Evaluating the seismic risk of mineral carbon sequestration

Geologic carbon sequestration, in which carbon is captured and stored underground, has been proposed as one way to mitigate the climatic effects of carbon dioxide emissions. One method of geologic carbon sequestration is to inject carbon dioxide in aqueous solution into rocks. However, as the solution fills the pore space in the rocks, the fluid pressure on the rocks increases, potentially increasing the risk of earthquakes.

Another option would be to inject carbon dioxide solutions into mafic rocks; the in these rocks react with the carbon dioxide, leaving solid carbonate reaction products, which decrease the amount of pore fluid.

To determine how mineral carbonation reactions affect seismic risk, Yarushina and Bercovici created a simple model to see how these reactions influence stress on the rock during and after carbon dioxide injection. Their model shows that the chemical reactions reduce fluid pore pressure and distribute stress on the minerals over a larger area.

They conclude that mineral carbonation in mafic rock could minimize the seismic risk of by underground injection as long as fluid pumping rates do not exceed a critical value.


Explore further

Geochemist raises questions about carbon sequestration

More information: Mineral carbon sequestration and induced seismicity, Geophysical Research Letters, doi:10.1002/grl.50196, 2013 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50196/abstract
Journal information: Geophysical Research Letters

Citation: Evaluating the seismic risk of mineral carbon sequestration (2013, March 15) retrieved 19 May 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2013-03-seismic-mineral-carbon-sequestration.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
0 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Mar 15, 2013
A dead technology walking. And all this nonsense just to block the obvious solution: the nuclear option.

Mar 20, 2013
What is proposed here is a form of underground pollution. Causing increased damage to the rocks beneath. I was hoping that liquid carbon dioxide (under pressure) would be denser than water and so could push its way down under its own pressure and weight through water. But this is only the case when the temperature is below -20, which will have its own problems freezing the surrounding damp rock instead of pushing out the water.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more