Carbon Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise (CarbonSAFE): Integrated CCS Pre-Feasibility

CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin

Final Report

March 1, 2017 - October 31, 2019

Principal Investigator: Dr. Hannes Leetaru

Business Contact: Illinois State Geological Survey
615 E. Peabody Drive
Champaign, IL 61820‐7406
[email protected]

Report Issued:
October 31, 2019

U.S. DOE Cooperative Agreement Number: DE-FE0029445

Prairie Research Institute

The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois
c/o Office of Sponsored Programs & Research Administration
1901 S. First Street Suite A
Champaign, Illinois 61820

1
2
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their
employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for
the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed,
or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific
commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, or manufacturer, or otherwise does
not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not
necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

3
Contents
DISCLAIMER................................................................................................................................................... 3
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ 5
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. 7
Contributors .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................... 14
Project Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 15
Objectives ............................................................................................................................................... 15
Accomplishments and Benefits of this Project ....................................................................................... 17
Regional Geologic Assessment ................................................................................................................... 19
Deep Saline Storage .................................................................................................................................... 20
Cambro‐Ordovician Knox Group and the St. Peter Sandstone ............................................................... 24
Knox Carbonates ................................................................................................................................. 24
St. Peter Sandstone ............................................................................................................................. 25
CO2-EOR and Storage Possibility in Illinois East Sub-Basin ..................................................................... 26
Seals ............................................................................................................................................................ 29
Eau Claire Shale....................................................................................................................................... 29
Maquoketa Shale .................................................................................................................................... 31
New Albany Shale ................................................................................................................................... 33
Storage Complexes in the East Sub-Basin............................................................................................ 33
Regional Screening ...................................................................................................................................... 39
Structural Elements ................................................................................................................................. 39
Natural Gas Storage Fields...................................................................................................................... 40
Class I Disposal Wells .............................................................................................................................. 43
Groundwater resources .......................................................................................................................... 44
Legal definitions from US EPA (FRL–9923–75–Region 5, 2015):............................................................. 45
Assessment of the National Risk Partnership’s CO2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools .................... 46
Wabash CarbonSAFE Feasibility Project ..................................................................................................... 46
Business, Legal, and Permitting Landscape in Indiana............................................................................ 48
Data Assessment ......................................................................................................................................... 54
Data Acquisition ...................................................................................................................................... 57
Regional Deep Saline Storage Landscape ............................................................................................... 59
Geocellular Model ................................................................................................................................... 61
4
 Fate and Transport of Injected CO2 ......................................................................................................... 65
Stratigraphic test well and 2D seismic reflection profiles ....................................................................... 71
References: ................................................................................................................................................. 73
Acknowledgments....................................................................................................................................... 77
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 78

