Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Sep 2;5(36):23429-23436.
doi: 10.1021/acsomega.0c03383. eCollection 2020 Sep 15.

Study of CO2 Enhancing Shale Gas Recovery Based on Competitive Adsorption Theory

Affiliations

Study of CO2 Enhancing Shale Gas Recovery Based on Competitive Adsorption Theory

Ying Sun et al. ACS Omega. .

Abstract

As an indispensable part of unconventional natural gas resources, the shale reservoir is huge and widely distributed. It is of great significance to study how to enhance the shale gas recovery for improving the energy structure. In order to solve the problem of low gas production rate and long recovery period in the process of shale gas production, in this paper, the influences of pressure, temperature, moisture, and gas type on isothermal adsorption and desorption of shale gas are analyzed based on shale adsorption and desorption experiments, and the adsorption and desorption abilities of CO2 and CH4 in shale are compared to verify the feasibility of CO2 enhancing shale gas recovery. Depletion production experiments and CO2 injection experiments with different injection pressures (6 and 7 MPa), different injection rates (5, 10 and 20 mL/min), and different injection amounts are carried out. The mechanism of CO2 enhancing shale gas recovery is proposed, and the parameters of CO2 injection are optimized. The results show that the adsorption capacity of CH4 increases with the increase in pressure and the decrease in temperature and moisture in a certain range. Under the same experimental conditions, the sorting of adsorption capacity is CO2 > CH4 > N2, while desorption capacity is CH4 > CO2 > N2. The desorption curves of the three gases lag behind the adsorption curves, in which the lag phenomenon of CO2 is most obvious. The ultimate recovery of depletion production ranges from 66 to 73%. CO2 injection can effectively increase the gas production rate of CH4, and it can also keep the cumulative gas production of CH4 growing steadily and rapidly. Within a certain range, CH4 recovery increases with the increase in CO2 injection pressure, the injection rate, and injection amount, but its increase range is related to the porosity and permeability of shale.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Adsorption and desorption of samples.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Adsorption and desorption isotherms with different moisture.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Isothermal adsorption and desorption of CO2, CH4, and N2.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Relationship between methane production rate and time.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Relationship between methane production rate and time.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Relationship between the methane production rate and time.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Recovery of different injection amounts of CO2.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Diagram of the adsorption and desorption experimental system. 1—Sample room, 2—standard room, 3—calibration room, 4, 5—high-pressure gas cylinders, 6—vacuum pump, 7—pressure relief valve, 8–14—valve, 15—pressure transducer, 16—constant temperature water bath, 17—data acquisition system.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Diagram of shale gas exploitation experimental system. 1—methane cylinder, 2—carbon dioxide cylinder, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 22, 24—valve, 5—constant temperature system, 6—pressure gage, 9—pistons container, 11—constant-flux pump, 12—distilled water, 14—standard room, 16—vacuum pump, 17—pressure sensor, 19—sample room, 20—temperature sensor, 21—data collection system, 23—BPR, 25—NaOH, 26—distilled water, 27—measuring cylinder.

References

    1. Dong Z.; Holditch S.; McVay D.; Ayers W. B. Global Unconventional Gas Resource Assessment. SPE Econ. Manag. 2012, 4, 222–234. 10.2118/148365-PA. - DOI
    1. Qian B.; Zhang J.; Zhu J.; Fang Z.; Kou S.; Chen R. Application of Zipper-Fracturing of Horizontal Cluster Wells in the Changning Shale Gas Pilot Zone, Sichuan Basin. Nat. Gas Ind. 2015, 2, 181–184. 10.1016/j.ngib.2015.07.008. - DOI
    1. Yuan J.; Luo D.; Feng L. A Review of the Technical and Economic Evaluation Techniques for Shale Gas Development. Appl. Energy 2015, 148, 49–65. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.03.040. - DOI
    1. Jenkins C. D.; Boyer C. M. Coalbed- and Shale-Gas Reservoirs. J. Pet. Technol. 2008, 60, 92–99. 10.2118/103514-JPT. - DOI
    1. Rivard C.; Lavoie D.; Lefebvre R.; Séjourné S.; Lamontagne C.; Duchesne M. An Overview of Canadian Shale Gas Production and Environmental Concerns. Int. J. Coal Geol. 2014, 126, 64–76. 10.1016/j.coal.2013.12.004. - DOI