Advertisement

Experimental and numerical evaluation of CBM potential in Jharia Coalfield India

  • Harinandan KumarEmail author
  • M. K. Mishra
  • S. Mishra
Original Article

Abstract

Geophysico-mechanical characterization of coal data are important in the economic success of CH4 extraction as well as a CO2 injection in deep coal seam reservoir. The heterogeneous nature of coal makes the CH4 removal quite challenging because of the complex behaviour of the seam at in situ as well as applied stress level. Coal matrix behaviour depends on several parameters as permeability, porosity, pore pressure, gas content, structural features, etc. plays a leading role in methane extraction. Therefore, extensive laboratory investigation is handiest approached to anticipate the behavior of coal effectively. This paper presents the results of coal characterization, gas permeability, adsorption/desorption capacity of coal as well as the performance of CBM production well in the replicated model of JH-MD-XVI-T coal seam at a depth of 580 m. The coal characterization was determined to evaluate the prospects of methane in the study area. The gas permeability was determined in a triaxial experimental set up using Darcy’s approach to in situ conditions. The decrease in permeability with an increase in confining as well as gas pressure was observed in all coal samples due to the crushing of grain, coal deformation and narrowing of fractures as well as cleats leading to hinder the flow of fluid through it. The well performance was evaluated to determine the gas rate as well as cumulative gas volume over twenty-five years of well life. Mutual relation between permeability, in situ confining pressure as well as gas pressure, has been established statistically.

Keywords

Coal bed methane Proximate and ultimate analysis Permeability Reservoir simulation Statistical analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge the financial assistance provided by SERB, DST, vide approval No: SB/S4/ES-697/2013.

