Favorable Stratigraphic Conditions for Carbon Sequestration Exist in the Rocky Mountain Basins*

Ronald M. Drake II
1
and Sean T. Brennan


Search and Discovery Article #80274 (2012)**
Posted December 17, 2012

*Adapted from oral presentation given at AAPG Rocky Mountain Section meeting, Grand Junction, Colorado, 9-12 September 2012
**AAPG2012 Serial rights given by author. For all other rights contact author directly.

1
U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO (rmdrake@usgs.gov)
2
U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA (sbrennan@usgs.gov)

Abstract

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) was directed by the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (Public Law
110-140) to assess the potential geologic storage resources for carbon dioxide (CO
2
) within the United States. The USGS,
following its published, wholly probabilistic methodology for this national assessment, began these assessments in the Rocky
Mountain States in the Fall of 2010. The basic unit of assessment for the USGS methodology is the Storage Assessment Unit
(SAU), which consists of a storage formation and an overlying regional seal formation. The SAUs are defined by geologic
criteria, primarily based on depth, rock properties, and regional extents of the storage and seal formations. The methodology
requires that the storage formation be between 3,000 and 13,000 ft below ground surface. This minimum required depth
ensures that CO
2
will be supercritical. Within the Rocky Mountain basins, a significant portion of the Mesozoic section (such
as the Dakota Sandstone), fits within this interval. However, when rock properties indicate that CO
2
could be stored at depths
greater than 13,000 feet, a separate deep SAU is assessed. The areal extent of the storage formation and overlying seal are
required to be continuous and regional in extent. Most Rocky Mountain basins contain thick laterally extensive marine shales
like the Pierre Shale or Mowry Shale that would inhibit flow to superjacent strata. In some cases, the stratigraphy includes the
potential for multiple or stacked seals. During the assessment, the seal is evaluated for leakage potential and a minimum seal
thickness is defined. This minimum seal thickness must exist over the extent of the storage formation and no portion of the
SAU may exist where the seal is too thin or nonexistent. A final consideration is the salinity of the water within the pore space
of the storage formation; based on available salinity data and geologic models, estimates are made as to how much of the SAU
contains water that has less than 10,000 parts per million total dissolved solids. Much of the stratigraphic section in the Rocky
Mountain area is composed of porous and permeable sedimentary rock, though much of the rock contains low salinity waters.
The USGS Carbon Sequestration assessments have shown that the stratigraphy of the Rocky Mountain basins is conducive to
potential CO
2
sequestration, with some restrictions.

References

Brennan, S.T., R.C. Burruss, M.D. Merrill, P.A. Freeman, and L.F. Ruppert, 2010, A probabilistic assessment methodology for
the evaluation of geologic carbon dioxide storage: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 20101127, 31 p. Web accessed
30 November 2012. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1127.

Covault, J.A., M.L. Buursink, W.H. Craddock, M.D. Merrill, M.S. Blondes, M.A. Gosai, and P.A. Freeman, 2012, Geologic
framework for the national assessment of carbon dioxide storage resourcesBighorn Basin, Wyoming and Montana, Chapter
A: in P.D. Warwick, and M.D. Corum, (eds.), Geologic framework for the national assessment of carbon dioxide storage
resources: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 20121024-A, 23 p. Web accessed 30 November 2012.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1024/a/.

Duncan, D.W., and E.A. Morrissey, 2011, The concept of geologic carbon sequestration: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet
FS-2010-3122, 2 p. Web accessed 30 November 2012. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3122/pdf/FS2010-3122.pdf.

Energy Independence and Security Act, 2007: Web accessed 30 November 2012. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-
110publ140/html/PLAW-110publ140.htm

Higley, D.K., R.R. Charpentier, T.A. Cook , T.R. Klett, R.M. Pollastro, and J.W. Schmoker, 2002, Petroleum systems and
assessment of undiscovered oil and gas in the Denver Basin Province, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and
Wyoming-USGS Province 29: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-69-P, Chapter 1, 4 p.

