A.2.2. Regional Improvement

After having defined the appropriate ranking, we improved IPCC original map with regional maps that have been released after 2005 and up to now.

This section sums up the different regional or local sources used to improve the world suitability map (Figure 14).

Examples of such improvements are given in sub-sections below.

A.2.2.1. Australia

The study conducted by Australian CCS Taskforce [9] carried out a detailed ranking of the Australian basins. Using a probabilistic approach they created a five levels ranking: Highly Suitable, Suitable, Possible, Unlikely, and Unsuitable.

The ranking seen above was adapted on Australia. In addition the extrusive volcanic rocks have been highlighted. New Zealand has been considered as unsuitable only due to a high natural seismicity risk.

Figure 55 : CCS Taskforce interpretation of Australia storage capacity [9]

Figure 56: New assessment of storage suitability for Australia.

A.2.2.2. India

The map of storage potential in India [29], proposed by IEAGHG - 2008 has the same logic of ranking, with only three levels:

  • Good
  • Fair
  • Limited

As for Australia the extrusive volcanic rocks have been highlighted in the new proposed version (see Figure 58).

Figure 57 : IEAGHG 2008 interpretation

Figure 58: New assessment of storage suitability for India

A.2.2.3. China

The study from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) [13] and the works of Dahowski et al [15], of Finlay et al [21], of Le Nindre et al [42], of Li et al [44], and of Jiao et al [36] have been used for China to improve the IPCC’s map (Figure 53).

These documents propose a good description of the storage possibilities in deep saline formations, oil and gas fields and coal fields. The following Figure 59 and Figure 60 are derived from these references.

Figure 59: China basin prospectivity

Figure 60: China Deep saline prospectivity

Figure 61: New assessment of storage suitability for China

A.2.2.4. South-East Asia

For the South-East Asian countries, the map from IPCC (Figure 53) was too global. The work presented by ICTPL [28] proposed some interesting details of the potential storage capacities at a country level.

Additionally the report from Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) on South East Asia countries [3] has also been used.

The work of Huh et al [27] and Dooley for PNNL [17] has been used for Korea.

The works of Best et al [5] and of Indonesia CCS working group [35] were used for Indonesia.

Figure 62: New assessment of storage suitability for South-East Asia

A.2.2.5. Europe

In Europe, the results from EU GeoCapacity project [20] were used. This project assessed European capacity for geological storage of CO2 in following countries: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and UK.

The presentation of Carneiro [11] was used to improve the information about the Portuguese aquifers. The work of Okandan et al [50], and Ersoy [19] were used for Turkey.

The work of Wilkinson et al [60] improves the information about North Sea storage.

Figure 63 : New assessment of storage suitability for Europe

A.2.2.6. North America

The Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United States and Canada edited by NETL was used for the US and North West Canada.

Figure 64 : New assessment of storage suitability for North America

A.2.2.7 South America

The most recent information about South America is focussed on Brazil. The data come from the project managed by PUCRS [39, 40].

Figure 65: New assessment of storage suitability for South America

A.2.2.8. Africa

The main area studied for CO2 storage is South Africa. The atlas information [13] from the carbon sequestration project financed by the Department of Minerals and Energy of South Africa and the CSIR has been used. The works of Campher et al [7], Cloete [13] and Viljoen et al [59] permitted to improve the information on South Africa.

A program is under development in Morocco but there is no information was made available at the time of the study.

Figure 66: New Assessment of storage suitability for Africa

A.2.2.9. Middle East

There is not a lot of information on Middle East countries concerning CO2 storage suitability.

To increase the precision in this area, the repartition of oil and gas field proposed by USGS was used.

As is detailed below the natural seismicity was used to precise the IPCC map (Figure 53). In the Middle East, Iran was classified as unsuitable area because of a very high seismic hazard except along the coast of the Persian Gulf.

Figure 67: New Assessment of storage suitability for Middle East