The National Academies Study Process and a proposed study on Subsurface Characterization, Modeling, Monitoring, and Remediation of Fractured Porous Rocks Presentation to the Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable November 9, 2010 Sammantha Magsino J. Carlos Santamarina National Academies Georgia Tech 1
National Academy of Sciences (1863) National Research Council (1916) National Academy of Engineering (1964) Institute of Medicine (1970) Abraham Lincoln with the founders of the Academy signing the Academy charter of March 3, 1863. Painting by Albert Herter. 2
What is COGGE? C ommittee o n G eological C ommittee o n G eological and and G eotechnical E ngineering G eotechnical E ngineering 3
National Academy National Academy Institute of Medicine of Engineering of Sciences National Research Council Division on Division on Division on Division on Transportation Earth Behavioral and Policy and Engineering and Social Sciences Research Board and Global Affairs Physical Sciences Life Studies and Education Board on Earth Sciences and Resources Committee on Committee on Committee on Mapping Geophysical Geographical Committee on Geological Seismology Science Sciences Earth and and and Committee Committee Resources Geotechnical Environmental Geodynamics Engineering Data 4
COGGE Members Edward Kavazanjian, Jr. (Chair) Arizona State University Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Conrad W. Felice C.W. Felice, LLC Murray W. Hitzman Colorado School of Mines Department of Geology and Geological Engineering Sandra Houston Arizona State University Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Wesley C. Patrick Southwest Research Institute Geosciences and Engineering Division J. Carlos Santamarina Georgia Institute of Technology School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Past Chair Gregory B. Baecher , University of Maryland Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 5
COGGE Mission Statement To identify, investigate, and report on questions relating to geological and geotechnical engineering to government, industry, academia, and the public; To inform public policy on geological and geotechnical engineering issues; To identify new technologies and potential applications; and To promote the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge. 6
Types of Activities Consensus reports Symposia, roundtables, and forums on national issues Proceedings from conferences and workshops “White papers” that take a stand on pressing scientific concerns 7
COGGE Sponsors National Science Foundation US Nuclear Regulatory Commission NIOSH Mining Safety and Health Research Program Past and Present Study Sponsors FEMA, EPA, NSF, USNRC, DoD, DoE, BLM, Bureau of Reclamation, FHWA, Gas Research Institute, Dowell-Schlumberger, Inc. 8
Current Activities Current Studies Underground Engineering for Sustainable Development Integrating Dam and Levee Safety and Community Resilience Induced Seismicity in Energy Applications In Development The Role of Geotechnology in Sustainable Energy Production Criteria for Liquefaction Susceptibility Assessment 9
Today’s topic Subsurface Characterization, Modeling, Monitoring, and Remediation of Fractured Porous Rocks 10
11 Spatial Variability (b) Isotropically correlated (a) Uncorrelated network Network (Fig. 6) (Fig. 4 and 6) ① COV(R 2 )=0.49 ② COV(R 2 )=1.26 ③ COV(R 2 )=1.95 Jang
Valdes Fines Migration 12
Hydro-Biological The diatoms - 1990 Estimated pore size d pore [mm] Estimated pore size d pore [mm] Estimated pore size d pore [mm] 10 -5 10 -5 10 -5 10 -4 10 -4 10 -4 10 -3 10 -3 10 -3 10 -2 10 -2 10 -2 10 -1 10 -1 10 -1 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 2 10 2 10 2 1.E+02 1.E+02 1.E+02 silts silts silts clays clays clays sands sands sands 1.E+01 1.E+01 1.E+01 10 0 10 0 10 0 1.E+00 1.E+00 1.E+00 Hydraulic conductivity after bioclogging k final [cm/s] Hydraulic conductivity after bioclogging k final [cm/s] Hydraulic conductivity after bioclogging k final [cm/s] Estimated reduction Estimated reduction Estimated reduction 