1 Introduction

Enhancing coalbed methane (CBM) recovery by injecting CO2 (CO2-ECBM) is a new technology used to increase CBM production (Pan et al. 2017; Ranathunga et al. 2017a, b), indicating that CO2 can be permanently sequestered in unmineable coal seams and thus increase CBM production (Li et al. 2017). The adsorption capacity of CO2 in coal is better than that of CH4 in high-temperature and pressure environment (Andreas and Yves 2011). Therefore, when CO2 is injected and adsorbed on a matrix in coal, it can improve not only the CO2 storage capacity, but also the CH4 output (Pratama et al. 2018).

The injected CO2 has a supercritical state and a normal state (Yasunami et al. 2010; Vanelle and Gajewski 2011). Although supercritical CO2 has excellent enhancement effects on increasing the CH4 output compared to normal CO2 (Ranathunga et al. 2017a, b), the requirement for normal CO2 to reach supercritical CO2 (pressure > 7.38 MPa, temperature > 31.1 °C) is relatively stringent (Zhang et al. 2011a, 2013). Therefore, increasing attention has been paid to the displacement process of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat in deep coal seams in geological environments that cannot reach supercritical conditions due to the influence of the thermal environment on the pore structures and adsorption behavior (Mandadige 2017; Feng et al. 2017; Zhang et al. 2017).

The numerical simulation to enhance CBM recovery can be divided into heat injection and gas injection (Wei et al. 2007; Zhou et al. 2013). For heat injection, scholars mainly carry out studies based on the experimental simulation and mainly discuss the influences of heat injection on CH4 seepage velocity and compare CBM production in thermal or nonthermal environments (Yasunami et al. 2010; Vilarrasa and Rutqvist 2017; Qu et al. 2017). Gas injection simulation is more systematic than heat injection simulation (Vishal et al. 2013; Ma et al. 2017). Scholars mainly focus on analyzing and deriving numerical models (i.e., multi-gas adsorption model, heat transfer model and fluid–solid coupled model; Liu and Smirnov 2008; Vishal et al. 2013; Sun et al. 2016), which have been successfully applied to the numerical software (i.e., COMSOL, COMET and SIMEDWin). Previous studies have shown that the injection of heat and CO2, individually, into coal can enhance CBM production. However, there are few publications on how to combine heat injection and CO2 injection. Few people are involved in the field of CO2 with heat injection, and few scholars have considered using CO2 as a heat-carrying medium.

To improve theoretical studies on technologies to displace CBM by injecting CO2 with heat, the coupling equations of gas diffusion–adsorption–seepage–heat transfer fields are established, and the displacement processes at different pressures and temperatures are simulated by COMSOL in this research. The displacement effect, the comparison of the CO2 storage capacity with CH4 output and the effective influencing radius of CO2 injection under different pressures and temperatures are analyzed and discussed. Carrying out the numerical simulation of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat under the geological conditions of the Qinshui Basin has important practical value and theoretical significance for promoting the implementation of this technology.

2 Theoretical analysis

In this study, COMSOL software (www.comsol.com), based on the finite element method, was used to carry out the numerical simulation analysis of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat (Taheri et al. 2017; Liu et al. 2017a, b). COMSOL has been widely used to solve problems in the geosciences (i.e., element migration, fluid migration and heat transfer), and the widely used partial differential equation module has a strong capability of coupling physical fields (Ni et al. 2017; Ma et al. 2017).

2.1 Governing equations

There are several assumptions applied to establish governing equations (Wei et al. 2007; Vishal et al. 2013): (a) Coal is a dual and isotropic porous medium containing both pores and fractures; (b) there is only CO2 and CH4 in the coal seam without water, and the adsorption and desorption of multiple gases is in accordance with the extended Langmuir model; (c) the gas in pore is free, conforming to the ideal gas equation; (d) the migration of gas in pores obeys Fick’s law, and the transport of gas in fractures obeys Darcy’s law; and (e) there is a mass exchange between the diffusion and percolation processes of gas.

