In March and April, 2012, Geoscience Australia undertook a seabed characterisation survey, aimed at supporting the assessment of CO2 storage potential of the Vlaming Sub-basin, Western Australia. The survey, undertaken as part of the National CO2 Infrastructure Plan program was targeted to provide an understanding of the link between the deep geological features of the area and the seabed, and connectivity between them as possible evidence for seal integrity. Data was acquired in two sections of the Rottnest Shelf lying above the regional seal - the South Perth Shale - and the underlying potentially CO2-suitable reservoir, the Gage Sandstone. Seabed samples were taken from 43 stations, and included 89 seabed grab samples. A total of 653 km2 of multibeam and backscatter data was obtained. Chirper shallow sub-bottom profile data was acquired concurrently. 6.65 km2 of side-scan sonar imagery was also obtained. The two surveyed areas, (Area 1 and Area 2), are set within a shallow sediment starved shelf setting. Area 2, situated to the southwest of Rottnest Island, is characterised by coralline red algal (rhodolith) beds, with ridges and mounds having significant rhodolith accumulations. The geomorphic expression of structural discontinuities outcropping at the seabed is evident by the presence of linear fault-like structures notable in Area 1, and north-south trending lineaments in Area 2. North-south trending structural lineaments on the outer section of Area 2 have in places, mounds standing 4-5 m above the seafloor in water depths of 80-85 m. Although there are apparent spatial correlations between seabed geomorphology and the structural geology of the basin, the precise relationship between ridges and mounds that are overlain by rhodolith accumulations, fluid seepage, and Vlaming Sub-basin geology is uncertain, and requires further work to elucidate any links.

The economics of the storage of CO2 in underground reservoirs in Australia have been analysed as part of the Australian Petroleum Cooperative Research Centre's GEODISC program. The analyses are based on cost estimates generated by a CO2 storage technical / economic model developed at the beginning of the GEODISC project. They also rely on data concerning the characteristics of geological reservoirs in Australia. The uncertainties involved in estimating the costs of such projects are discussed and the economics of storing CO2 for a range of CO2 sources and potential storage sites across Australia are presented. The key elements of the CO2 storage process and the methods involved in estimating the costs of CO2 storage are described and the CO2 storage costs for a hypothetical but representative storage project in Australia are derived. The effects of uncertainties inherent in estimating the costs of storing CO2 are shown. The analyses show that the costs are particularly sensitive to parameters such as the CO2 flow rate, the distance between the source and the storage site, the physical properties of the reservoir and the market prices of equipment and services. Therefore, variations in any one of these inputs can lead to significant variation in the costs of CO2 storage. Allowing for reasonable variations in all the inputs together in a Monte Carlo simulation of any particular site, then a large range of total CO2 storage costs is possible. The effect of uncertainty for the hypothetical representative storage site is illustrated. The impact of storing other gases together with CO2 is analysed. The other gases include methane, hydrogen sulphide, nitrogen, nitrous oxides and oxides of sulphur, all of which potentially could be captured together with CO2. The effect on storage costs when varying quantities of other gases are injected with the CO2 is shown. Based on the CO2 storage estimates and the published costs capturing CO2 from industrial processes, the econ

In July 2010 Geoscience Australia and CSIRO Marine & Atmospheric Research jointly commissioned a new atmospheric composition monitoring station (' Arcturus') in central Queensland. The facility is designed as a proto-type remotely operated `baseline monitoring station' such as could be deployed in areas that are likely targets for commercial scale carbon capture and geological storage (CCS). It is envisaged that such a station could act as a high quality reference point for later in-fill, site based, atmospheric monitoring associated with geological storage of CO2. The station uses two wavelength scanned cavity ringdown instruments to measure concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), water vapour and the isotopic signature (?13C) of CO2. Meteorological parameters such as wind speed and wind direction are also measured. In combination with CSIRO's TAPM (The Air Pollution Model), data will be used to understand the local variations in CO2 and CH4 and the contributions of natural and anthropogenic sources in the area to this variability. The site is located in a region that supports cropping, grazing, cattle feedlotting, coal mining and gas production activities, which may be associated with fluxes of CO2 and CH4. We present in this paper some of the challenges found during the installation and operation of the station in a remote, sub-tropical environment and how these were resolved. We will also present the first results from the site coupled with preliminary modelling of the relative contribution of large point source anthropogenic emissions and their contribution to the background.

CO2CRC Project 1 - Site Specific Studies for Geological Storage of carbon Dioxide Part 1: Southeast Queensland CO2 Storage Sites - Basin Desk-top, Geological Interpretation and Reservoir Simulation of Regional Model

Many industries and researchers have been examining ways of substantially reducing greenhouse gas emissions. No single method is likely to be a panacea, however some options do show considerable promise. Geological sequestration is one option that utilises mature technology and has the potential to sequester large volumes of CO2. In Australia geological sequestration has been the subject of research for the last 2? years within the Australian Petroleum Cooperative Research Centre's GEODISC program. A portfolio of potential geological sequestration sites (?sinks?) has been identified across all sedimentary basins in Australia, and these have been compared with nearby known or potential CO2 emission sources. These sources have been identified by incorporating detailed analysis of the national greenhouse gas emission databases with other publicly available data, a process that resulted in recognition of eight regional emission nodes. An earlier generic economic model for geological sequestration in Australia has been updated to accommodate the changes arising from this process of ?source to sink? matching. Preliminary findings have established the relative attractiveness of potential injection sites through a ranking approach. It includes the ability to accommodate the volumes of sequesterable greenhouse gas emissions predicted for the adjacent region, the costs involved in transport, sequestration and ongoing operations, and a variety of technical geological risks. Some nodes with high volumes of emissions and low sequestration costs clearly appear to be suitable, whilst others with technical and economic issues appear to be problematic. This assessment may require further refinement once findings are completed from the GEODISC site-specific research currently underway.

