15th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, GHGT-15

15th 18th March 2021 Abu Dhabi, UAE

CO2 injection at K12-B, the final story

V. Vandeweijera*, C. Hofsteeb, W. v. Peltc, H. Gravenc*
a
TNO, Princetonlaan 6, 3584CB Utrecht, Netherlands
b
Consultant Sustainability and Housing, Utrecht, Netherlands (formerly TNO)
c
Neptune Energy Netherlands B.V., Einsteinlaan 10, 2719 EP Zoetermeer, Netherlands

Abstract

In 2003 the mature gas field K12-B was selected as a demonstration site for offshore injection of CO2. The initial project was aimed
at investigating the feasibility of CO2 injection and storage in depleted natural gas fields on the Dutch continental shelf, with the
objective to realize a permanent CO2 injection facility. Over the years many different aspects related to CO2 storage at K12-B have
been researched, most of them widely applicable to other CO2 storage sites as well. CO2 injection and related research projects
involving K12-B have continued until 2017, completing a period of almost 15 years of CO2 injection. This paper presents an
overview of the most relevant and memorable research topics, their related activities and results.

The K12-B gas field, is located in the Dutch sector of the North Sea, some 150 km northwest of Amsterdam. It was developed and
operated by predecessors of the current operator, which since 2017, is Neptune Energy Netherlands B.V. K12-B has been producing
natural gas from the Permian age, Upper Slochteren Member (Rotliegend) since 1987. The natural gas produced has a relatively
high CO2 content (13%) and the CO2 is separated from the production stream on site, prior to gas transport to shore. The CO2 used
to be vented into the atmosphere but from 2004 on it has been injected into the gas field above the gas-water contact; at a depth of
approximately 4000 m. K12-B was the first site in the world where CO2 has been re-injected into the same reservoir from which it
originated. The average CO2 injection rate could reach 30,000 Nm3 CO2 per day, which is approximately 20 kt per year.

This paper presents an overview of the results and lessons learned of the multiple measurements campaigns and numerous research
projects related to the CO2 injection at K12-B since 2004, performed by the operator and TNO. The research ranged from the
investigation of top side and well equipment to the behavior of the gas field to social, environmental and risk assessment aspects.
This paper will take you through our journey where we encountered anomalous tubing thicknesses, abnormal downhole injection
pressures and surprising chemical evaluations. The paper will present how we learned more and more about the reservoir itself
through the analysis of tracer chemicals breaking through, continuous extensive reservoir modelling, geomechanical modelling and
even the actual back production of re-injected CO2.

This paper shows what valuable knowledge and information the CO2 injection project at K12-B has produced over the years. CO2
injection at K12-B was stopped when end 2017 the separation of CO2 at K12-B itself came to a halt. Without the active separation
of CO2 on site there was no supply of CO2 anymore, which could be injected into the reservoir.

Keywords: K12-B; CO2 storage; depleted gas field; reservoir modelling; chemical tracers; well integrity; enhanced gas recovery; back production

* Corresponding author. Email: vincent.vandeweijer@tno.nl

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 2

1. Introduction

Our world is facing the challenge to develop ways to cut the emission of CO2 substantially. One way of doing so
might be through subsurface storage of CO2 in geological formations, in the transition period, while the world develops
large scale implementations of sustainable energy. Capture and subsurface storage of CO2 might be the way to
maintain industrial competitiveness and substantially cut the emission of CO2.
In the Netherlands extensive knowledge and an abundance of the natural gas fields is present. This combination
has given rise to knowledge development focusing on CO2 storage in depleted gas reservoirs.

