Comparative analysis of carbon footprint of various CO2-enhanced oil recovery methods: A short experimental study

CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processes provide the perfect balance to sequester anthropogenic CO2 emissions in the subsurface while continuing to produce crude oil, which due to the lack of suitable alternatives, continues to be the most economically viable fuel for the developing world. Unlike, other eco-sustainable energy sources, oil produced from projects undergoing CO2-EOR emit large volumes of CO2 on combustion. However, this volume of CO2 is certainly lower than oil produced from other projects, yielding a net-zero emission scenario where the amount of CO2 emitted is equal to or lesser than CO2 sequestered in the subsurface. Thus, in this study, various means of CO2-EOR like gas injection, water-alternating gas (WAG), carbonated water injection (CWI) and foam flooding were performed in a fabricated porous media and the resultant oil recovery was compared with the amount of CO2 injected to establish the carbon footprint of each method. From the presented results, the application of foam flooding is recommended to achieve near net-zero carbon emissions from produced crude oil.

Automated summary

CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processes provide a balanced solution for sequestering CO2 emissions while continuing crude oil production. Compared to other sustainable energy sources, CO2-EOR projects emit less CO2 during combustion, resulting in a net-zero emission scenario. In this study, different CO2-EOR methods were compared in terms of oil recovery and the associated carbon footprint. The results suggest that foam flooding is recommended to achieve near net-zero carbon emissions from produced crude oil.