2.1.1 Mass conservation equation for gas diffusion motion

The diffusion motion of CH4 and CO2 in coal follows the Fick’s diffusion law (Eq. 1; Sampath et al. 2017; Liu et al. 2018).

$$\left\{ \begin{aligned} \frac{{\partial C_{1} }}{\partial t} - \nabla \cdot \left( {D_{1} \nabla C_{1} } \right) = - S_{1} \hfill \\ \frac{{\partial C_{2} }}{\partial t} - \nabla \cdot \left( {D_{2} \nabla C_{2} } \right) = - S_{2} \hfill \\ \end{aligned} \right.$$
(1)

where C1 and C2 are the mole concentration of CH4 and CO2, D1 and D1 are the gas diffusion coefficient of CH4 and CO2 and S1 and S2 denote the source terms, which reflect the mass exchange between adsorption phase and free phase.

2.1.2 Mass conservation equation of gas seepage motion

According to the basic assumptions, the seepage of CH4 and CO2 in coal follows Darcy’s law based on the analysis of the mass conservation equation (Eq. 2; Xu et al. 2017; Li et al. 2016; Zhong et al. 2016; Le et al. 2017).

$$\left\{ \begin{aligned} \frac{{\varphi M_{1} }}{RT}\frac{{\partial P_{1} }}{\partial t} - \nabla \cdot \left( {\frac{{M_{1} K_{1} P_{1} }}{{RT\mu_{1} }}\nabla \left( {P_{1} + P_{2} } \right)} \right) = S_{1} \hfill \\ \frac{{\varphi M_{2} }}{RT}\frac{{\partial P_{2} }}{\partial t} - \nabla \cdot \left( {\frac{{M_{2} K_{2} P_{2} }}{{RT\mu_{2} }}\nabla \left( {P_{1} + P_{2} } \right)} \right) = S_{2} \hfill \\ \end{aligned} \right.$$
(2)

where φ denotes the porosity of coal, M1 and M2 are the mole mass of CH4 and CO2, R is the gas constant, T denotes the gas temperature, P1 and P2 represent the pressure of CH4 and CO2, K1 and K2 are the permeabilities of CH4 and CO2, μ1 and μ2 represent the dynamic viscosity of CH4 and CO2 and S1 and S2 are the source term in the seepage field.

2.1.3 Multi-gas adsorption equations

According to basic assumptions, the adsorption amount of each gas follows the Langmuir equation (Li et al. 2017; Liu et al. 2017a, b) when the pressure balance exists in an adsorption saturation state. The S1 and S2 in the seepage equation can be derived according to Eq. 3.

$$\left\{ \begin{aligned} S_{1} = \left( {C_{1} - \frac{{\rho_{{1{\text{a}}}} \rho_{\text{c}} a_{1} b_{1} P_{1} }}{{\left( {1 + b_{1} P_{1} + b_{2} P_{2} } \right)}}} \right) \cdot \tau \hfill \\ S_{2} = \left( {C_{2} - \frac{{\rho_{{2{\text{a}}}} \rho_{\text{c}} a_{2} b_{2} P_{2} }}{{\left( {1 + b_{1} P_{1} + b_{2} P_{2} } \right)}}} \right) \cdot \tau \hfill \\ \end{aligned} \right.$$
(3)

where ρc is the density of the coal, ρ1a and ρ2a are the density of CH4 and CO2 under standard conditions, a1 and a2 are the Langmuir volume parameter of CH4 and CO2, b1 and b2 are the Langmuir pressure parameter of CH4 and CO2 and τ denotes the desorption diffusion coefficient, which reflects the difficulty of desorption of the adsorbed gas and diffusion to the fracture system.

2.1.4 Heat transfer equation

According to basic assumptions, the heat transfer in coal follows the heat transfer equation in a porous medium (Eq. 4; Lin et al. 2017; Wang et al. 2017).

$$\left( {(1 - \varphi )\rho_{\text{c}} C_{{{\text{c}},p}} + \varphi C_{{{\text{mix}},p}} } \right)\frac{\partial T}{\partial t} - c_{{{\text{mix}},p}} \left( {\frac{{C_{1} k_{1} + C_{2} k_{2} }}{{C_{1} \mu_{1} + C_{2} \mu_{2} }}} \right)\nabla p \cdot \nabla T - \nabla \cdot \left( {\left( {(1 - \varphi )\beta_{\text{c}} - \varphi \beta_{\text{mix}} } \right) \cdot \nabla T} \right) = Q_{\text{TS}}$$
(4)

where Cc,p denotes the specific heat capacity of coal, Cmix,p denotes the ratio heat capacity of mixed gas, βc denotes the thermal conductivity of coal, βmix is the thermal conductivity of mixed gas and QTS is the source terms in the heat transfer field.