1.1. The K12-B pilot program

The K12-B structure was discovered in 1982 and is located 150 km north west of Amsterdam in the North Sea. As
the gas reserves proved to be economically recoverable, a number of wells were drilled to develop the K12-B field.
The natural gas from the Rotliegend reservoir contains 13% of CO2, which is too high for direct transport to shore.
Since the start of the gas production the CO2 has been separated from the natural gas stream on-site. The CO2 separated
from the produced gas contained on average 95% CO2, the remainder being CH4.
In 2004 the K12-B CO2 injection demonstration project commenced. At first part of the separated CO2 stream was
injected into a the nearly depleted gas field. At a later point all the separated CO2 was injected. This activity made
K12-B the first location in the world where CO2 is being injected into the same reservoir from which it was produced
as part of the CO2 rich natural gas stream. Over the years more than 100.000 ton of CO2 have been stored in the K12-
B gas field. Over the years a long term ongoing scientific research program was executed, where the operator and
research institutes worked closely together. During this program many individual studies took place. Findings made
initially at K12-B are now applied to other CCS projects.

Fig. 1. Location and overview of relevant wells and compartments of the K12-B gas field, Note: CO2 injection wells are in red after [1].

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 3

The overall program consisted of three phases:

 Phase 1: Investigating the feasibility of underground CO2 injection by using existing installations,
equipment and techniques.
 Phase 2: consisted of the actual demonstration of offshore underground CO2 injection. The purpose of
this phase was to gain experience with respect to all aspects of underground injection and storage,
including but not limited to technical, operational, safety, environmental, financial, and company-
strategy points of view.
 Phase 3: included the scale-up of the demonstration installation to a full-scale industrial size CO2
injection installation including the investigation of possibilities for re-use of the injected CO2. The
additional CO2 for this phase could be delivered by the treatment plant located at K12-B itself when
large quantities of CO2 containing gas from adjacent gas fields could be supplied or it could be
transported from other locations via pipeline or ship.
The potential total available storage volume at the K12-B location was estimated to amount to about 25 Mt CO2.
Phase 1 and 2 have been executed, phase 3 is still under evaluation.

2. Feasibility study

The activities focussed on how to perform steady and save CO2 injection in depleted or nearly depleted natural gas
field, and investigated what was needed to develop an industrial size CO2 injection and storage facility. These
included:
 Understand the behaviour of the CO2 (also in relation to the continuing gas production).
 Identify and install the necessary and suitable surface and subsurface equipment.
 Investigate suitable abandonment procedures.
 Identify and test any legal, regulatory and social aspects.
 Identify any possible health, safety and environmental issues.
 Produce the economics of the underground injection and storage.
In 2003 a desk study commenced.

2.1. Geology

The K12-B field consists of several tilted fault blocks (Figure 2), which are not or barely in pressure communication
with one another. The reservoir section of the K12-B field consists of Rotliegend sandstones, of Permian age. In the
K12 area, the Upper Rotliegend Group consists of the following stratigraphic units from top to bottom: Ten Boer
Claystone, Upper Slochteren Member, Ameland Claystone, Lower Slochteren Member (Figure 2).
The top and side seal of the K12-B field are provided by rock salt of the Zechstein Group. It attains a thickness
directly above the reservoir of some 500 m. An additional side seal with a thickness of some 600 m along the main
bounding fault is also provided by the Zechstein. There are no faults that cross the entire Zechstein interval. Above
the Zechstein the Triassic, Jurassic, Lower and Upper Cretaceous, and Tertiary are present (Figure 2).
The CO2 was injected in the Upper Slochteren Member. Sedimentary heterogeneities include a complex
interfingering of high-perm (300-500 mD) aeolian facies, low-perm fluvial facies (5-30 mD), and mud-flat facies; the
latter act as vertical permeability barriers. It is most likely that the several meters thick aeolian streaks, which form
about 11% of the gross rock volume, act as conduits for the production of natural gas as well as for the injection of
CO2. The lateral extent of individual streaks is estimated to be no more than a few hundred meters. Shale streaks
comprise 16% of the volume and fall into two categories: A minority has a field-wide extent, while most of the shale
streaks cannot be correlated across more than two or so wells, corresponding to a lateral extent of a few hundred
meters.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 4

Figure 2: E-W cross-section through the summit of the K12-B reservoir showing structural features, facies model, Rotliegend reservoir and
overburden stratigraphy (Tertiary omitted)

