Author
Listed:
- Song, Xinxing
- Wu, Xiaolong
- Zhao, Xiaoya
- Song, Yu
- Wang, Sijia
- Chen, Junlin
- Dong, Hongsheng
- Jiang, Lanlan
- Lv, Pengfei
- Song, Yongchen
Abstract
In the context of the global energy transition and carbon neutrality, CO2 plume geothermal systems, as a CCUS technology that can synergistically achieve geothermal development and carbon storage, show broad application prospects. This study focuses on the Quantou Formation reservoir in the Songliao Basin. A three-dimensional heterogeneous model is constructed to compare four injection schemes: pure CO2 continuous injection, CO2-water alternating injection with 1-year cycles, CO2-water alternating injection with 2-year cycles, and CO2-water alternating injection with 3-year cycles. The impact of different injection rates on the system's heat extraction and storage performance is analyzed. The results indicate that the alternating injection strategy can significantly improve the overall system performance. At a flow rate of 40 kg/s, the system lifespan is extended to 26.8 years, an increase of 25.8% compared to pure CO2 injection; at a flow rate of 50 kg/s, the cumulative heat extraction reaches 2.83 × 1015 J. Thermal quality analysis shows that 30 kg/s is the optimal flow rate for intermittent injection, achieving a balance between thermal extraction and sustainability. In terms of CO2 storage, pure CO2 injection has a faster short-term storage rate, storing 1.5 × 1010 kg over 15 years at 50 kg/s, whereas alternating injections, although initially lagging, achieve a comparable long-term storage volume. However, alternating injection can cause periodic fluctuations in reservoir pressure, and the local high pressure formed during the water injection phase may affect the integrity of the caprock.
Suggested Citation
Song, Xinxing & Wu, Xiaolong & Zhao, Xiaoya & Song, Yu & Wang, Sijia & Chen, Junlin & Dong, Hongsheng & Jiang, Lanlan & Lv, Pengfei & Song, Yongchen, 2026.
"Numerical analysis of CO2-water alternating injection effects on heat extraction and carbon storage in plume geothermal systems,"
Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:energy:v:353:y:2026:i:c:s0360544226010509
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2026.140945
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:353:y:2026:i:c:s0360544226010509. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.