the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Solutions for Thermally-driven Reactive Transport and Porosity Evolution in Geothermal Systems (“Reactive Lauwerier Problem”)
Abstract. Subsurface non-isothermal fluid injection is a ubiquitous scenario in energy and water resources applications, which can lead to geochemical disequilibrium and thermally-driven solubility changes and reactions. Depending on the nature of the solubility of a mineral, the thermal change can lead to either mineral dissolution or precipitation (due to undersaturation or supersaturation conditions). Here, by considering this thermo-hydro-chemical scenario and by calculating the temperature-dependent solubility using a non-isothermal solution (the so-called Lauwerier solution), thermally-driven reactive transport solutions are derived for a confined aquifer. The coupled solutions, hereafter termed the “Reactive Lauwerier Problem”, are developed for axisymmetric and Cartesian symmetries, and additionally provide the porosity evolution in the aquifer. The solutions are then used to study two common cases: (I) hot CO2-rich water injection into carbonate aquifer; and (II) hot silica-rich water injection, leading to mineral dissolution and precipitation, respectively. We discuss the timescales of such fluid-rock interactions and the changes in hydraulic system properties. The solutions and findings here contribute to the understanding and management of subsurface energy and water resources, like aquifer thermal energy storage (ATES), aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and reinjection of used geothermal water. The solutions are also useful for developing and benchmarking complex coupled numerical codes.
- Preprint
(1243 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (extended)
-
RC1: 'Comment on hess-2023-307', Atefeh Vafaie, 05 Mar 2024
reply
This manuscript presents analytical and numerical solutions for thermo-hydro-chemical problems, i.e., non-isothermal fluid injection from two different types of injection sources into a thin confined aquifer. The authors use temperature-dependent solubility in the reactive flow formulation while predicting the thermal flow field using the Lauwerier solution. The derived solution is then applied to two well-known scenarios in carbonate and sandstone aquifers to predict the changes in porosity and subsequently, the permeability of the aquifers following the thermally driven mineral dissolution and precipitation. The manuscript is well written and well organized, and the topic is of interest to the geoscience society specifically for geo-energy applications. The authors have stated the problem clearly and raised the importance of the provided approach. I have some minor comments that I hope help the authors improve their work.
- I think the Introduction is a bit wordy and can be summarized in 4-5 concise paragraphs raising the main points.
- Considering the main model assumptions, how applicable/reliable is constant fluid density with temperature changes, in particular, for CO2 as the working fluid? The same question will be raised for the assumption of having the same heat capacity for both confining rocks and the aquifer.
- The authors have used a power-law relationship between the porosity and permeability of the aquifer to calculate the effective permeability. The authors have raised the limited predictive capability of these types of relations as well and mentioned that they solely used this type of relations to evaluate the general trends. Although this type of relationship could help evaluate the general trend of permeability evolution in mineral dissolution cases, they may not be the best choice for anti-correlated porosity-permeability changes in the systems when the percolating fluid has a weak capacity for dissolution or when we have mineral precipitation. Why did the authors not use other types of porosity-permeability relationships (e.g., a two-parameter exponential model) for sandstone aquifers where they expected to see mineral precipitation?
- It seems that the last sentence in the Figure 1 caption is not complete. Please review the caption and correct it.
- How reliable are the utilized values for the surface area of the carbonates and sandstones? Are they within the reported range for the surface area of these rocks in the literature?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2023-307-RC1
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
205 | 54 | 14 | 273 | 9 | 12 |
- HTML: 205
- PDF: 54
- XML: 14
- Total: 273
- BibTeX: 9
- EndNote: 12
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1