2.2. CO2 Storage complex,

The K12-B gas reservoir consists of 4 compartments, which are bounded by faults (Figure 1). The subdivision in
compartments is partly based on evidence from production strategy and reserve estimates. During phase 2 of the
program CO2 was injected in compartments 3 and 4, where the majority of the injection took place in compartment 3.
There are three faults in between compartment 1, 2 and 3 (Figure 1 & 2) which are expected to be sealing on a
production timescale. The migration between compartments might be limited, justifying the subdivision in
compartments, but since the potential future storage of CO2 occurs on a much longer timescale this assumption might
not be not justified in the long term. Therefore, compartment 1,2 and 3 are considered to be one compartment for the
storage of CO2. Compartment 4 is bounded by faults which are sealing since this compartment was still at virgin
pressure when it was drilled while neighboring compartments were already at much lower pressures. Furthermore, the
southern bounding fault was accidentally drilled and 10 meter of sealing siderite was found.
The lower limit of the storage complex is defined by the base of the Slochteren Formation (Figure 2). The top of
the storage complex coincides with the base of the rock salt in the Zechstein Group. Laterally to the East the complex
is bounded by the large N-S trending fault and to the West by the deepest closing contour. The wellbores penetrating
the storage complex are cased and their annuli are cemented. During the operational phase the wells are equipped with
a downhole safety valve and well plugs and the cement sheaths will seal the well after abandonment.

2.3. Wells

The wells have cemented casings and liners and have been completed using Cr13 steel tubing. Analysis of the wells
[2] used for the CO2 injection shows that the original cementation is deemed sufficient to ensure good zonal isolation.
Any cement degradation by CO2 based on diffusion is a very slow process. Even under the fastest degradation rate as
estimated from literature, only 12.5 meter of intact cement would be degraded within 10,000 years. The presence of
channels in or near the well cement could significantly accelerates the degradation rates of cement. The actual presence
could only be proven for K12-B8, where 360° ultrasonic image logs were available. Since the same cementation
program had been used on all the wells in this field, there is a possibility that channeling does exist in other wells as

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 5

well. However, the channels in well cement, located between the casing and the Zechstein salt, will most likely be
closed within a period of 10 to 25 years due to the creep movement of the salt towards the casing. This assumption
seems to be realistic at present, referring to the analogue convergence behavior of rock salt bodies in the Gulf of
Mexico [3] and simulation work performed for the K12-B setting [4].
The wells have produced sour gas for 20 to 30 years, leading to unavoidable corrosion of equipment, the corrosion
rate of the casing and liner used on K12-B wells was estimated to be initially 1.5 - 2 mm per annum with a clear
tendency to decline with time. As a result, the liners exposed to CO2 dissolved in water could be extensively corroded.
The questionable integrity of the production liners exposed to the reservoir is not supposed to be an issue as long as
the sealing of the well at the level of the cap rock is good. The cementation is relatively good in the cap-rock, which
allows to emplace appropriate plugs and ensure good zonal isolation.
The above considerations are supported by the fact that there has been no sign of problems during the years of gas-
production and the CO2 injection phase. There is no evidence at all of gas migration along the wells, whether through
the primary cement sheath or the A-annulus as no casing pressures have been detected for the K12-B wells. The overall
status of the wells at K12-B implies only a minor and manageable risk for the CO2 containment at K12-B.

2.4. Legal, regulatory and social aspects

The CO2 injection activities at K12-B were set up as part of an extended gas production license and are not subject
to any, at the time nonexistent, risk assessment requirements of the EU Storage Directive. CO2 injection at K12-B
started long before the EC Directive came into force. At the time CO2 injection started the following legislation was
considered relevant:
 The new Mining Act
 The Environmental Management Act
 The OSPAR Convention.

The assessment indicated that there were no significant impediments against underground CO2 injection at K12-B.
There where issues which needed clarification, like the ownership of the injected CO2 after abandonment, but these
where resolved. Further, at the time it was assumed that a demonstration project might enhance awareness of and
support for CO2 storage. The involvement of the government, political parties, environmental groups and other
organizations during the demonstration phase would likely enhance support for and acceptance of large-scale injection
projects. The visit of the Minister of environment to the K12-B platform during CO2 injection operations is an example
of this.

