There are several options of gases to be re injected. Some companies re-inject natural hydrocarbon gas. It has commercial value and I am wondering why do not they inject CO2. Injecting natural gas seems to me like injecting money. Why do they do so. Is it because of its difficulty to capture? Is it because simply company has no source of cheap CO2?
Dear Abuov,
You have yourself answered your own question. Yes, CO2 is difficult to capture. And yes, apart from North America, I highly doubt the possibility of having large point sources of CO2 (i.e. power plants etc.) in the near vicinity of the oilfield. This makes CO2 injection (which is a very attractive proposition, at least on paper) nonviable for most injection projects.
Most companies find it easy to inject the available natural gas down the wellbore in absence of a viable mechanism to com-modify that gas.
The final answer on what should be injected is determined not only by science but also by economics and convenience.
It's related to the availability of the gas source, and normally APG is used because it's economic.
Gas source, if u hadboth, you´d try to separate as much CO2 as you could to inject/re-inject (tipically "dragging" 5-10% combustible gas)
- Badges
- Science topic