CO2 Sequestration [Capillary Trapping]
1. Feasible to capture the primary capillary trapping mechanisms (a) Bypass trapping (which happens, when the moving menisci of the bulk fluid traverse around a pore due to its lower entry capillary pressure threshold; and such trapping becomes dominant when the Capillary number increases from very low [10^-06] to intermediate [10^-06 to 10^-04]; and in this case, the bypassing pore is generally assumed to become completely filled by the invading-phase) and (b) Snap-off (which happens, when the wetting film in front of the bulk front thickens and detaches from pore corners, associated with capillary instability) during imbibition @ field-scale?
2. Under what circumstances, Land’s model {which provide 1st-order estimates of CO2 capillary trapping following imbibition of the brine as a function of the initial CO2 saturation} gets consolidated to a simple endpoint relationship, where, characteristic trapping constant remains inversely related with the maximum CO2 saturation (following the completion of a primary imbibition cycle) @ field-scale?
3. Whether the presence of surface roughness @ sub pore-scale would enhance CO2 trapping?
If so, then, how exactly surface roughness should be taken into account towards estimating CO2 capillary trapping, on top of considering pore topology, IFT, viscosity and flow rate?
4. When exactly capillary forces begin to influence the percolation behavior of the CO2-phase?
Do we still require to consider the effect of viscous forces in order to capture the percolation effects of surface roughness on capillary trapping?
5. Whether, mineral surface roughness alone could trigger capillary trapping?
In such cases, even the conventional data set including IFT, contact-angle and viscosity ratio – would not remain to be sufficient?
Suresh Kumar Govindarajan Professor (HAG) IIT-Madras
https://home.iitm.ac.in/gskumar/
https://iitm.irins.org/profile/61643
18-July-2024