List of Figures
Figure 1 Pre-feasibility study area, CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin. Major sources of CO2 in the broad
region are shown as circles, sized by relative emissions (modified from US EPA, 2017), and the area
contains multiple saline storage complexes, regionally extensive seals, and opportunities for CO2-EOR. 15
Figure 2 Generalized geologic column of the Illinois Basin (thickness not to scale) with storage complexes
(reservoirs and seals) identified in Cambrian and Ordovician Strata in the Illinois Basin. Tertiary seal and
oil reservoirs are identified in the overlying strata..................................................................................... 16
Figure 3: Selected anthropogenic CO2 sources in the CarbonSAFE Illinois – East Sub-Basin region (CO2
emissions greater than 100,000 tonnes/year) are shown as red circles and include plant names. .......... 19
Figure 4 Concentration of total dissolved components in the Mt. Simon Sandstone reservoir waters
increases from fresh water in the north to concentrated brines in the south (from Mehnert and
Weberling, 2014). ....................................................................................................................................... 21
Figure 5 Regional thickness of combined Mt. Simon Sandstone and Argenta formations. ....................... 22
Figure 6 Regional Structure (elevation in feet) of the Mt. Simon Formation in the expanded East Sub-
Basin study area. ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 7 Mapped extent of the regional thickness (feet) of the highly arkosic zone in the Lower Mt.
Simon Sandstone. ....................................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 8 Regional thickness (feet) of the St. Peter Sandstone.................................................................... 25
Figure 9 General stratigraphic column of the Ordovician through Middle Pennsylvanian succession in
southern Illinois showing formal and informal units. Oil productive intervals are shown as solid circles
(modified from Huff and Seyler, 2010). ...................................................................................................... 27
Figure 10 CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin CO2-EOR area of study. Field-level results (solid colors)
from MGSC Phase I work (Finley, 2005) were supplemented with reservoir-level results (hachured lines),
showing an additional level of CO2-miscibility information for oil fields in the area. ............................... 28
Figure 11 Regional thickness of the Eau Claire Shale. ................................................................................ 30
Figure 12 Regional thickness of Maquoketa shale formation. ................................................................... 31
Figure 13 . Isopach map of the Lower Maquoketa Group in the CarbonSAFE-Illinois Basin (IB). The cross
section illustrates the relative position of the Middle Unit that enhances the thickening of the Lower
Unit. The red rectangle indicates the prefeasibility study area.................................................................. 32
Figure 14. Stratigraphic correlation chart for the main units under assessment in the CarbonSAFE
prefeasibility region. ................................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 15 Storage resource estimates (SREs) for the St Peter Sandstone (unit 3). This map represents
results with efficiency factor E p100 (E=1). Values are total storage capacity per unit area, per county.. 37
5
Figure 16 Storage resource estimates (SREs) for the Knox Supergroup (unit 4). This map represents
results with efficiency factor E p100 (E=1). Values are total storage capacity per unit area, per county.. 38
Figure 17 Storage resource estimates (SREs) for the Mount Simon Sandstone (unit 5). This map
represents results with efficiency factor E p100 (E=1). Values are total storage capacity per unit area, per
county. ........................................................................................................................................................ 39
Figure 18 Mapped regional structural features. ......................................................................................... 40
Figure 19 Location of assessed CO2 sources in relation to the Mahomet Sole source aquifer in blue
(source US EPA) . ......................................................................................................................................... 45
Figure 20 . Topographic map base for Vigo County, Indiana (source Esri). ................................................ 47
Figure 21 Aerial view of the WVR IGCC plant site, showing location of proposed stratigraphic test well.
Inset map shows the site’s location within the Illinois Basin. .................................................................... 50
Figure 22 Thin Section photomicrographs of Hinton #7 well core plugs in the Mt. Simon Sandstone. ..... 56
Figure 23 Thickness of the Cypress Sandstone in Noble Field. Location of 2D seismic reflection shown as
the red line across the Noble Field. ............................................................................................................ 58
Figure 24 . Seismic reflection across the Noble Field Areas (overlies the Clay City Anticline). The Base of
Knox reflector shows a broad anticlinal feature in the Noble Field Area. The Top of Precambrian is