1.E-01 1.E-01 1.E-01 assuming a "tube assuming a "tube assuming a "tube model" w ith t = 7 µ m model" w ith t = 7 µ m model" w ith t = 7 µ m 1.E-02 1.E-02 1.E-02 10 -2 10 -2 10 -2 Estimated reduction Estimated reduction Estimated reduction assuming a "tube assuming a "tube assuming a "tube Biological Biological Biological model" w ith t = 70 µ m model" w ith t = 70 µ m model" w ith t = 70 µ m 1.E-03 1.E-03 1.E-03 clogging can be clogging can be clogging can be mechanically mechanically mechanically 10 -4 10 -4 10 -4 constraint constraint constraint 1.E-04 1.E-04 1.E-04 1.E-05 1.E-05 1.E-05 10 -6 10 -6 10 -6 1.E-06 1.E-06 1.E-06 1.E-07 1.E-07 1.E-07 2-orders of 2-orders of 2-orders of magnitude magnitude magnitude reduction reduction reduction 1.E-08 1.E-08 1.E-08 10 -8 10 -8 10 -8 Rebata-Landa 1.E-09 1.E-09 1.E-09 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02 1.E-09 1.E-08 1.E-07 1.E-06 1.E-05 1.E-04 1.E-03 1.E-02 1.E-01 1.E+00 1.E+01 1.E+02 10 -8 10 -8 10 -8 10 -6 10 -6 10 -6 10 -4 10 -4 10 -4 10 -2 10 -2 10 -2 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 2 10 2 10 2 Initial hydraulic conductivity k initial [cm/s] Initial hydraulic conductivity k initial [cm/s] Initial hydraulic conductivity k initial [cm/s] 13
Reactive Fluid Transport Reactive fracture surfaces (CaCO 3 ) [CO 2(aq) ] 5 10 15 20 inlet 25 30 35 40 45 Kim 50 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 14
Advection-Diffusion-Reaction low reaction rate 10 -4 10 -3 10 -2 Advection rate 10 -1 Diffusion rate 10 -4 10 -3 10 -2 10 -1 10 1 10 2 10 3 diffusion v d dominant Pe = D 10 1 10 2 10 3 advection dominant Reaction α l rate Da = Advection rate v Fredd & Fogler 1988, 1998 Fredd & Miller’s 2000 Golfier et al. 2002 15
Hydro-Chemo-Mechanical 90% glass bead + 10% NaCl 0.00 Vertical strain 0.02 0.04 Lateral stress coefficient, k 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 Shin 0.3 0 1000 2000 Time (sec) 16
Cyclic Stress: AC Advection 1 VF/VL= 60 - 0.57 Hz - 1.1 cc/s VF/VL=190 - 0.23 Hz - 1.2 cc/s VF/VL=170 - 0.28 Hz - 1.5 cc/s 0.8 VF/VL=400 - 0.13 Hz - 1.6 cc/s Normalized Resistance 0.6 chemical 0.4 diffusion D~1.9 mm 2 /s D~0.0015 mm 2 /s 0.6 0.15 0.2 0 Goldstein 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 10000000 100000000 Time [s] 17
Study Objectives Plan and hold a workshop to examine state-of-the-art in Subsurface fracture and matrix characterization and the • development of conceptual models Detection of fluid and contaminant pathways and travel times • Detection and modeling of factors that affect change in • geotechnical and hydrological properties over time Groundwater and contaminant transport modeling, monitoring, and • remediation and how these can aid decision making during the lifecycle of a facility Early indicators of system failure resulting in unintentional fluid • release Potential mitigation measures to eliminate or reduce system failure • 18
Findings and Conclusions A final report will be issued that will discuss Where research and development could improve the current state of the art Where incorporation of scientific and technical advances could enhance the state-of-practice and inform federal regulations and implementing guidelines Other areas identified by partnering sponsors 19
Study Process 20
NA Committee Selection Nominations sought from many sources Staff interview candidates well balanced free from conflicts of interest range of expertise All reports undergo extensive internal and external review 21
Study Logistics 10 committee members , expertise in appropriate geotechnical and geohydrological disciplines plus members familiar with related statutes and regulations, design and operation of related facilities, remediation practices, and current public concerns. 19 month activity Once contract in place, committee selected and approved Committee holds workshop and 3 meetings over a 12-month period Report enters review at 12 months Prepublication version of report released at 15 months Final version of report becomes available at 19 months 22
Recommend
More recommend
