Hot Rocks in Australia - National Outlook Hill, A.J.1, Goldstein, B.A1 and Budd, A.R.2 goldstein.barry@saugov.sa.gov.au hill.tonyj@saugov.sa.gov.au Petroleum & Geothermal Group, PIRSA Level 6, 101 Grenfell St.Adelaide SA 50001 Anthony.Budd@ga.gov.au Onshore Energy & Minerals Division, Geoscience Australia, GPO Box 378 Canberra ACT 26012 Abstract: Evidence of climate change and knowledge of enormous hot rock resources are factors stimulating growth in geothermal energy research, including exploration, proof-of-concept appraisals, and development of demonstration pilot plant projects in Australia. In the six years since the grant of the first Geothermal Exploration Licence (GEL) in Australia, 16 companies have joined the hunt for renewable and emissions-free geothermal energy resources in 120 licence application areas covering ~ 67,000 km2 in Australia. The associated work programs correspond to an investment of $570 million, and that tally excludes deployment projects assumed in the Energy Supply Association of Australia's scenario for 6.8% (~ 5.5 GWe) of Australia's base-load power coming from geothermal resources by 2030. Australia's geothermal resources fall into two categories: hydrothermal (from relatively hot groundwater) and the hot fractured rock i.e. Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS). Large-scale base-load electricity generation in Australia is expected to come predominantly from Enhanced Geothermal systems. Geologic factors that determine the extent of EGS plays can be generalised as: - source rock availability, in the form of radiogenic, high heat-flow basement rocks (mostly granites); - low thermal-conductivity insulating rocks overlying the source rocks, to provide thermal traps; - the presence of permeable fabrics within insulating and basement rocks, that can be enhanced to create heat-exchange reservoirs; and - a practical depth-range, limited by drilling and completion technologies (defining a base) and necessary heat exchange efficiency (defining a top). A national EGS resource assessment and a road-map for the commercialisation of Australia's EGSs are expected to be published in 2008. The poster will provide a synopsis of investment frameworks and geothermal energy projects underway and planned in Australia.

Covering an area of approximately 247 000km2, the Galilee Basin is a significant feature of central Queensland. Three main depocentres contain several hundred metres of Late Carboniferous to Middle Triassic sediments. Sedimentation in the Galilee Basin was dominated by fluvial to lacustrine depositional systems. This resulted in a sequence of sandstones, mudstones, siltstones, coals and minor tuff in what was a relatively shallow intracratonic basin with little topographic relief. Forty years or more of exploration in the Galilee Basin has failed to discover any economic accumulations of hydrocarbons, despite the presence of apparently fair to very good reservoirs and seals in both the Permian and Triassic sequence. Despite some relatively large distances (upwards of 500km) between sources and sinks, previous and ongoing work on the Galilee Basin suggests that it has potential to sequester a significant amount of Queensland's carbon dioxide emissions. Potential reservoirs include the Early Permian Aramac Coal Measures, the Late Permian Colinlea Sandstone and the Middle Triassic Clematis Sandstone. These are sealed by several intraformational and local seals as well as the regional Triassic Moolayember Formation. With few suitable structural traps and little faulting throughout the Galilee sequence, residual trapping within saline reservoir is the most likely mechanism for storing CO2. The current study is aimed at building a sound geological model of the basin through activities such as detailed mapping, well correlation, and reservoir and seal analysis leading to reservoir simulations to gain a better understanding of the basin.