structurally complex and needs further analysis and integration with other regional seismic reflection
profiles. The vertical scale is in seconds. .................................................................................................... 59
Figure 25 Structural cross section using deep wells near the proposed drill site; datum: Top of St. Peter
Sandstone. .................................................................................................................................................. 60
Figure 26 : Cross-plot of porosity and permeability results from core plug testing from the Newport well
used for the Upper and Middle Mt. Simon model zones. .......................................................................... 62
Figure 27 Cross-plot of porosity and permeability results from core plug testing from the Decatur project
used for the Lower Mt. Simon and Arkosic model zones. Points and fitted curves are colorized by which
facies each was assigned. Equations for each regression model and associated r2 values are also shown
and colorized according to match the corresponding facies. ..................................................................... 63
Figure 28 Distribution of porosity in final model as viewed from the south west looking north east. ...... 64
Figure 29 Distribution of permeability in final model as viewed from the south west looking north east.
.................................................................................................................................................................... 64
Figure 30 CO2 and brine relative permeability curves used in the reservoir model................................... 66
Figure 31 Horizontal permeability distribution (top) and CO2 saturation distribution using a (bottom). Hot
colors indicate low permeability or CO2 saturation. Cooler colors indicate high permeability or CO2
saturation. ................................................................................................................................................... 67
Figure 32 Horizontal permeability distribution (top) and CO2 saturation distribution using a (bottom). Hot
colors indicate low permeability or CO2 saturation. Cooler colors indicate high permeability or CO2
saturation. ................................................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 33 Plume size radius (feet) correlation using cumulative mass injection (M tonnes), effective
porosity (fraction) and net thickness (feet) (1 ft = 0.3048 m). ................................................................... 69
Figure 34 Comparison of simulation predictions to plume size correlation developed by Frailey, 2013.
Plume size radius (feet) correlation using the cumulative mass injection (M tonnes), effective porosity
(fraction) and net thickness (feet) (1 ft = 0.3048 m)................................................................................... 70
Figure 35 Comparison of simulation predictions to plume size correlation developed by Frailey, 2013.
Plume size area (square miles) correlation using cumulative mass injection (M tonnes), effective porosity
(fraction) and net thickness (feet) (1 mile = 1.609 km; 1 ft = 0.3048 m). ................................................... 71
6
List of Tables
Table 1 Selected large-scale anthropogenic CO2 sources (>100,000 tonnes/year) considered in the
CarbonSAFE Illinois – East Sub-Basin source and storage network study. ................................................. 18
Table 2. Regional CO2 storage resource estimates (million tonnes) for saline formations in the Illinois
East Sub-basin. *The P50 scenario was not assessed for the Knox group, but a reasonable P50
approximation is 36% of the P90 storage value. Figures have been rounded. .......................................... 34
Table 3 Number of wells used in each method. ......................................................................................... 36
Table 4 Gas Storage Fields in Illinois and Indiana (EIA-191 Monthly Underground Gas Storage Reports,
2019). .......................................................................................................................................................... 41
Table 5 Class I Disposal Well Data from Illinois and Indiana....................................................................... 43
Table 6 Site screening criteria (modified from Quintessa 2019). ............................................................... 51
Table 7. Nearest wells to the proposed site which penetrate selected formations................................... 55
Table 8 Locations and well information for wells within ten miles of the proposed stratigraphic test well
drill site which penetrate the Maquoketa or Knox formations. ................................................................. 56
Table 9 Model summary ............................................................................................................................. 65
Table 10 Bulk, net and pore volume for constructed model assuming net-to-gross ratio of 0.6, 0.8 and 1.
.................................................................................................................................................................... 65
Table 11 : Plume extents of different simulated scenarios. ....................................................................... 68