2.1.5 Relationship between porosity, permeability and in situ stress

The process of injecting CO2 with heat is also affected by the in situ stress environment, which further affects the porosity of coal. The expression is as follows:

$$\phi = \left( {\phi_{0} - \phi_{\text{r}} } \right)\exp \left( {\alpha_{\phi } \overline{{\sigma_{\text{v}} }} } \right) + \phi_{\text{r}}$$
(5)

where φ0 denotes the initial porosity of coal, φr denotes the porosity of coal in a high-pressure stress state, αφ denotes the stress sensitivity coefficient of permeability and σv denotes average effective stress. The expression is as follows:

$$\overline{{\sigma_{\text{v}} }} = {{\left( {\sigma_{1} + \sigma_{2} + \sigma_{3} } \right)} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{\left( {\sigma_{1} + \sigma_{2} + \sigma_{3} } \right)} {3 + \alpha P}}} \right. \kern-0pt} {3 + \alpha P}}$$
(6)

where α denotes the effective stress coefficient of Biot and σ1, σ2 and σ3 denote the minimum, intermediate and maximum principal stress, respectively.

In addition, there is an exponential relationship between permeability and porosity:

$$k = k_{0} \exp \left[ {22.2\left( {{\phi \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {\phi {\phi_{0} - 1}}} \right. \kern-0pt} {\phi_{0} - 1}}} \right)} \right]$$
(7)

where k denotes the permeability after stress action and k0 denotes the initial permeability.

2.2 Coupling of equations

The processes of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat include the processes of gas seepage–adsorption–diffusion–heat transfer in a porous medium. The seepage field, coupled with the diffusion field through flow velocity and with the adsorption field through source terms, is coupled with the heat transfer field by controlling convection heat transfer. The multiple gas adsorption field, coupled with the diffusion field through the concentration distribution and the seepage field through the partial pressure, is coupled with the heat transfer field by the relationship between the adsorption constant and temperature. When the heat transfer field is influenced by the seepage velocity, the temperature distribution will also affect the permeability distribution, gas density and gas viscosity in the seepage field. Meanwhile, it will also affect the adsorption constant in the adsorption field, so that it can be coupled with the multiple gas adsorption field. The porosity and permeability will also be affected by the in situ stress environment.

3 Model description and model validation against experimental data

3.1 Model description

The process of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 and heat is a three-dimensional process that can be simplified to a two-dimensional (2D) process by considering the feasibility and effectiveness of numerical calculation (Sang et al. 2016). The geological model is a square area of 20 m, one-fourth region of which is selected as the numerical simulation area considering the symmetry of the affected area (Fig. 1). The upper right corner of the region is the CO2 injection hole (Hin), and the lower left corner is the CH4 discharge hole (Hout). The centerline, L, connecting the CO2 injection hole and the CH4 discharge hole, is selected as a 2D transversal (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Geological model of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection

Full size image

3.2 Simulation schemes and physical parameters

To explore the stimulation effect of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat, the simulation schemes can be carried out as follows (Table 1). By changing the injection pressure or temperature, this paper carries out a comparative study of displacement effect with different displacement pressures at the same injection temperature and different injection temperatures at the same displacement pressure.

Table 1 Numerical simulation scheme of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat
Full size table

The TL-003 well concerning the CO2-ECBM process in the southern Qinshui Basin is the first technical well in China (Zhang et al. 2011b). For the numerical simulation of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 and heat, all parameters concerning coal are derived from the experimental results of the same samples collected from No. 3 coal seams in the TL-003 well (i.e., mercury injection experiments, liquid nitrogen experiment, adsorption experiments, nuclear magnetic resonance and displacement experiment). Other parameters needed for the numerical simulation are derived from other scholars’ research results in the same research area (Ye et al. 2007, 2012, 2016). The relevant parameters are given in Table 2.

