Monitoring Network Meeting Report

Publication Overview

The IEAGHG Monitoring Network aims to assess new technologies and techniques in the monitoring of CO₂ storage, determine the limitations, accuracy and applicability of monitoring techniques, disseminate information from research and pilot storage projects around the world, develop extensive monitoring guidelines for the different sub-categories of geological storage; oil and gas fields, unmineable coal seams, and saline aquifers covering the differing conditions and reservoir properties encountered globally as well as to engage with relevant regulatory bodies.

Publication Summary

Co-hosted by Louisiana State University’s (LSU) Petroleum Engineering Department and the Gulf Coast Carbon Center (GCCC) in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this was the 14th in-person meeting of this IEAGHG research network and for the first time in the Network’s history, the event was split into two separate themes to reflect the importance and timeliness of not only technical knowledge but also regulatory issues. Day 1 encompassed a technical deep-dive into developments in monitoring techniques, methods and processes and day 2 encouraged regulators and technical experts to ruminate on the details of regulatory topics that need addressing in the CO₂ monitoring sphere. 

This meeting aimed to determine the limitations of CO₂ storage monitoring technologies available today, facilitate the exchange of ideas and experiences in monitoring, and promote the development of improved designs and implementation of monitoring guidelines. Technical sessions involved presentations from international experts and discussions on areas such as fibre optics, low-cost monitoring for subsurface seismic and non-seismic methods, offshore environmental monitoring, terrestrial monitoring and automation and integration of MMV.

The regulatory-focused day delved into framing the problem, environmental aspects, requirements and societal considerations of monitoring. The conclusions from the first day included: noting the significant advances in geophysics, adding maturity to plume monitoring; with carbonate geology – monitoring advances and needs are specific to this geology; there are strong tools for marine monitoring and attribution of seabed leakage; what monitoring is needed depends on what is needed by different users, e.g. environmental risk, accounting, business risk – trespass, liability for incident, allegation, economic risk, public acceptance/assurance; noted AUV developments and that small USV are commercial; combining permanent and/or mobile (on demand) – keep focussed on why and the value; hubs may have different CO₂ stream compositions with monitoring implications. Recommendations included: that developments in monitoring should be acceptable by regulators; development of traffic lights for monitoring measurements to trigger responses using weight of evidence and multiple lines of evidence; need for public data on CO₂ in overburden; it would be good to have a global database on environmental parameters.

The highlights of the regulatory day included: that looking into US Class I well permits and data provides much useful information and learnings for Class VI; speeding up the closure process would be very site specific and still determined by the regulator; and there was great input from regulators, particularly the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources. The workshop identified unmet needs which included: public communications; updating regulations and guidance to include technology/technique developments; more case studies on wellbore integrity and there would be benefit from having a test site; monitoring strategies for wells that cannot be re-entered; clearer metrics on groundwater monitoring for response to allegations; groundwater to take brine into account, as well as CO₂; how to better handle pressure space; delineate the area of review based on pressure and corrective action; brine monitoring; whose responsibility is induced seismicity due to pressure space interactions; non-well based pressure 2 monitoring; better fault characterisation – barrier, transmission, monitoring strategies; how to define the offshore “area of review” and pressure management; and to reach out better to journalists and social media.