References

  1. Alama MM, Borrea MK, Fabricius IL, Hedegaard K, Rogena B, Hossain Z, Krogsboll AS (2010) Biot’s coefficient as an indicator of strength and porosity reduction: calcareous sediments from Kerguelen Plateau. J Pet Sci Eng 70:282–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin G, Gasparik M, Alexandra AH, Gensterblum Y, Krooss BM (2014) Experimental study of fluid transport processes in the matrix system of the European organic-rich shales: I. Scandinavian Alum Shale. J Mar Pet Geol 51:79–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aminian K (2009) Type curves for coalbed methane production prediction. SPE 91482 presented at the SPE eastern regional meeting, Charleston, West Virginia, 15–17 SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  4. ASTM Standard Method of Preparing Coal Samples for Analysis (1994) ASTM D2013 - 86 Google Scholar
  5. Averitt P, Berryhill LR (1950) Coal resources of the United States. A Progress Report. United States Department of the Interior, Geological SurveyGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell GJ, Rakop KC (1986) Hysteresis of methane/coal sorption isotherms. In: 61st annual technical conference and exhibition of the society of petroleum engineers, New OrleansGoogle Scholar
  7. Berrezueta E, Domínguez-Cuesta MJ, Ordóñez-Casado B, Medina C, Molinero R (2017) Pore space quantification of sedimentary rocks before-after supercritical CO2 interaction by optical image analysis. Energy Proc 114:4382–4393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL) (2015) Feasibility Report on Moonidih Coal Bed Methane Project. Part of Cluster XI, CMPDI, Regional Institute-II Koyla Bhawan, DhanbadGoogle Scholar
  9. Bhavsar AB (2005) Prediction of coalbed methane reservoir performance with type curves. Thesis submitted to the college of engineering and mineral resources, petroleum and natural gas engineering, West Virginia UniversityGoogle Scholar
  10. Biot MA (1941) Biot General theory of three-dimensional consolidation. J Appl Phys 12:155–164CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Bo L, Jianping W, Kai W, Peng L (2014) Wang, “A method of determining the permeability coefficient of coal seam based on the permeability of loaded coal. Int J Min Sci Technol 24:637–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chandra K (1997) Alternative hydrocarbon resources in the next millennium. Geohorizons 2(2):443Google Scholar
  13. Chatterjee R, Paul S, Pal PK, Srivastava VK (2010) Formation evaluation and characterization of CBM reservoir rocks from well logs of Jharia Coalfield, India. Petrotech, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen Jane, Shi Su, Pohl John H (2004) Use of maceral content to characterize Steam coal performance. Fuel Chem 49:923–924Google Scholar
  15. Cheng Y, Jiang H, Zhang X, Cui J, Song C, Li X (2017) Effects of coal rank on physicochemical properties of coal and on methane adsorption. Int J Coal Sci Technol 4:129–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Connell LD, Lu M, Pan Z (2010) An analytical coal permeability model for tri-axial strain and stress conditions. Int J Coal Geol 84:103–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cui X, Bustin RM (2005) Volumetric strain associated with methane desorption and its impact on coalbed gas production from deep coal seams. AAPG Bull 89:1181–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fahad M (2013) Simulation of Fluid Flow and Estimation of Production from Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Ph.D. thesis submitted in department of Petroleum Engineering, University of New South WalesGoogle Scholar
  19. Gash BW, Volz RF, Potter G, Corgan JM (1993) The effects of cleat orientation and confining pressure on cleat porosity, permeability and relative permeability in coal. In: Proceedings of the international coalbed methane symposium, Tuscaloosa, University of AlabamaGoogle Scholar
  20. Gentzis T, Goodarzi F, Cheung FK, Laggoun-Défarge F (2008) Coalbed methane producibility from the Mannville coals in Alberta, Canada: a comparison of two areas. Int J Coal Geol 74:237–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ghosh S, Jha P, Vidyarthi AS (2014) Unraveling the microbial interactions in organic coal fermentation for generation of methane—A classical to metagenomic approach. Int J Coal Geol 125:36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gray I (1987) Reservoir engineering in coal seams part 1: the physical process of gas storage and movement in coal seams. Soc Pet Eng 2:28–35Google Scholar
  23. Guo P, Cheng Y (2013) Permeability prediction in deep coal seam: a case study on the No. 3 coal seam of the Southern Qinshui Basin in China. Sci World J.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/161457 Google Scholar
  24. Holloway S (1997) An overview of the underground disposal of carbon dioxide. Energy Convers Manag 38:193–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Indian Standard methods for sampling of coal and coke (1965) IS: 436 (Part l/Set 1) – 1964Google Scholar
  26. Izadi G, Wang S, Elsworth D, Liu J, Wu Y, Pone D (2011) Permeability evolution of fluid-infiltrated coal containing discrete fractures. Int J Coal Geol 85:202–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jing X, Gao M, Yu B, Zhang R, Jin W (2015) Coal permeability model on the effect of gas extraction within effective influence zone. Geomech Geophys Geo-Energy Geo-Resour 1:15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jun LJ, Guang L (2012) Numerical simulation of CO2 flooding coal bed methane considered mixture shrinkage effect. EJGE 17:3797–3802Google Scholar
  29. Kazemi H (1976) Numerical simulation of water-oil flow in naturally fractured reservoirs. Soc Pet Eng J 16:317–326Google Scholar
