Subsurface Characterization, Modeling, Monitoring, and Remediation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

subsurface characterization modeling monitoring and
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Subsurface Characterization, Modeling, Monitoring, and Remediation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

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


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

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

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Abraham Lincoln with the founders of the Academy signing the Academy charter of March 3, 1863. Painting by Albert Herter.

National Academy of Sciences (1863) National Research Council (1916) National Academy of Engineering (1964) Institute of Medicine (1970)

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

Committee on Geological

and

Geotechnical Engineering Committee on Geological

and

Geotechnical Engineering

What is COGGE?

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

National Academy

  • f Engineering

National Academy

  • f Sciences

Institute of Medicine National Research Council Board on Earth Sciences and Resources Division on Earth and Life Studies Transportation Research Board Division on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Division on Policy and Global Affairs Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences Committee on Earth Resources Geographical Sciences Committee Committee on Geophysical and Environmental Data Mapping Science Committee Committee on Seismology and Geodynamics Committee on Geological and Geotechnical Engineering

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

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

COGGE Members

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

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.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

Consensus reports Symposia, roundtables, and forums on national issues Proceedings from conferences and workshops “White papers” that take a stand on pressing scientific concerns

Types of Activities

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

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.

COGGE Sponsors

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

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

Current Activities

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Subsurface Characterization, Modeling, Monitoring, and Remediation of Fractured Porous Rocks

Today’s topic

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

Spatial Variability

① COV(R2)=0.49 ② COV(R2)=1.26 ③ COV(R2)=1.95 (a) Uncorrelated network (Fig. 4 and 6) (b) Isotropically correlated Network (Fig. 6) Jang

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

Fines Migration

Valdes

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

Hydro-Biological

The diatoms - 1990

Rebata-Landa

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 Initial hydraulic conductivity kinitial [cm/s] Hydraulic conductivity after bioclogging kfinal [cm/s] 2-orders of magnitude reduction Estimated reduction assuming a "tube model" w ith t = 7 µm Estimated reduction assuming a "tube model" w ith t = 70 µm Biological clogging can be mechanically constraint 10-8 10-6 10-4 10-2 100 102 10-8 10-6 10-4 10-2 100 102 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 Estimated pore size d pore [mm] sands silts clays 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 Initial hydraulic conductivity kinitial [cm/s] Hydraulic conductivity after bioclogging kfinal [cm/s] 2-orders of magnitude reduction Estimated reduction assuming a "tube model" w ith t = 7 µm Estimated reduction assuming a "tube model" w ith t = 70 µm Biological clogging can be mechanically constraint 10-8 10-6 10-4 10-2 100 102 10-8 10-6 10-4 10-2 100 102 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 Estimated pore size d pore [mm] sands silts clays 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 Initial hydraulic conductivity kinitial [cm/s] Hydraulic conductivity after bioclogging kfinal [cm/s] 2-orders of magnitude reduction Estimated reduction assuming a "tube model" w ith t = 7 µm Estimated reduction assuming a "tube model" w ith t = 70 µm Biological clogging can be mechanically constraint 10-8 10-6 10-4 10-2 100 102 10-8 10-6 10-4 10-2 100 102 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 100 Estimated pore size d pore [mm] sands silts clays

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Reactive Fluid Transport

[CO2(aq)] inlet 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Reactive fracture surfaces (CaCO3 )

Kim

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Advection-Diffusion-Reaction

D d v Pe = rate Diffusion rate Advection

v l α Da rate Advection Reaction = rate

diffusion dominant advection dominant low reaction rate

Fredd & Fogler 1988, 1998 Fredd & Miller’s 2000 Golfier et al. 2002

10-4 10-3 10-2 101 102 103 10-1 103 102 101 10-1 10-2 10-3 10-4

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

Hydro-Chemo-Mechanical

0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1000 2000 Time (sec) Lateral stress coefficient, k 0.00 0.02 0.04 Vertical strain 90% glass bead + 10% NaCl

Shin

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 10000000 100000000 Time [s] Normalized Resistance 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 VF/VL=400 - 0.13 Hz - 1.6 cc/s

chemical diffusion D~0.0015 mm2/s D~1.9 mm2/s 0.6 0.15

Cyclic Stress: AC Advection

Goldstein

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

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
slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

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

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Study Process

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

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

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

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