2.5. Risk assessment

Risks related to seal and fault compartments are considered to be minimal. The mechanical impact of reservoir
depletion and subsequent CO2 re-injection on the bounding seals is very limited [4]. The main advantage of the rock-
salt as a seal is due to its visco-elastic behavior. When the shear stresses develop in the overburden due to reservoir
compaction, or in fault zones due to differential compaction of the neighboring reservoir compartments, the rock salt
will start to creep until these stresses fully dissipate [4]. There are no faults that run through the top seal, and the east
bounding fault is juxtaposed to the Zechstein seal. Therefore, fault sealing is also not considered a risk for the long
term containment of CO2. The top and side seal (500m of Zechstein Salts) of the K12-B field are considered the best
possible seal and leakage through it is considered highly unlikely. Note that the salt has trapped the natural gas with
its 13% CO2 content for millions of years already. There are no faults that cross the entire Zechstein interval, and
therefore the most likely migration pathway for any gas, should migration occur, is along the wellbores.

Eight wells and one sidetrack penetrating the K12-B field did not show any operational or risk related issues in
terms of long-term integrity since producing the field in 1987. No anomalous casing pressure has been observed and
well operations have been conducted without major irregularities. Already abandoned wells have been abandoned
according to industry best practices and relevant regulations. For future abandonment the most adequate options will

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 6

be chosen by the operator. Whether a conventional or innovative method (e.g. setting a pancake plug) will be used has
to be decided independently for each well.
The potential chemical impact of CO2 storage was assessed for the reservoir and the cap rock. After assessing the
initial mineralogical and water compositions, batch geochemical modelling was used to predict CO2 water-rock
interactions during the injection period and long-term storage period (>10,000 years). The geochemical simulations
[5] show that the injection of CO2 will not significantly modify the geochemical system and porosity structure within
the reservoir. Indeed, as the reservoir initially contained 13% CO2 in the gas phase, the geochemical system was
originally in equilibrium with CO2 and, therefore, the influence of CO2 injection is low both during injection and long–
term storage. Both CO2 solubility trapping and mineral trapping are low.
The likelihood and consequence of a certain type of CO2 leakage was assessed for four main risks (Figure 3).
Initially leakage along the well-bores were considered to be a medium risk and control measures were needed. To
mitigate this risk the well integrity was monitored including annular pressure measurements.

The coloring of the matrix in figure 3 should be seen as an assumption:

Green: acceptable risk; no action needed
Yellow: high risk; countermeasures has to be initiated
Red: unacceptable risk; showstopper if no effective countermeasures are available
Very
High

1. Seepage through the caprock

Spilling of CO2 (spill-point) out of

the reservoir
High

Leakage along faults

Leakage along the well-bores

Medium
Likelihood >

Low
Very
Low

B1, B5,
B6, B8

Very
Very low Low Medium High
high

Consequence >

Figure 3: Risk matrix for K12-B after monitoring and corrective measure (green arrow), modified from [6].

Based on the initial performance and risk assessment the focus of the monitoring plan is well-integrity. A secondary
objective of the monitoring plan became the potential of CO2 injection for EGR (to maintain pressure in the reservoir
while avoiding early CO2 breakthrough which could lead to uneconomical production).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 7

3. Demonstration

3.1. CO2 Injection and re-production tests

From 2004 May to January 2005, CO2 was injected in compartment 4 which is a depleted reservoir compartment
with one well (K12-B8, injection/production, Figure 1b). The CO2 was injected in the gaseous phase. The objectives
of this test were to:
 Test the injection facility
 Prove that injection is feasible and safe
 Examine the CO2 phase behavior
 Examine the reservoir response.

During this first test, the injection facility appeared to function as planned. The facility was able to inject CO2 at
the target rate of 30,000 Nm3 per day and was operated safely at the applied conditions. Phase behavior and reservoir
response were modelled and measured and were within an acceptable range of each other.