Higley, D.K., and D.O. Cox, 2007, Oil and Gas Exploration and Development along the Front Range in the Denver Basin of
Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming, in D.K. Higley,
(ed.), Petroleum Systems and Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas in the Denver Basin Province, Colorado, Kansas,
Nebraska, South Dakota, and WyomingUSGS Province 39. U. S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-69-P, Version
1.0. Chapter 2. http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-p/REPORTS/69_P_CH_2.pdf

Huffman, C.A., Jr., 1995, San Juan Basin Province (022), in D.L. Gautier, G.L. Dolton, K.I. Takahashi, and K.L. Varnes,
(eds.), 1995 National assessment of United States oil and gas resources--Results, methodology, and supporting data: U.S.
Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-30, Release 2, one CD-ROM.
http://certmapper.cr.usgs.gov/data/noga95/prov22/text/prov22.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, 2010, Carbon sequestration atlas of the United States
and Canada (2d ed.; Atlas III): 162 p. Web accessed 30 November 2012.
http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon_seq/refshelf/atlasIII/.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008, Federal requirements under the underground injection control (UIC) program
for carbon dioxide (CO
2
) geologic sequestration (GS) wells: Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
proposed rule: Web accessed 30 November 2012. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2008/July/Day-25/w16626.htm.

U.S. Geological Survey Bighorn Basin Province Assessment Team, 2010, Executive Summary-Assessment of undiscovered
oil and gas resources of the Bighorn Basin Province, Wyoming and Montana, 2008, in Petroleum Systems and Geologic
Assessment of Oil and Gas in the Bighorn Basin Province, Wyoming and Montana: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data
Series DDS69V, Chapter 1, 7 p., accessed March 22, 2011. Web accessed 30 November 2012. http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-
069/dds-069-v/REPORTS/69_V_CH_1.pdf.

U.S. Geological Survey San Juan Basin Province Assessment Team, 2002, Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources
of the San Juan Basin Province of New Mexico and Colorado, 2002: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 147-02, 2 p., Web
accessed 30 November 2012. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-147-02/FS-147-02.pdf

Wyoming Geological Association, 1969, Wyoming stratigraphic nomenclature chart: Wyoming Geological Association 21st
Annual Field Conference Guidebook, p. 7.
Favorable Stratigraphic Conditions
for
Carbon Sequestration
Exist in the
Rocky Mountain Basins

Ronald M. Drake II
and
Sean T. Brennan


U.S. Geological Survey
Department of the Interior
Outline for Presentation
Introduction
Overview of legislation
Geologic sequestration model
Methodology
Assessment examples from Rocky Mountain basins
Summary
Energy Independence and Security Act 2007
TITLE VIICARBON CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION

Subtitle BCarbon Capture and Sequestration Assessment and Framework

SEC. 711. CARBON DIOXIDE SEQUESTRATION CAPACITY ASSESSMENT.
(b) METHODOLOGY shall develop a methodology for conducting an assessment
under subsection (f), taking into consideration
(1) the geographical extent of all potential sequestration formations in all States;
(2) the capacity of the potential sequestration formations;
(3) the injectivity of the potential sequestration formations;
(4) an estimate of potential volumes of oil and gas recoverable by injection and
sequestration of industrial carbon dioxide in potential sequestration formations;
(5) the risk associated with the potential sequestration formations; and
(6) the work done to develop the Carbon Sequestration Atlas (USDOE, 2010) of the
United States and Canada that was completed by Department of Energy (DOE).
(c) COORDINATION
(1) Federal Coordination
(2) State Coordination
For more information on the Energy Independence and
Security Act 2007
See: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2010/07/08/2010-
16236/energy-independence-and-security-act-pub-l-110-140
(Duncan and Morrissey , 2011)
What is Geologic CO
2
Sequestration?
, "
"
land uco
change
", "
Co nee!!! of Geologic Carbon
Contnbution to atmoslheric:
cO
2
by human activity
,.i ,
.
.
!
.
.
,
" '
"
,."
,,'
"
. '
"
,
,
Electricrty generation
using fossil fuels
Energy demand
(consumption)
EXPLANATION
.
.
.
, ,
TransportatlOn
,. ,. .. :.:.:.: COz storage volurne
Ga s flow
- Oill'lnd gas flow
Petrochemical and
cement manufacture and
heavyindu5try
Seal formation
Storage forrnati on
USGS Assessment Methodology for
Geologic CO
2
Storage Capacities
The USGS assessment focuses on CO
2
injected at depths of 3,000 to 13,000 ft
(deeper if rock properties indicate potential storage resources)