  30. Keim SA (2011) Optimization of coalbed methane completion strategies, selection criteria and production prediction: a case study in China’s Qinshui Basin. Ph.D. Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  31. Khan C, Ge L, Rudolph V (2015) Reservoir simulation study for CO2 sequestration in saline aquifers. Int J Appl Sci Technol 5:30–45Google Scholar
  32. Koenig RA, Stubbs PB (1986) Interference testing of a coalbed methane reservoir. Presented at the SPE Unconventional Gas Technology Symposium, Louisville, KentuckyGoogle Scholar
  33. Lama RD, Bartosiewicz H (1984) Determination of gas content of coal seams. Seam gas drainage with particular reference to the working seam. University of Wollongong, Wollongong, pp 36–52Google Scholar
  34. Lee GJ, Kwon TH (2016) Effect of swelling of coal-induced by carbon dioxide adsorption on permeability and P-wave velocity. In: World congress on ACEM, Jeju Island, KoreaGoogle Scholar
  35. Li S, Zhang B (2016) Research of coalbed methane development well-type optimization method based on unit technical cost. Sustainability 8:843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Li M, Cao J, Li W (2016) Stress and damage induced gas flow pattern and permeability variation of coal from Songzao Coalfield in Southwest China. Energies 9:2–16Google Scholar
  37. Liang W, Shimin L, Yuanping C, Guangzhi Y, Dongming Z, Pinkun G (2017) Reservoir reconstruction technologies for coalbed methane recovery in deep and multiple seams. Int J Min Sci Technol 27:277–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Liu S, Harpalani S (2012) Gas production induced stress and permeability variations in coalbed methane reservoirs. American Rock Mechanics Association, 46th US rock mechanics/geomechanics symposium, Chicago, IL, USAGoogle Scholar
  39. Liu HH, Rutqvist J (2010) A new coal-permeability model: internal swelling stress and fracture-matrix interaction. Transp Porous Media 82:157–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Liu J, Li G, Zhang Y (2016) Numerical simulation of CO2 flooding of coalbed methane considering the fluid-solid coupling effect. PLoS ONE 11:1–16Google Scholar
  41. Maffucci R, Bigi S, Corrado S, Chiodi A, Paolo LD, Giordano G (2015) Quality assessment of reservoirs using outcrop data and ‘‘discrete fracture network” models: the case history of Rosario de La Frontera (NW Argentina) geothermal system. Tectonophysics 647:112–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Makinde I, Lee WJ (2016) Reservoir simulation models—impact on production forecasts and performance of shale volatile oil reservoirs. J Gen Eng 16:53–69Google Scholar
  43. Mavor MJ, Robinson JR (1993) Analysis of coal gas reservoir interference and cavity well tests. Paper SPE 25860. Presented at the joint rocky mountain regional and low permeability reservoirs symposium, Denver, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  44. Mazumder S, Wolf KAA (2004) An overview of the potentials and prospects of coalbed Methane exploration and exploitation In the permo-carboniferous coal measures Of the barakar formation, jharia basin, india. Geol Belg 7:147–156Google Scholar
  45. Meng ZP, Li GQ (2013) Experimental research on permeability of high-rank coal under a varying stress and its influencing factors. Eng Geol 162:108–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mohalik NK (2017) Development of a petrographic technique to assess the spontaneous combustion susceptibility of Indian coals. Int J Coal Prep Util.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19392699.2017.1360874 Google Scholar
  47. MoM Alama MK, Borrea IL Fabricius, Hedegaard K, Rogena B, Hossain Z, Krogsboll AS (2010) Biot’s coefficient as an indicator of strength and porosity reduction: calcareous sediments from Kerguelen Plateau. J Pet Sci Eng 70:282–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moore TA (2012) Coalbed methane: a review. Int J Coal Geol 101:36–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mora CA (2007) Comparison of computation methods For CBM production performance. Thesis on Master of Science, Texas A and M University, Petroleum EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  50. Mukherjee PK, Sinha DP, Rawat DS (1999) Coal Bed Methane: How India fits as a potential candidate in CBM prospect and potentiality, vol 5. SAAEG, pp 79–87Google Scholar
  51. Okeke AN (2005) Sensitivity analysis of modeling parameters that affect the dual peaking behavior in coalbed methane reservoirs. Thesis on Master of Science, Texas A and M University, Petroleum Engineering, pp 30Google Scholar
  52. Pan Z, Connell DL, Camilleri M, Connelly L (2010) Effects of matrix moisture on gas diffusion and flow in coal. Fuels 89:3207–3217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Perera MSA, Ranjith PG (2012) Carbon dioxide sequestration effects on coal’s hydro-mechanical properties: a review. Int J Energy Res 36:1015–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Prusty BK (2008) Sorption of methane and CO2 for enhanced coalbed methane recovery and carbon dioxide sequestration. J Nat Gas Chem 17:29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ranathunga AS, Perera MSA, Ranjith PG, De Silva GPD (2017) A macro-scale view of the influence of effective stress on carbon dioxide flow behaviour in coal: an experimental study. Geomech Geophys Geo-Energy Geo-Resour 3:13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reiss LH (1980) The reservoir engineering aspects of fractured reservoirs. Gulf Publishing Company, ParisGoogle Scholar
  57. Rice DD (1993) Composition and origins of coalbed gas. Am Assoc Pet Geol Stud Geol 38:159–184Google Scholar
  58. Saikia K, Sarkar BC (2007) EXGID – A prototype exploration geological information system for Jharia coalfield, India. J Sci Ind Res 66:513–516Google Scholar