From February 2005 injection was continued in compartment 3 via well K12-B6 as a second test. While wells K12-
B1, K12-B3st and K12-B5 kept producing natural gas from the same compartment. Experience and results gained
from the first test were used to optimize the procedure. This test, with the exception of some short interruptions, lasted
until the end of the CO2 injection at K12-B in 2017. The objectives of the 2nd test were to:
 Investigate the CO2 phase behavior
 Examine the reservoir response in an area that is currently under production
 Assess the potential for Enhanced Gas Recovery
 Examine the degree of corrosion along the tubing of the K12-B6 CO2 injection well

During test 2, the injection facility also functioned as planned. The phase behavior, which included the change
from gaseous to supercritical, of the CO2 was within the expected range. The reservoir response could be reproduced,
although initially some anomalies where witnessed. After some years of CO2 injection, changes in tubing thickness
appeared larger than expected at certain depth intervals, but also this could be explained in due time. The total amount
of re-injected CO2 for both compartments was more than 100.000 ton at the end of 2017. During test 2 several
measurements campaigns took place, test 2 lasted quite long, almost 15 years, and successfully delivered extensive
data on CO2 injection.

3.2. Samples and Measurements

A general overview of the monitoring techniques and when they were applied is given in the table below.

Table 1. Overview of applied monitoring tools and techniques

Activity Period
Pressure and Temperature Gradient Profiling 2004, 2005, 2007
Pressure Fall-Off Measurements 2004, 2005, 2007
Injection Gas Analysis 2004, 2005, 2007
Production Logging 2005, 2007 (Failed partially)
Production Gas Analysis From 2005 onwards
Production Water Analyses 2005, 2007
Injection chemical Tracers From 2005 and 2016
Detection chemical Tracers From 2005 onwards
Multi Finger Imaging Tool 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009
Cement Bond Log 2007 (Failed)

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 8

Down Hole Video Log 2007

Electromagnetic Imaging Tool 2009
Downhole water sample from injection well 2007

3.3. Chemical tracers

At the start of the injection in K12-B6 (on March 1st 2005), water-insoluble tracers (Figure 4)were added to the
CO2 injection stream [7]. As these tracers were virtually insoluble in water, they were assumed to represent the
methane. Later in 2016 other types of tracers where added to the CO2 stream [8], including ones that migrated through
the reservoir comparable to CO2, but this second batch of tracers came too late to result in any new insights, when in
2017 CO2 injection halted over a shortage of CO2 at the site. Over many years the presence and concentration of the
tracers was measured at various production wells (Figure 4). The results were used to calibrate the reservoir models
regarding the migration of CO2 through the reservoir.

Figure 4. Chemical tracers used in the initial tracer test and the tracer concentrations and the CO2 concentration for well K12-B1 and the total
amount of injected CO2 for well K12-B6 after [7].

3.4. Modelling and Performance assessment

Throughout the injection project, a continuous monitoring and reservoir simulation program was carried out.
Several reservoir models (Simed, Eclipse, Though and others) were applied to investigate and predict the fate and
transport of CO2 in the reservoir. One method, which was applied, is the so-called history matching techniques, which
matches simulated pressure and compositions during the past production with known injection, production rates with
actual measurements of pressure and composition at the injector and producer, during that period.. In the first part of
phase 2 a very high skin was required to obtain a match between the very high (measured) pressure at the bottom of
the injector, even in combination with low injection rates. An interdisciplinary group of experts then went back to all
available data and measurements. It was discovered, that due to production problems, production from this lower
reservoir had prematurely ceased and the well had been plugged with a cement (Figure 5) at the caprock of that lower

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 9

reservoir. It was speculated that water from this lower reservoir had leaked through the plug into the borehole of the
injector, closing of the lower part of the perforations for injection. After closing the lower perforations (mimicking a
water column in the well bore) in the simulations, the pressure could be matched with the simulations with reasonable
parameters. The water column also explained the changes in injection pressures, which were detected at the onset of
an injection and was corroborated as a water table was detected when a camera was lowered in the bore hole. For all
other observations, plausible explanations were eventually found.