Table 2 Physical parameters of numerical simulation for enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection
Full size table

3.3 Boundary setting and initial conditions

3.3.1 Seepage field

According to the simulation scheme, the boundary condition of the CO2 injection hole is constant pressure, and the pin is 3 MPa, 5 MPa and 7 MPa, respectively. The boundary condition of the CH4 discharge hole is connected to the bottom hole flow pressure; thus, the pout is set to 0.5 MPa. The condition of the other boundaries is set to zero flow. It is assumed that the initial pressure of the coal seams is 2.5 MPa, the free gas pressure is 2.5 MPa, and the adsorbed gas is a saturated adsorption state at 2.5 MPa.

3.3.2 Diffusion field

According to the simulation scheme, the boundary condition of the CO2 injection hole is a constant concentration, and the concentration of CO2 is 820 mol/m3, 1641 mol/m3 and 2462 mol/m3, respectively. The boundary condition of the CH4 discharge hole is connected to the export. The condition of the other boundaries is set to zero flow. It is assumed that CH4 at a concentration of 451.7 mol/m3 in the coal is saturated at 2.5 MPa in the original condition, and there is no CO2 in the coal.

3.3.3 Heat transfer field in a porous medium

According to the simulation scheme, the boundary condition of the CO2 injection hole is a constant temperature, and the Tin is 293.15 K, 313.15 K or 333.15 K, respectively. The boundary condition of the CH4 discharge hole is connected with the atmosphere. It is defined as the constant temperature boundary, and the Tout is 293.15 K. The condition of the other boundaries is set to a constant temperature. It is assumed that the initial temperature of the coal seam is 293.15 K.

3.4 Model validation against experimental data

Some laboratory experiments can be carried out to verify the accuracy of the coupling models. The setting of the required parameters and boundary conditions are consistent with the numerical simulation conditions. The laboratory experiments maintain the isothermal process, which means that the displacement mole fraction of CO2 (i.e., injection of CO2 mol number/initial CH4 mol number) and the displacement efficiency of CH4 (i.e., output of CH4 mol number/initial CH4 mol number) in the numerical simulation results can be better compared to those in the laboratory experiment results without considering the influence of temperature.

Figure 2 shows that the simulation results are in good agreement with the experimental results. With the injection of CO2, a large amount of CH4 was displaced from the coal seam, and CO2 was sequestered in the coal seam. At the initial stage of CO2 injection, the output rate of CH4 was high. With the continuous injection of CO2, the permeability of the coal seam decreased as a result of the adsorption deformation of coal, and the injectivity of CO2 was reduced. It can also be seen that the experimental and simulation results are consistent. The maximum error is less than 10%, which proves the rationality of the coupling models by injecting CO2. Therefore, the coupling models with multi-physical fields can be used to simulate the displacement process by injecting CO2 with a heat injection.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Comparison of the experimental results and the simulation results for displacement efficiency

Full size image

4 Results and analysis

In this study, the displacement effect of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting heat and CO2 can be analyzed from gas injection, different displacement pressures and different displacement temperatures.

4.1 Displacement process of gas injection and the analysis of this effect

The displacement effect of gas injection can be analyzed according to the pressure distribution, the temperature distribution and the concentration distribution.

Figure 3 shows that CO2 at high pressure moves from the CO2 injection hole toward the middle of the coal seam as time goes on. On the 10th day, the pressure distribution reached 7 m. On the 50th day, the influencing range of gas pressure has nearly covered the entire coal seam. The gas pressure in coal changes obviously when the time of the gas injection lasts for less than 40 days. The gas pressure changes slowly as the displacement time increases, especially after the 60th day. The partial pressure of CH4 increases due to the energy caused by CO2. The highest point of the pressure moves to the CH4 discharge hole based on the fact that the injection pressure of CO2 is higher than that of CH4 in the original formation.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Pressure distribution during the process of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 and heat (at 5 MPa and 313.15 K)

Full size image

Although there are convective heat transfer and solid heat transfer in coal, the heat transfer process is very slow, and the ranging radius of temperature is only approximately 7–8 m on the 100th day during the CO2 injection process (Fig. 4). In the early stage of CO2 injection, the ranging radius of the temperature obviously changes, but the increase in the radius decreases.