CO
2
(pressurized and supercritical at depths > 3000 ft) is buoyant and displaces existing
water, oil, or gas

Storage formation must have an overlying seal to retain buoyant CO
2

USGS assessment methodology addresses buoyant and residual trapping

Salinity of groundwater in storage formation must be >10,000 ppm TDS per
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations (U.S. EPA, 2008)

Assessment results provide probabilistic ranges of storage capacities


(Modified from Warwick, written comm., 2012 NETL CCUS)
Salinity of water in storage formation must be > 10,000 ppm TDS per
EPA regulations
(Modified from Brennan and others, 2010)
Muddy Sandstone
Mowry Shale
What are Favorable Conditions for Potential CO
2

Storage?

Storage Assessment Unit (SAU) with a minimum depth of 3,000 feet below
the surface

A storage formation with reservoir-quality rock properties

Storage formation must have a robust overlying seal that is

Impermeable
Regionally extensive
Maintains a minimum thickness (e.g. 75)
Rocky Mountain Basin Stratigraphy
Laramide Orogeny --
formed and preserved
structural basins


Alternating storage
unit/seal stratigraphy


Western Interior Seaway
sea level changes
(Regional)


Ancestral Rockies,
erosion



(Wyoming Geological Association, 1969)
= Regional Seal

= Reservoir
= Regional Seal

= Reservoir
(Wyoming Geological Association, 1969)
Examples of Cretaceous seals and reservoirs

UNHA....[O
Ut[,. Sit SH
SM
IUT[1t SM. MItTO $ "
ClO'lt/l.Y"
ClCN(ftLY-
TRIASSIC
Denver Basin in Colorado, Wyoming and Nebraska
Lytle and Plainview Formations
Muddy (J) Sandstone and
D sandstone
Greenhorn Limestone
Niobrara Formation,
Codell Sandstone
Member
Pierre Shale and
sandstone members
(Modified from Higley and Cox, 2007)
(Higley and others, 2002)
Regional seal (blue)
and reservoir (red)
San Juan Basin, New Mexico and Colorado
(Huffman, 1995)
(USGS, San Juan Basin Province Assessment Team, 2002)
1) Mesaverde Group w/ Lewis Shale seal
2) Gallup Ss. with upper Mancos Shale seal
3) Dakota Ss. with lower Mancos Shale seal
4) Entrada Ss. with Todilto Member (evaporite) seal
Regional seal (blue)
and reservoir (red)
PERMIAN
Bighorn Basin, Wyoming and Montana
(Covault and others, 2012)

6 standard SAUs and 6 deep SAUs were assessed
Regional seal (blue)
and reservoir (red)
Pryor
Mounbllna
v
WiM
q"Xl' _ River....,
Mountalnl5
GoIIIgo
....... I0I0.:. __
........ lqoaI_,.,....



Montana
.-
EXPLANATION
8i CllGIA 8"", Gitlin,
Ir ... USGS Nlllill .. 1
101'
Wyoming
8.. i. .. m SyttllW..
US. G,olo,inl $Uf\'8Y
.. io
"' ........ T ..... 20Hl
Eoten,
Paleocen,
Uppar

e
"
Lower
i!
Uppar
" 'l
T';assie
Pennsylvanian
Devontan
"
I I
Sundance Formati on
Goon EIIII
Formalton
Frontier Sandstone SAU
C5034011 1 tSlandard) and C503401 12 (Deep 1
Seal: Cody Shale
Reservoi r: Frontier Formlltion
Muddy Sandstooe SAU
C503401 09 IStandard) and C5034011 D (Deep 1
Seal ' Mowry Shale
Reservoir: Muddy Sandsto ne
Cloverly fOlmlllion SAU
C503401D7IStandard) and C503401D8 (Deep 1
I
Crow Mountai n SandSSone SAU
C50340105 !Standard) and C50340106 (Deep 1
Seal: Gypsum Spri ng Fametion
Reservoir: Crow Mountain Sandstone 01 the Chugwatel GfOUp
EIVay Member SAU
C50340103 ISland' rd) li nd C503401 04 (Deep 1
Seal ' Phosphoria Formation and Dinwoody Formation
Reservoir: Ervay Member 01 the Phosphoria Formalloo
Tenslup Sandstone SAU
C50340101 tSlandard) and C50340102 (Deep I
SeaL Phosphoria Formation
Reservoir: Tensleep Sandstone
500-1100 ft
(Covault and others, 2012)
Seal is impermeable Gypsum Spring Formation
(80200 ft thick).
Triassic Crow Mountain Sandstone of Chugwater Group

-'11_:.0 o..o.liItIIoIN _
_ ...... _-....,
.., ... ....... JII"'<'
r ___ IIW1I'IO.