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.

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.

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.

Questions often asked by the public in regard to the concept of CO2 storage include; "But won?t it leak?", and "How long will it stay down there?". The natural environment of petroleum systems documents many of the processes which will influence CO2 storage outcomes, and the likely long (geological) timeframes that will operate. Thousand of billions of barrels of hydrocarbons have been trapped and stored in geological formations in sedimentary basins for 10s to 100s of millions of years, as has substantial volumes of CO2 that has been generated through natural processes. Examples from Australia and major hydrocarbon provinces of the world are documented, including those basins with major accumulations that are currently trapped in their primary reservoir, those that have accumulated hydrocarbons in the primary reservoir and then through tectonic activity spilled them to other secondary traps or released the hydrocarbons to the atmosphere, and those that generated hydrocarbons but for which no effective traps were in place for hydrocarbons to accumulate. Some theoretical modelling of the likelihood of meeting stabilisation targets using geological storage are based on leakage rates which are implausibly high when compared to observations from viable storage locations in the natural environment, and do not necessarily account for the likelihood of delay times for leakage to the atmosphere or the timeframe in which geological events will occur. Without appropriate caveats, they potentially place at risk the public perception of how efficient and effective appropriately selected geological reservoirs could be for storage of CO2. If the same rigorous methods, technology and skills that are used to explore for, find and produce hydrocarbon accumulations are now used for finding safe and secure storage sites for CO2, the traps so identified can be expected to contain the CO2 after injection for similar periods of time as that in which hydrocarbons and CO2 have been stored in the natural environment.

A geomechanical assessment of the Naylor Field, Otway Basin has been undertaken by the Cooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies (CO2CRC) to investigate the possible geomechanical effects of CO2 injection and storage. The study aims to: - further constrain the geomechanical model (in-situ stresses and rock strength data) developed by van Ruth and Rogers (2006), and; - evaluate the risk of fault reactivation and failure of intact rock. The stress regime in the onshore Victorian Otway Basin is: - strike-slip if maximum horizontal stress is calculated using frictional limits, and; - normal if maximum horizontal stress is calculated using the CRC-1 leak-off test. The NW-SE maximum horizontal stress orientation (142ºN) determined from a resistivity image log of the CRC-1 borehole is broadly consistent with previous estimates and verifies a NW-SE maximum horizontal stress orientation in the Otway Basin. The estimated maximum pore pressure increase (Delta-P) which can be sustained within the target reservoir (Waarre Formation Unit C) without brittle deformation (i.e. the formation of a fracture) was estimated to be 10.9 MPa using maximum horizontal stress determined by frictional limits and 14.5 MPa using maximum horizontal stress determined using CRC-1 extended leak-off test data. The maximum pore pressure increase which can be sustained in the seal (Belfast Mudstone) was estimated to be 6.3 MPa using maximum horizontal stress determined by frictional limits and 9.8 MPa using maximum horizontal stress determined using CRC-1 extended leak-off test data. The propensity for fault reactivation was calculated using the FAST (Fault Analysis Seal Technology) technique, which determines fault reactivation propensity by estimating the increase in pore pressure required to cause reactivation (Mildren et al., 2002). Fault reactivation propensity was calculated using two fault strength scenarios; cohesionless faults (C = 0; ? = 0.60) and healed faults (C = 5.4; ?= 0.78). The orientations of faults with high and low reactivation propensity are similar for healed and cohesionless faults. In addition, two methods of determining maximum horizontal stress were used; frictional limits and the CRC-1 extended leak-off test. Fault reactivation analyses differ as a result in terms of which fault orientations have high or low fault reactivation propensity. Fault reactivation propensity was evaluated for three key faults within the Naylor structure with known orientations. The fault segment with highest fault reactivation propensity in the Naylor Field is on the Naylor South Fault near the crest of the Naylor South sub-structure. Therefore, leakage of hydrocarbons from the greater Naylor structure may have occurred through past reactivation of the Naylor South Fault, thus accounting for the pre-production palaeo-column in the Naylor field. The highest reactivation propensity (for optimally-orientated faults) ranges from an estimated pore pressure increase (Delta-P) of 0.0 MPa to 28.6 MPa depending on assumptions made about maximum horizontal stress magnitude and fault strength. Nonetheless, the absolute values of Delta-P presented in this study are subject to large errors due to uncertainties in the geomechanical model. In particular, the maximum horizontal stress and rock strength are poorly constrained.