Reactivity of CO 2 with Utica, Marcellus, Barnett, and Eagle Ford Shales and Impact on Permeability

• Published in: Energy & Fuels
• Main Authors: Goodman, Angela, Kutchko, Barbara, Sanguinito, Sean, Natesakhawat, Sittichai, Cvetic, Patricia, Haljasmaa, Igor, Spaulding, Richard, Crandall, Dustin, Moore, Johnathan, Burrows, Lauren C.
• Language: unknown
• Published: 2022
• Subjects: 04 OIL SHALES AND TAR SANDS; Carbonic acid
• Online Access: http://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1845717; https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1845717; https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.1c01995

We report that in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while recovering hydrocarbons from unconventional shale formations, processes that make use of carbon dioxide to enhance oil recovery while storing carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) should be considered. Here, we examine samples from three shale basins across the United States (Utica and Marcellus Shales in the Appalachian Basin, Barnett Shale in the Bend Arch-Ft. Worth Basin, and Eagle Ford in the Western Gulf Basin) to address the following questions: (1) do changes from reaction with CO 2 and fluids at the micrometer and nanometer scale alter flow pathways and, in turn, impact hydrocarbon production, CO 2 storage, and seal integrity and (2) can CO 2 or fluid reactivity be predicted based on physical or chemical properties of shale formations? Experiments were conducted at 40 °C and 10.3 MPa to characterize the interaction between CO 2 and shale using X-ray diffraction (XRD), carbon and sulfur analysis, in situ Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), feature relocation scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy-dispersive spectroscopy (SEM-EDS), mercury (Hg) intrusion porosimetry, and Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) surface area and pore size analysis coupled with density functional theory (DFT) methods. Changes in mechanical, physical, and flow properties of shale cores due to CO 2 exposure were addressed using a New England Research Autolab 1500 and Xenon X-ray computed tomography (CT) scanning. Results showed that CO 2 did not promote significant reactivity with the shale if water was not present; only shales with swelling clays or residual interstitial pore water reacted with dry CO 2 to promote reactivity in shale. When water was added as a reactant, CO 2 formed carbonic acid and reacted with the shale to dissolve carbonate pockets, etched and pitted the shale matrix surfaces, and increased the microporosity and decreased nanoporosity. Porosity and permeability increased appreciably in core shale samples after exposure to CO 2 saturated fluid due ...