The decision at the 2011 United Nations climate change meeting in Durban to accept CCS as a CDM project activity was truly historic and long overdue. The United Nations Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) allows emission reduction projects in developing countries to earn certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2. CERs can be traded and sold, and used by developed countries to meet part of their emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol. The intention of the mechanism is to stimulate sustainable development and emission reductions, while providing developed countries with some flexibility in how they achieve their emission reduction targets. The CDM allows developed countries to invest in emission reductions at lowest cost. Since its inception, the CDM has been identified as a means to reduce the cost of CCS projects and so initiate more projects. After five years of negotiations to get CCS accepted as a CDM project activity, the Cancun Decision (2010) put in place a work program to address issues of general concern before CCS could be included in the CDM. The 2010 work program consisted of submissions, a synthesis report, a technical workshop, and concluded with the UNFCCC Secretariat producing draft 'modalities and procedures' describing comprehensive requirements for CCS projects within the CDM. This twenty page 'rulebook' provided the basis for negotiations in Durban. The challenging negotiations, lasting over 32 hours, concluded on 9th December, 2012, with Parties agreeing to the text specifying the modalities and procedures for CCS as CDM project activities. The provisions of the Durban Decision (2011) cover a range of technical issues including site selection and characterisation, risk and safety assessment, monitoring, liabilities, verification and certification, environmental and social impact assessments, responsibilities for non-permanence, and timing of the CDM-project end. etc

Australia has been making major progress towards early deployment of carbon capture and storage from natural gas processing and power generation sources. This paper will review, from the perspective of a government agency, the current state of various Australian initiatives and the advances in technical knowledge up until the 2010 GHGT conference. In November 2008, the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Bill 2006 was passed by the Australian Parliament and established a legal framework to allow interested parties to explore for and evaluate storage potential in offshore sedimentary basins that lie in Australian Commonwealth waters. As a result of this Act, Australia became the first country in the world, in March 2009, to open exploration acreage for storage of greenhouse gases under a system that closely mirrors the well-established Offshore Petroleum Acreage Release. The ten offshore areas offered for geological storage assessment are significantly larger than their offshore petroleum counterparts to account for, and fully contain, the expected migration pathways of the injected GHG substances. The co-incidence of the 2009 Global Financial Crisis may have reduced the number of prospective CCS projects that were reported to be in the 'pipe-line' and the paper examines the implications of this apparent outcome. The Carbon Storage Taskforce has brought together both Australian governments technical experts to build a detailed assessment of the perceived storage potential of Australia's sedimentary basins. This evaluation has been based on existing data, both on and offshore. A pre-competitive exploration programme has also been compiled to address the identified data gaps and to acquire, with state funding, critical geological data which will be made freely available to encourage industrial participation in the search for commercial storage sites.

No abstract available

Quantification of leakage into the atmosphere from geologically stored CO2 is achievable by means of atmospheric monitoring techniques if the position of the leak can be located and the perturbation above the background concentration is sufficiently large for discrimination. Geoscience Australia and the CO2CRC have recently constructed a site in northern Canberra for the controlled release of greenhouse gases. This facility enables the simulation of leak events and provides an opportunity to investigate techniques for the detection and quantification of emissions of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) into the atmosphere under controlled conditions. The facility is modelled on the ZERT controlled release facility in Montana. The first phase of the installation is complete and has supported an above ground, point source, release experiment (e.g. simulating leakage from a compromised well). Phase 2 involves the installation of a shallow underground horizontal well for line source CO2 release experiments and this will be installed during the first half of 2011. A release experiment was conducted at the site to explore the application of a technique, termed atmospheric tomography, to simultaneously determine the location and emission rate of a leak when both are unknown. The technique was applied to the release of two gas species, N2O and CO2, with continuous sampling of atmospheric trace gas concentrations from 8 locations 20m distant from a central release point and measurement of atmospheric turbulence and dispersive conditions. The release rate was 1.10 ± 0.02 g min-1 for N2O and 58.5 ± 0.4 g min-1 for CO2 (equivalent to 30.7 ± 0.2 tonnes CO2 yr-1). Localisation using both release species occurred within 0.5 m (2% error) of the known location. Determination of emission rate was possible to within 7% for CO2 and 5% for N2O.