Compressed CO2

Downhole pressure gauge

CO2 /water interface

Injected CO 2
Injected CO 2
Well perforations

Upper Slochteren Member (Rotliegend)

Leaking cement behind casing

Lower Slochteren Member

figure 5: Left: Cellular dynamic reservoir model of the center compartment of K12-B, indicating water saturation. Right: Artist impression
of the plausible explanation of the miss-matches at the CO2 injector [1].

All acquired data were used for monitoring the conformity to the models. The pressure modelling of compartment
4 gave a very high model-monitoring conformity. The pressure modelling of compartment 3 resulted in a good model-
monitoring conformity. Due to the complex phase behavior of CO2 it was found absolutely necessary to use bottom
hole measurements for conformity assessment.

4. Well integrity

Due to the acidic nature of CO2 in water and the uncertainties about the actual down-hole conditions, establishing
and monitoring any change in the integrity of the (injection) wells is of great importance. Various types of tools have
been used at K12-B for this purpose. Among these were multi-finger imaging tools, a cement bond log, a down hole
video log, an electromagnetic imaging tool and a natural gamma ray tool.
Several tubing integrity surveys have been performed in time lapse mode. The goal of these surveys was to image
and monitor the inner tubing of CO2 injection well K12-B6 during prolonged exposure to CO2. Multi-finger
imaging/caliper tools, like the Kinley Caliper and the PMIT, provided high resolution, multiple internal tubing radii
measurements.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 10

figure 6. Right: Time lapse results of the multi-finger caliper measurements in the K12-B6 well, Left: Photograph taken in the inside of the
tubing at approx. 3600m depth [1].

Due to scale build-up inside the tubing, an alternative tool had to be found to investigate the tubing integrity. The
EMIT, insensitive to most of the common minerals, which are expected to precipitate in well bores, by Schlumberger
provided a solution to our problem. An EMIT was deployed in 2009 to establish the pipe integrity of the CO2 injection
well K12-B6. Contrary to the earlier readings from the multi finger imaging tools, the EMIT results showed very
consistent pipe integrity over the measured interval.

5. Discussion

As expected, the entire operation at the K12-B field went without any significant complications. We can therefore
state that safe and uneventful underground storage is likely in other depleted gas reservoirs. The CO2 storage related
activities at K12-B took place within multiple projects, which together formed a multiyear program, which was
financed by a variety of funding agencies. During the many projects at K12-B, multiple techniques for multiple
applications were tested and investigated. For such a program it is paramount to establish a long-lasting close
collaboration between the operator and a research institutes. The way this was approached at K12-B has helped in
assessing other projected CCS projects, such as P18 [9], De Lier [10].

Figure 7: Timeline depicting the multiple CO2 injection related projects which took place at K12-B. In red the amount of CO2 injected over
the years, after [1].

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 11

The CO2 injection activities at K12-B have been part of an extended gas production license and did not need to be
subjected to requirements of the EU Storage Directive. All (injection and non-injection) compartments are under-
pressured, and only a slow increase towards original hydrostatic pressures is assumed in the long run, which usually
does not represent a risk for the integrity of properly abandoned wells. The wells will be abandoned according to the
Dutch mining law, and no post-transfer monitoring is planned.
Regarding any large-scale storage. Even though, when the separation of CO2 at K12-B came to an end and thus the
CO2 supply and CO2 injection came to an end, Neptune is still actively developing their CO2 storage capabilities in
the Southern North Sea. For upscaling purposes recent research focusses on models being able to determine the
operational envelope, efficient monitoring and control schemes to enable large scale CO2 injection into depleted gas
fields.