  59. Seidle J (2011) Fundamental of coal bed methane reservoir engineering. Penn Well Corporation, OklahomaGoogle Scholar
  60. Shi JQ, Durucan S (2005) CO2 storage in deep un-minable coal seams. Oil Gas Sci Technol 60:547–558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sinayuc C (2007) Modeling of Enhanced Coalbed Methane Recovery Technology. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, METUGoogle Scholar
  62. Siriwardane HJ, Gondle RK, Smith DH (2009) Shrinkage and swelling of coal-induced by desorption and sorption of fluids: theoretical model and interpretation of a field project. Int J Coal Geol 77:188–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Song Y, Xing W, Zhang Y, Jian W, Liu Z, Liu S (2015) Adsorption isotherms and kinetics of carbon dioxide on Chinese dry coal over a wide pressure range. Int J Adsorpt 21:53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Speight JG (2005) Handbook of coal analysis – a series of Monographs on analytical chemistry and its applications, vol 166, pp 238Google Scholar
  65. Taheri A, Sereshki F, Ardejani FD, Mirzaghorbanali A (2016) Numerical modeling of gas flow in coal pores for methane drainage. J Sustain Min 15:95–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Vishal V, Ranjith PG, Singh TN (2013) CO2 permeability of Indian bituminous coals: implications for carbon sequestration. Int J Coal Geol 105:36–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vishal V, Ranjith P, Singh T (2015) An experimental investigation on behaviour of coal under fluid saturation, using acoustic emission. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 22:428–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wang S, Elsworth D, Liu J (2012) A mechanistic model for permeability evolution in fractured sorbing media. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 117:B06205.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2011jb008855 Google Scholar
  69. Wang Z, Li Y, Liu H, Zeng F, Guo P, Jiang W (2017) Study on the adsorption, diffusion and permeation selectivity of shale gas in organics. Energies 10:142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Warren JE, Root PJ (1963) The behavior of naturally fractured reservoirs. SPE J 3:245–255Google Scholar
  71. Wei XR, Wang GX, Massarotto P, Golding SD, Rudolph V (2007) A review on recent advances in the numerical simulation for coal bed-methane-recovery process. SPE Reserve Eval Eng 10:657–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. White CM (2005) Sequestration of carbon dioxide in coal with enhanced coalbed methane recovery—A review. Energy Fuels 19:659–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wierzbicki M (2013) Changes in the sorption/diffusion kinetics of a coal-methane system caused by different temperatures and pressures. Instytut Mechaniki Gorotworu PAN, Krakow, p 159Google Scholar
  74. Wu Y, Liu J, Chen Z, Elsworth D, Pone D (2011) A dual poroelastic model for CO2-enhanced coalbed methane recovery. Int J Coal Geol 86:177–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Xiao XM, Zhao BQ, Thu ZL, Song ZG, Wilkins RWT (2005) Upper paleozoic petroleum system, Ordos Basin, China. Mar Pet Geol 22:945–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Yan S, Liu S, Zhang Q, Tao M, Zhao M, Feng H (2012) Coalbed methane genesis, occurrence and accumulation in China. Pet Sci 9:269–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Yan T, Yao Y, Liu D (2015) Critical tectonic events and their geological controls on gas generation, migration, and accumulation in the weibei coalbed methane field, Southeast Ordos Basin. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 27:1367–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Yan C, Cheng Y, Deng F, Tian J (2017) Permeability change caused by stress damage of gas shale. Energies 10:1350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Yang Y, Zoback MD (2011) The effects of gas adsorption on swelling, visco-plastic creep and permeability of sub-bituminous coal. American Rock Mechanics Association, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  80. Ye Z, Zhang L, Hao D, Zhang C, Wang C (2017) Experimental study on the response characteristics of coal permeability to pore pressure under loading and unloading conditions. J Geophys Eng 14:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Young GBC, McElhiney JE, Dhir R, Mavor MJ, Anbouba IKA (1991) Coal bed methane production potential of the rock springs formation, Great Divide Basin, Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Presented at the SPE Gas Technology Symposium, Houston, TexasGoogle Scholar
  82. Yumin L, Zhiping L, Dazhen T, Xu H, Chen X (2016) Permeability variation models for unsaturated coalbed methane reservoirs. J Oil Gas Sci Technol 71:2–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zhao X, Yang Y, Sun F, Wang B, Zuo Y, Li M, Shen J, Mu F (2016) Enrichment mechanism and exploration and development technologies of high coal rank coalbed methane in South Qinshui Basin, Shanxi Province. Pet Explore Dev 43:332–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zheng G, Pan Z, Chen Z, Tang S, Connell LD, Zhang S, Wang B (2012) Laboratory study of gas permeability and cleat compressibility for CBM/ECBM in Chinese coals. Energy Explorat Exploit 30:451–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zhu WC, Wei CH, Liu J, Xu T, Elsworth D (2013) Impact of gas adsorption induced coal matrix damage on the evolution of coal permeability. Rock Mech Rock Eng 46:1353–1366CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mining EngineeringNIT RourkelaRourkelaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Chemical EngineeringNIT RourkelaRourkelaIndia

Personalised recommendations