Fig. 4
figure 4

Temperature distribution of the process of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 and heat (at 5 MPa and 313.15 K)

Full size image

In the simulated period, the CH4 concentration around the injection hole varies significantly. The reducing range of concentration increases as time passes, and there is an area with a CH4 concentration near 0 mol/m3. The influencing radius of CO2 concentration expands, which is in accordance with the changing range of CH4 concentration. Therefore, it can be seen that the CO2 injection has a significant effect on the displacement of CH4 in coal (Figs. 5, 6). The changing range of CH4 and the CO2 concentration has a strong correspondence. The lowest concentration of CH4 can reach 0 mol/m3, that is, CH4 has been completely displaced. The highest concentration of CO2 can reach 1750 mol/m3, which shows that coal has a strong carbon sequestration capacity.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Concentration distribution of CH4 regarding enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection (under 5 MPa and 313.15 K)

Full size image
Fig. 6
figure 6

Concentration distribution of CO2 regarding enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection (under 5 MPa and 313.15 K)

Full size image

4.2 Analysis of the displacement effect under different displacement pressures

The displacement effect under different displacement pressures can be analyzed according to gas pressure and concentration distribution with the same displacement time.

In the same displacement time, the increase in the displacement pressure leads to an obvious change in the gas pressure distribution in coal. Specifically, in the early stage of CO2 injection, the increase in the displacement pressure can increase the gas pressure in coal over a short time (Fig. 7), which improves the gas energy in the coal seam and allows CH4 to be easily produced.

Fig. 7
figure 7

Distribution of pressure on the 50th day in the coalbed with different displacement pressures: a 3 MPa, b 5 MPa, c 7 MPa

Full size image

At the same time, the greater the displacement pressure is, the larger the range of CH4 being driven out of coal is (Fig. 8), which shows that the increase in the displacement pressure can effectively remove the CH4 from the original position and leave the coal seam in a short time, thus improving the CBM production. The greater the displacement pressure is, the greater the migration range of CO2 in the same time is, and the difference of the influencing scope increases with time (Fig. 9). It is indicated that increasing displacement pressure can store more CO2 in coal at the same time.

Fig. 8
figure 8

Concentration distribution of CH4 on the 50th day in the coalbed with different displacement pressures: a 3 MPa, b 5 MPa, c 7 MPa

Full size image
Fig. 9
figure 9

Concentration distribution of CO2 on the 50th day in the coalbed with different displacement pressures: a 3 MPa, b 5 MPa, c 7 MPa

Full size image

4.3 Analysis of the displacement effect under different displacement temperatures

The displacement effect analysis under different temperatures is mainly based on temperature distribution in the same displacement time.

In the same displacement time, the higher the injection temperature is, the greater the temperature range is in coal (Fig. 10). Due to the low migration velocity of gas and thermal conductivity of coal, there is little difference between the convection heat transfer and solid heat transfer of coal. Therefore, the temperature difference in coal is not significant for the two cases of displacement temperature of 313.15 K and 333.15 K.

Fig. 10
figure 10

Temperature distribution in the coal seam on the 50th day with different injection temperatures: a 313.15 K, b 333.15 K

Full size image

5 Discussions

5.1 Comparative analysis of CO2 storage capacity and CH4 output

CO2 storage capacity and CH4 output increase as time passes within the simulating timescale. With the increase in displacement pressure, there is a significant difference between the CO2 storage capacity and the CH4 output (Fig. 11a). When displacement pressure increases from 3 MPa to 7 MPa, the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity increase from 753.36 mol and 1610.78 mol to 2250.31 mol and 15,032.29 mol, respectively. On the 100th day, the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity at the displacement pressure of 5 MPa and 7 MPa are 2.00 times, 2.99 times and 4.21 times, 9.33 times that of 3 MPa (Fig. 11a). The displacement ratio is 2.14, 4.49 and 6.69, respectively, when displacement pressure is 3 MPa, 5 MPa and 7 MPa, which shows that the increase in displacement pressure can increase not only the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity but also the displacement ratio.

Fig. 11
figure 11

Distribution diagram of the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity with time: a different displacement pressures and b different displacement temperatures

Full size image

There is also a difference between the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity under different displacement temperatures. With the increase in the displacement temperature, the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity increase from 1638.32 mol and 6751.13 mol to 1732.11 mol and 6832.32 mol, respectively, on the 100th day. It can be seen that the increase in displacement temperature can increase the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity at the same time. The increase in the CO2 storage capacity is more sensitive to temperature than the CH4 output (Fig. 11b).