'"
W\'
"

EXPLANAnON
C'IIW Mountai. SMdWIM C50J.,,15
__ 1
c._ Mounlai. s-.toloaol D ..
I> IUlUU.I ... '''''_I
c:J a ...... I'll.
W. II , ... lIation
....
_.-'

12-11
Eoten,
Paleocen.
Upper
Lower
Upp.r
Pervlsylvenia n
OQvoman

Frontier Sandstone SAU
FOI'matioll
Goon Egg
FormatIOn
C5034011 1lSlandardl and C5034011210eepl
Seal : Cody Shale
Reservoi r: Frontier Formati on
Muddy Sandstone SAU
C50340109IStandardl and C50340IU 10eeil l
Seal : Mowry Shale
Resel voir: Muddy Sandstono
Cloverly f c. malion SAU
C50340107ISlandardl and C503401[)8lOeell l
Seal: Ii Shale
Crow Mountain Sandstone SAU
C50340105lSlanda rdl and C5034010610eell l
Seal : Gypsum Formation
Reservoir: Crow Mounlain Sandst one ol lhe Chugwatef Group
Ervay MlimbtrSAU
C50340103lSlanda rdla nd C503401G410eepl
Seal -Phosphori a Formation and [Jinwoody FormatIon
Reservoi r: Ervay Member 01 the Phosphona Formation
Tensleep Sandstone SAU
C50340101lStandardl and C503401 0210eepl
Seal : Phosphoria Formation
Reservoir: Tensleep Sandstone
(Covault et al., 2012)
Lower Cretaceous Cloverly Formation
Seal is Thermopolis Shale (up to
230 ft thick).

1----,
r:-._ho ...1C-, ... " ....
._-_."..-
_ l lCOlJl .... -.o. ....
_'b ...... .. '"'
r.."''' ...... ''' 'III'l'N

,.
'"
.
'=
..
. .
, .

10 .... ,..
'.
. .....
....
' .....
.,.. r: s
.;.. : -. -. I,
'r.'
.... : ...
... ;. ......
"
"
EXf'lANATlON
CIOlfrty formal i. C!J(l:MDIDl
D,"' .. I .... ..... 001
Cloverty
...... 111
c:::::J eitl_nb,insl"".,"
]
Well p.n",,'" .... 11'1
.... _ ..... r .... ..
-... _ 4-11
1l-l1
Eaten,
Paleocene
Upper
Lower
Upper
Triassic
Pervlsylvenian
OQvoman

Frontier Sandstone SAU
fraro. Far abon
Wowry
Sundance FOI' matioll
Chugw 191
Goon Egg
FormatIOn
C5034011 1lS1andardland C5034011210eepl
Seal: Cody Shale
Reservoir: Frontier Formation
Muddy Sandstone SAU
C50340109IStandardl and C50340IU IDeepl
Seal: Mowry Shale
Reservoir; Muddy Sandstono
Cl overly fCf malion SAU
C503401 07 IStanda rdl and C503401[)8lQeepl
Seal: Ii Shale
Crow Mountlli n Sandstone SAU
C50340105 lStandardl and C5034010610eepl
Seal: Gypsum Formation
Reservoi r: Crow Mountain Sandstone 01 the Chugwatef Group
Ervay Member SAU
C50340103lSlandardl and C503401MIDeepl
Seal - Phosphoria Formation and [Jinwoody Formation
Reservoir: Ervay Member 01 the Phosphona Formation
Tensleep Sandstone SAU
C50340101 lStandardl and C503401021Deepl
Seal : Phosphoria Formation
Reser\loir: Tens leep Sa nd stone
36 basins assessed containing 200+ SAUs
USGS National Sequestration Assessment Summary
Sedimentary Basins and Assessed
Areas for CO, Storage
EXPLANATION
_ Assessed Areas
_ Evaluated Areas
~ Sedimentary Basins of the United States
Summary
Most Rocky Mountain basins contain rocks formed in a
multitude of depositional environments