6. Conclusion

The CO2 injection activities at K12-B were permitted under the existing gas production license for K12-B. From
the assessments made, it appears that the K12-B reservoir is suitable to store CO2. The general behavior of the field
and many phenomena witnessed could be explained and in some cases even predicted. However there did remain
some interesting points, where knowledge on the exact behavior could not be predicted and field experience was
considered imperative. Phase 2 in particular produced valuable information that is not only applicable to the K12-B
reservoir, but also to CO2 injection in other depleted natural gas reservoirs.
The primary seal of the K12-B gas field consists of several hundreds of meters of deposits of the Zechstein Super
Group. These deposits mainly consist of rock salts and other evaporites. These deposits are regarded as the best
possible seal for any kind of gas reservoir. Performance assessment has indicated that if migration of CO2 to shallower
strata should occur at all, the most likely migration pathway would be along the well bores.
The absence of significant irregularities during the years of gas production and the CO2 injection phase, and the
fact that there is no evidence at all for gas migration along the wells, demonstrates well integrity. There is no detectable
leakage.
The modelling-monitoring conformity is high. The difference between measured and modelled pressures is often
merely a couple of bars,. Where irregularities occurred, sound explanations could be found, and it could be
demonstrated that these anomalies are not conflicting with the storage concept.
Since the reservoir will be abandoned in an under pressured state, the surrounding rocks will contain fluids at a
greater pressure. The long-term evolution will be one of a gradual return to equilibrium hydrostatic pressure.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Neptune Energy Netherlands B.V. and all the predecessors who have
operated K12-B and have supported the work. We would also like to acknowledge the Dutch government for
supporting the ORC, Castor, MONK, CATO, CATO2, The innovative tracer project and the European union for
supporting the EC CO2ReMoVe and EC CO2Care projects.

References

[1] Vandeweijer, V., Hofstee, C., Graven, H., 2018, 13 Years of safe CO2 injection at K12-B, EAGE, Fifth CO2 geological storage workshop,
2018, Utrecht, The Netherlands
[2] Geel, C., Duin, E., and van Eijs, R., 2005, Improved geological model of the K12-B Gas Field (CATO D1.1 & CATO D1.4). TNO Restricted
Report: NITG05-179-B1209
[3] Fredrich, J.T. & Fossum, A.F., 2002. Large-scale three-dimensional geomechanical modeling of reservoirs: examples from California and the
deepwater Gulf of Mexico. Oil & Gas Science and Technology – Rev. IFP, 57 (5), 423-441
[4] Orlic, B., 2006, Geomechaenical impact of CO2 injection in the K12-B gas field (CATO D3.1.3), TNO Restricted Report
[5] Audigane,P., Lions, J., Gaus, I. and Durst, P., 2006a, Long term geochemical modelling of the impact of CO2 storage at the K12B gas field
(offshore the Netherlands). BRGM/RP-54949-FR. CASTOR Deliverable 3.3.5 project n° SES6-2004-CT-502586
[6] DNV (2010): CO2QUALSTORE: Guideline for Selection and Qualification of Sites and Projects for Geological Storage of CO2. DNV Report
No.: 2009-1425

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865

 GHGT-15 V.P.Vandeweijer 12

[7] Vandeweijer, V., van der Meer, B., Hofstee, C., Mulders, F., D’Hoore, D., Graven, H., (2011). Monitoring the CO2 injection site: K12-B.
Energy Proc. 4, 5471–5478.
[8] Myers, Matthew, C. White, Alf Larcher, M. Woltering, V. Vandeweijer, and Cor Hofstee. “Behaviour of Perfluorocarbon Tracers under In Situ
Storage Conditions.” (2018).
[9] Arts, R.J., Vandeweijer V.P., Hofstee, C., Pluymaekers, M.P.D., Loeve, D., Kopp, A., and Plug, W.J., 2012, The feasibility of CO2 storage in
the depleted P18-4 gas field offshore the Netherlands (the ROAD project). Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control
[10] Hofstee, C., Seeberger, F., Orlic, B., Mulders, F., van Bergen, F., Bisschop, R., 2008, The feasibility of effective and safe carbon dioxide
storage in the De Lier gas field. First Break 26(1)

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3820865