The increase in the displacement pressure increases the activation energy of the surface for the matrix in the coal during the displacing process. CO2 has more contact collisions with CH4 and will produce more CH4. The increase in temperature plays a significant role in activating the gas. By heating the coal, the CH4 adsorbed on the coal surface is more easily desorbed, which moves more CH4 away from the matrix surface in the coal and provides more adsorption sites for CO2. Because of the increase in temperature, the coal will produce a new fracture structure due to thermal action, which makes more CO2 adsorption space in coal. The above aspects cause an increase in the CO2 volume stored in coal, and the difference between the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity will become small as the temperature increases. Analyzing the relationship between CH4 output, CO2 storage capacity and time, temperature and pressure of gas injection can guide the development and implementation of the CO2-ECBM project.

5.2 Analysis of the effective influencing radius of gas injection

The effective influencing radius of gas injection refers to the distance between the point with the lowest effective pressure, which can effectively displace the CH4 in coal, and the CO2 injection hole. The minimum distance that conforms to the condition is the effective influencing radius of gas injection (Wang et al. 2012). The author proposes that the radial distance between the point when the CH4 pressure is reduced to 0.1 MPa in coal and the CO2 injection hole is the effective influencing radius of the gas injection during the gas injection.

The former analysis shows that when the injection time is longer than 10 days, the effective radius under each injection pressure is greater than that in the simulation area, which is not conducive to the analysis of the effective radius of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection. Therefore, the first 10 days are chosen to analyze the effective influencing radius of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection with different injection pressures and times. Table 3 shows that the effective influencing radius of gas injection increases with the increase in injection time and injection pressure, the increase in which is gradually reduced.

Table 3 Effective influencing radius of enhancing CBM recovery by injecting CO2 with heat injection with different injection pressures and injection times
Full size table

Figure 12 shows that the effective influencing radius increases with the increase in the gas injection time under the same gas injection pressure, and there is an exponential function relationship between the effective influencing radius, R, and the gas injection time, t, R = AtB. According to regression analysis, there is a linear relationship among the coefficients, A and B, and the gas injection pressure, P (Fig. 13), where A = 0.47P + 0.22, B = − 0.02P + 0.63 and R = (0.47P + 0.22)t(−0.02P+0.63) (3 ≤ P ≤ 7 MPa). Analyzing the relationships among the effective influencing radius of gas injection and the gas injection pressure and time, it is beneficial to guide the development and implementation of the CO2-ECBM project.

Fig. 12
figure 12

Relationship between the effective influencing radius and the injection time under different injection pressures

Full size image
Fig. 13
figure 13

Relationship between coefficient A and coefficient B and gas injection pressure P

Full size image

6 Conclusion

In this paper, to perfect theoretical studies on the technology to displace CBM by injecting CO2 with heat injection, the coupling equations of gas diffusion–adsorption–seepage–heat transfer fields are established, and the displacement processes under different pressures and temperatures are simulated by COMSOL. The displacement effect, the comparison of the CO2 storage capacity with the CH4 output, and the effective influencing radius of CO2 injection under different pressures and temperatures are emphatically analyzed and discussed. The main conclusions are as follows.

  1. (1)

    The displacement pressure and temperature are the key factors influencing the CH4 output and the CO2 storage capacity, which can be significantly increased by improving the displacement pressure and temperature. The displacement ratio can also be improved. The CO2 storage capacity is more sensitive to temperature and pressure than the CH4 output.

  2. (2)

    The decrease in the CH4 concentration and the increase in the CO2 concentration are obvious during the displacement process of injecting CO2 with heat injection. The coal seams have a high storage capacity for CO2, and the increase in the displacement radius decreases as time passes.

  3. (3)

    The effective influencing radius of injecting CO2 with heat injection is increased with the increase in time and pressure, but the increase in the radius is gradually reduced. The relationship between the effective influencing radius and the time of gas injection has a power exponential function, and there is a linear relationship between the function coefficient and the gas injection pressure. It is beneficial to guide the development and implementation of the CO2-ECBM project by analyzing the relationship between the effective influencing radius and injection pressure with injection time.