IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/circec/v2y2022i3d10.1007_s43615-021-00105-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Machine Learning Tools for Fossil and Geothermal Energy Production and Carbon Geo-sequestration—a Step Towards Energy Digitization and Geoscientific Digitalization

Author

Listed:
  • Siddharth Misra

    (Texas A&M University
    Texas A&M University)

  • Rui Liu

    (Texas A&M University)

  • Aditya Chakravarty

    (Texas A&M University)

  • Keyla Gonzalez

    (Texas A&M University)

Abstract

Eighty percent of current world energy consumption is satisfied by subsurface resources. In future, billions of watts of electrical power will be generated from geothermal energy sources. Subsurface earth can store the energy produced from renewable sources, such as wind and solar, and could provide safe storage of contaminants and hazardous nuclear waste. Engineering of subsurface earth is critical for fossil energy production, geothermal energy production, and carbon geo-sequestration. However, the subsurface is opaque, inaccessible, and heterogenous with nano-scale to kilo-scale processes that limits our understanding (characterization) and constrains the efficient engineering of the complex subsurface earth resources. There has been rapid increase in sensor deployment, data acquisition, data storage, and data processing for purposes of better engineering and characterizing the subsurface earth. This has promoted large-scale deployment of data-driven methods, machine learning, and data analytics workflows. Subsurface data ranges from nano-scale to kilometer-scale passive as well as active measurements. Subsurface data is acquired in the form of physical fluid/solid samples, images, 3D scans, time-series data, waveforms, and depth-based multi-modal signals, to name a few. Subsurface data sense various physical phenomena, e.g., transport, chemical, mechanical, electrical, and thermal properties. Integration of such varied data sources being acquired at varying scales, rates, resolutions, and volumes mandates robust machine learning methods to better characterize and engineer the subsurface earth. Machine learning has shown to improve the efficiency, efficacy, and productivity of subsurface engineering and characterization efforts required to produce fossil/geothermal energy and to sequester carbon dioxide.

Suggested Citation

  • Siddharth Misra & Rui Liu & Aditya Chakravarty & Keyla Gonzalez, 2022. "Machine Learning Tools for Fossil and Geothermal Energy Production and Carbon Geo-sequestration—a Step Towards Energy Digitization and Geoscientific Digitalization," Circular Economy and Sustainability,, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:circec:v:2:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s43615-021-00105-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s43615-021-00105-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43615-021-00105-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s43615-021-00105-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leach, Andrew & Mason, Charles F. & Veld, Klaas van ‘t, 2011. "Co-optimization of enhanced oil recovery and carbon sequestration," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 893-912.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leach, Andrew & Mason, Charles F. & Veld, Klaas van ‘t, 2011. "Co-optimization of enhanced oil recovery and carbon sequestration," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 893-912.
    2. Dana M. Abdulbaqi & Carol A. Dahl & Mohammed R. AlShaikh, 2018. "Enhanced oil recovery as a stepping stone to carbon capture and sequestration," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 31(1), pages 239-251, May.
    3. You, Junyu & Ampomah, William & Sun, Qian, 2020. "Co-optimizing water-alternating-carbon dioxide injection projects using a machine learning assisted computational framework," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    4. Vanessa Núñez-López & Ramón Gil-Egui & Seyyed A. Hosseini, 2019. "Environmental and Operational Performance of CO 2 -EOR as a CCUS Technology: A Cranfield Example with Dynamic LCA Considerations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Gao, Shen & van ’t Veld, Klaas, 2021. "Pegging input prices to output prices—A special price adjustment clause in long-term CO2 sales contracts," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Okullo, Samuel J. & Reynès, Frédéric & Hofkes, Marjan W., 2015. "Modeling peak oil and the geological constraints on oil production," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 36-56.
    7. Özge .Ic{s}legen & Stefan Reichelstein, 2011. "Carbon Capture by Fossil Fuel Power Plants: An Economic Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 21-39, January.
    8. Calderón, Andrés J. & Pekney, Natalie J., 2020. "Optimization of enhanced oil recovery operations in unconventional reservoirs," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    9. Compernolle, T. & Welkenhuysen, K. & Huisman, K. & Piessens, K. & Kort, P., 2017. "Off-shore enhanced oil recovery in the North Sea: The impact of price uncertainty on the investment decisions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 123-137.
    10. Waxman, Andrew R. & Corcoran, Sean & Robison, Andrew & Leibowicz, Benjamin D. & Olmstead, Sheila, 2021. "Leveraging scale economies and policy incentives: Carbon capture, utilization & storage in Gulf clusters," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    11. William Ampomah & Robert S. Balch & Reid B. Grigg & Brian McPherson & Robert A. Will & Si‐Yong Lee & Zhenxue Dai & Feng Pan, 2017. "Co‐optimization of CO 2 ‐EOR and storage processes in mature oil reservoirs," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 7(1), pages 128-142, February.
    12. Ampomah, W. & Balch, R.S. & Cather, M. & Will, R. & Gunda, D. & Dai, Z. & Soltanian, M.R., 2017. "Optimum design of CO2 storage and oil recovery under geological uncertainty," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 80-92.
    13. Kevin McDonnell & Levente Molnár & Mary Harty & Fionnuala Murphy, 2020. "Feasibility Study of Carbon Dioxide Plume Geothermal Systems in Germany−Utilising Carbon Dioxide for Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-24, May.
    14. Niko Jaakkola, 2012. "Monopolistic sequestration of European carbon emissions," OxCarre Working Papers 098, Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies, University of Oxford.
    15. Wang, Xiao & van ’t Veld, Klaas & Marcy, Peter & Huzurbazar, Snehalata & Alvarado, Vladimir, 2018. "Economic co-optimization of oil recovery and CO2 sequestration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 132-147.
    16. Tayari, Farid & Blumsack, Seth, 2020. "A real options approach to production and injection timing under uncertainty for CO2 sequestration in depleted shale gas reservoirs," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    17. Tapia, John Frederick D. & Lee, Jui-Yuan & Ooi, Raymond E.H. & Foo, Dominic C.Y. & Tan, Raymond R., 2016. "Optimal CO2 allocation and scheduling in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operations," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 337-345.

    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:spr:circec:v:2:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s43615-021-00105-1. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.