.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Evaluating subsea-capping-stack usage for CO2 blowouts
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
DOI：10.1016/j.geoen.2026.214412.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
This study evaluates the suitability of using existing subsea capping stack (SCS) designs to control CO2 blowouts. The physics behind controlling a methane (i.e., CH4) subsea blowout using an SCS is well understood by the oil and gas industry. The same, however, is not true for CO2, whose thermophysical properties differ greatly from CH4. Hence, the risks associated with halting a CO2 blowout with an SCS are not clearly understood. Understanding such risks, though, is an indispensable step in preparing for the future possibility of a subsea CO2 blowout. Numerical simulations of blowout/SCS scenarios for various combinations of water depth (300 or 762 m), blowout rate (4.25, 8.93 or 10.49 MMm3/d), reservoir fluid (CO2 or CH4), and SCS configuration (three variants) are conducted, with the goal of generating a broad spectrum of results for understanding the differences between installing an SCS on CO2 versus CH4 blowouts. Each simulation covers the full progression of a blowout (from initial reservoir fluid influx to final closure of the SCS). Multiphase computational fluid dynamic (CFD) modeling of the entire sequence is performed using a version of the OLGA model, newly applied to CO2 well-control events. High-rate CO2 blowouts in shallow water create conditions conducive to significant hydrate and ice formation, whereas CH4 blowouts do not (under any condition). The configuration of an SCS has little impact on outcomes. This suggests that using an SCS to control a shallow-water, high-rate CO2 blowout may encounter difficulties, implying that relief wells may be a necessary back-up option.
Keywords:
Subsea
Blowout
CO2
Capping stack
Sequestration
Journal
G
IF:
4.6
Papers:
211
Citations:
0
Organization
No organization information available