Geological storage of CO2 is a leading strategy for large-scale greenhouse gas emission mitigation. Monitoring and verification is important for assuring that CO2 storage poses minimal risk to people's health and the environment, and that it is effective at reducing anthropogenic CO2 emissions. Eddy Covariance (EC) has been proposed as a long-term monitoring solution for geological storage projects and is considered suitable for monitoring areas 1000 - 100,000 m2 in size. Eddy Covariance is a key micrometeorological technique which has traditionally been used for assessing ecosystem exchange of CO2 in a variety of natural and agricultural settings. It measures the vertical transfer of scalar variables such as CO2 via eddies from upwind of the instrumentation, and correlates the measured CO2 flux to the upwind source area based on several key assumptions. These assumptions include that the upwind source area is homogeneous, flat and uniform, which in turn requires that horizontal gradients in CO2 concentration are zero and that horizontal and vertical gradients in the covariance of CO2 concentration and orthogonal wind directions are zero. Work undertaken at the GA-CO2CRC Gininnderra controlled release facility, where CO2 is released from the shallow subsurface (at 2 m depth), suggests that CO2 leakage in the near subsurface will follow paths of least resistance up to the surface. Similar observations have been observed at the ZERT facility in Montana and CO2 Field Lab in Norway. This leads to CO2 leaks having localised, patchy surface expression, rather than a diffuse wide-scale leak which one typically expects (Lewicki et al. 2010). The implication of this is that the source area for a leak is highly inhomogeneous, meaning the magnitudes of CO2 flux values measured using EC are grossly unreliable. These limitations were discussed in Leuning et al.'s (2008) review on CCS atmospheric monitoring technologies yet are not addressed in much of the recent EC leak quantification literature. This presentation will present findings from the first subsurface release at the CO2CRC facility in Canberra (March - May 2012), where EC data was analysed for application in leak detection and quantification. The CO2 release rate was 144 kg/d. Eddy Covariance was successfully used to detect the leak by comparing CO2 fluxes in the direction of the leak to baseline wind sectors. Median CO2 fluxes in the leak direction were 9.1 µmol/m2/s, while the median background flux was 1.0 µmol/m2/s. Separate measurements taken using a soil flux meter found that the daytime background soil flux had a median flux of 1.8 µmol/m2/s but the peak soil flux over a leak was 1100 µmol/m2/s. Quantification and spatially locating the leak were attempted, but due to the problem of source area inhomogeneity, no substantive progress could be made. How an inhomogeneous source area contributes to 'lost' CO2 from the system, through advection and diffusion, will be discussed, coupled with suggestions for how these parameters can be evaluated in future experimental design. Leuning R., Etheridge D., Luhar A., and Dunse B., 2008. Atmospheric monitoring and verification technologies for CO2 sequestration. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2(3), 401-414. Lewicki J. L., Hilley G. E., Dobeck L., and Spangler L., 2010. Dynamics of CO2 fluxes and concentrations during a shallow subsurface CO2 release. Environmental Earth Sciences, 60(2), 285-297. Presented at the 2014 Australian Earth Sciences Convention (AESC)

Note: A more recent version of this product is available. This point dataset contains the major power stations in Australia including all those that feed into the electricity transmission network.

A short animation of an atmospheric simulation of methane emissions from a coal mine (produced using TAPM) compared to actual methane concentrations detected by the Atmospheric Monitoring Station, Arcturus in Central Queensland. It illustrates the effectiveness of both the detection and simulation techniques in the monitoring of atmospheric methane emissions. The animation shows a moving trace of both the simulated and actual recorded emissions data, along with windspeed and direction indicators. Some data provided by CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research.

A Bayesian inversion technique to determine the location and strength of trace gas emissions from a point source in open air is presented. It was tested using atmospheric measurements of nitrous oxide (N2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2) released at known rates from a source located within an array of eight evenly spaced sampling points on a 20 m radius circle. The analysis requires knowledge of concentration enhancement downwind of the source and the normalized, three-dimensional distribution (shape) of concentration in the dispersion plume. The influence of varying background concentrations of ~1% for N2O and ~10% for CO2 was removed by subtracting upwind concentrations from those downwind of the source to yield only concentration enhancements. Continuous measurements of turbulent wind and temperature statistics were used to model the dispersion plume. The analysis localized the source to within 0.8 m of the true position and the emission rates were determined to better than 3% accuracy. This technique will be useful in assurance monitoring for geological storage of CO2 and for applications requiring knowledge of the location and rate of fugitive emissions.