are measures of induced seismicity and leakage risks. As the cost factor, sea depth, area of other activities and distance from coast line and/or major shipping routes are the candidate of the examination. At each site, these criteria were scored under the knowledge at development stage. The total ranking can be calculated using weights for each criterion. TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) methodology had been implemented for the ranking of the reservoir sites in North Sea (Alcalde et al., 2021). Similar kind of ranking can be evaluated using Analytic Hierarch Process, which is a structured technique for analyzing complex decisions.
This systematic workflow enables a mapping of preferable area for further investigation. Uncertainties of each criterion would be reduced after new data at the site are obtained. We will apply this method to filtering of storage site for each cost scenario.
As the first screening of storage sites, critical criteria of the reservoir, such as depth, thickness, existence of seal, porosity of the reservoir, should be evaluated. These criteria are selected to eliminate risk of CCS. When any criteria were not satisfied, the storage site should be excluded from further study. For the secondary screening, reservoir quality, risks of the storage and costs feasibility should be considered. As the reservoir quality, area of the potential reservoir, geological settings, and injectivity should be investigated. Seismic activities and distance from major faults are measures of induced seismicity and leakage risks. As the cost factor, sea depth, area of other activities and distance from coast line and/or major shipping routes are the candidate of the examination. At each site, these criteria were scored under the knowledge at development stage. The total ranking can be calculated using weights for each criterion. TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) methodology had been implemented for the ranking of the reservoir sites in North Sea (Alcalde et al., 2021). Similar kind of ranking can be evaluated using Analytic Hierarch Process, which is a structured technique for analyzing complex decisions.
This systematic workflow enables a mapping of preferable area for further investigation. Uncertainties of each criterion would be reduced after new data at the site are obtained. We will apply this method to filtering of storage site for each cost scenario.