The USGS national assessment has shown that many units
meet the criteria of the CO
2
storage assessment methodology
and may be suitable as potential CO
2
storage formations

The USGS CO
2
storage assessment methodology can estimate
the technically accessible CO
2
storage resource at a variety of
levels of uncertainty across a formation

The assessment process has been completed; final products
are expected in 2013
Also on the web at:

http://energy.usgs.gov
http://rmgsc.cr.usgs.gov/carbon_seq/
http://energy.er.usgs.gov/health_environment/co2_sequestration/
For more information contact:


Ron Drake
rmdrake@usgs.gov
303-236-5677

Sean Brennan
sbrennan@usgs.gov
703-648-6434

Peter Warwick
pwarwick@usgs.gov
703-648-6469

References
Brennan, S.T., Burruss, R.C., Merrill, M.D., Freeman, P.A., and Ruppert, L.F., 2010, A probabilistic assessment methodology for the evaluation of geologic carbon dioxide
storage: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 20101127, 31 p., available only at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1127.

Covault, J.A., Buursink, M.L., Craddock, W.H., Merrill, M.D., Blondes, M.S., Gosai, M.A., and Freeman, P.A., 2012, Geologic framework for the national assessment of carbon
dioxide storage resourcesBighorn Basin, Wyoming and Montana, chap. A of Warwick, P.D., and Corum, M.D., eds., Geologic framework for the national assessment of
carbon dioxide storage resources: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 20121024-A, 23 p., at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1024/a/.

Duncan, D.W., and Morrissey, E.A., 2011, The concept of geologic carbon sequestration: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-2010-3122, 2 p. available only at
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3122/pdf/FS2010-3122.pdf.

Energy Independence and Security Act, 2007, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ140/html/PLAW-110publ140.htm

Higley, D.K., Charpentier, Ronald R., Cook, Troy A., Klett, Timothy R., Pollastro, Richard M., and Schmoker, James W., 2002, Petroleum systems and assessment of
undiscovered oil and gas in the Denver Basin Province, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming-USGS Province 29: U.S. Geological Survey Digital
Data Series DDS-69-P, Chapter 1, 4 p.

Higley, D.K., and D. O. Cox, 2007. Oil and Gas Exploration and Development along the Front Range in the Denver Basin of Colorado, Nebraska, and Wyoming. In Higley, D.
K., ed., Petroleum Systems and Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas in the Denver Basin Province, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wyoming
USGS Province 39. U. S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-69-P, Version 1.0. Chapter 2. http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-
p/REPORTS/69_P_CH_2.pdf

Huffman, C.A. Jr., 1995, San Juan Basin Province (022), in Gautier, D. L., Dolton, G.L., Takahashi, K.I., and Varnes, K.L., eds., 1995 National assessment of United States oil
and gas resources--Results, methodology, and supporting data: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-30, Release 2, one CD-ROM.
http://certmapper.cr.usgs.gov/data/noga95/prov22/text/prov22.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, 2010, Carbon sequestration atlas of the United States and Canada (2d ed.; Atlas III): 162 p., accessed April
21, 2011, at http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon_seq/refshelf/atlasIII/.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008, Federal requirements under the underground injection control (UIC) program for carbon dioxide (CO2) geologic sequestration (GS)
wells: Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, proposed rule, accessed April 21, 2011at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2008/July/Day-
25/w16626.htm.

U.S. Geological Survey Bighorn Basin Province Assessment Team, 2010, Executive Summary-Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the Bighorn Basin Province,
Wyoming and Montana, 2008, in Petroleum Systems and Geologic Assessment of Oil and Gas in the Bighorn Basin Province, Wyoming and Montana: U.S. Geological
Survey Digital Data Series DDS69V, Chapter 1, 7 p., accessed March 22, 2011, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-v/REPORTS/69_V_CH_1.pdf.

U.S. Geological Survey San Juan Basin Province Assessment Team, 2002, Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the San Juan Basin Province of New Mexico
and Colorado, 2002: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 147-02, 2 p., accessed at http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-147-02/FS-147-02.pdf

Wyoming Geological Association, 1969, Wyoming stratigraphic nomenclature chart: Wyoming Geological Association 21st Annual Field Conference Guidebook, p. 7.