7
Contributors
Project principal investigator, Hannes E. Leetaru of the Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS), prepared
the final report with assistance of Curt Blakley, Carl Carman, Damon Garner, and Chris Korose of the
ISGS. Roland Okwen, Ola Babarinde, and James Damico of the ISGS contributed the Reservoir
Simulation section of this report. The CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin pre-feasibility project is the
result of collaboration between the ISGS and the Indiana Geological & Water Survey, Indiana University,
Projeo Corp., Industrial Economics, Inc., Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, University of Wyoming,
Trimeric Corporation, and Brigham Young University.

The following table is a list of research scientists from the different organizations. They all made
significant contributions to this research project and are authors of papers, presentations, and
topical reports summarizing the project results.

Topical Report Author Affiliation

Summary of Carbon Storage Chiara Trabucchi Industrial Economics,
Incentives and Potential Incorporated
Legislation: CarbonSAFE East
Sub-Basin Project Subtask
3.1 - Topical Report:
DOE/FE0029445‐1

An Assessment of Potential Vinodkumar Patel Prairie Research Institute,

CO2 Sources throughout the Illinois Sustainable
Illinois Basin: CarbonSAFE Technology Center
East Sub-Basin
ProjectSubtask 5.1 – Topical
Report: DOE/FE0029445‐2
Kevin O’Brien Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois Sustainable
Technology Center
Christopher Korose Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey

Transportation and Andrew Sexton Trimeric Corporation

Infrastructure Assessment:
CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin
ProjectSubtask 5.2 - Topical
Report: DOE/FE0029445‐3
Ray McKaskle Trimeric Corporation

8
Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Christopher Korose Prairie Research Institute
Permitting Case Study:
CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin
Project Subtask 3.2 – Topical
Report: DOE-FE0029445-4
John Rupp O’Neill School of Public and
Environmental Affairs,
Indiana University
Sallie Greenberg Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey

Data Gap Assessment: Curt Blakley Prairie Research Institute,

CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin Illinois State Geological
Project Subtask 4.1 - Topical Survey
Report DOE-FE0029445-5

Carl Carman Prairie Research Institute,

Illinois State Geological
Survey
Damon Garner Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
James Damico Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Christopher Korose Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey

An Assessment of the Carl Carman Prairie Research Institute,

National Risk Assessment Illinois State Geological
Program’s CO2 Sequestration Survey
Leakage Modeling Tools:
CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin
Project Subtask 6.1- Topical
Report: DOE/FE0029445-6

9
 James Damico Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Curt Blakley Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Signe White Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory
Diana Bacon Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory
Christopher Brown Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory

Evaluation of Geologic Cristian R. Medina Indiana Geological and

Carbon Storage Resource Water Survey, Indiana
Estimates (SREs) of Cambrian University
Ordovician Units within the
CarbonSAFE Prefeasibility
Study Region: CarbonSAFE
East Sub-Basin Project
Subtasks 4.2 and 4.3 -
Topical Report: DOE-
FE0029445-7

Kevin M. Ellett Indiana Geological and

Water Survey, Indiana
University
John Rupp O’Neill School of Public and
Environmental Affairs,
Indiana University

Stakeholder Analysis Report: Sallie Greenberg Prairie Research Institute,

CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin Illinois State Geological
Project Subtask 3.3 - Topical Survey
Report: DOE/FE0029445‐8

Chris Korose Prairie Research Institute,

Illinois State Geological
Survey

10
 Zoe Need O’Neill School of Public and
Environmental Affairs,
Indiana University
John Rupp O’Neill School of Public and
Environmental Affairs,
Indiana University

Developing CO2 Source and Curt Blakley Prairie Research Institute,

Storage Opportunities across Illinois State Geological
the Illinois Basin: Survey
CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin
Project Subtask 5.3 – Topical
Report: DOE/FE0029445-9

Carl Carman Prairie Research Institute,

Illinois State Geological
Survey
Charles Monson Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Jared Freiburg Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Christopher Korose Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey

A Summary of CO2-Enhanced Curt Blakley Prairie Research Institute,

Oil Recovery Options in the Illinois State Geological
Illinois East Sub-Basin: Survey
CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin
Project - Topical Report:
DOE-FE0029445-10

Nathan Webb Prairie Research Institute,

Illinois State Geological
Survey
Yaghoob Lasemi Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey

11
 Zohreh Askari Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Christopher Korose Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Nathan Grigsby Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Carl Carman Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey

Evaluation of Caprock Cristian R. Medina Indiana Geological and

Integrity of the Upper Water Survey, Indiana
Ordovician Units within the University
CarbonSAFE Prefeasibility
Study Region - CarbonSAFE
East Sub-Basin Project
Subtask 4.3 - Topical Report:
DOE-FE0029445-11

John A. Rupp O’Neill School of Public and

Environmental Affairs,
Indiana University
Richard Lahann Indiana Geological and
Water Survey, Indiana
University
Jayson Eldridge Indiana Geological and
Water Survey, Indiana
University

CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin Curt Blakley Prairie Research Institute,

Site Feasibility Plan: Illinois State Geological
CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin Survey
Subtask 4.5 – Topical Report:
DOE-FE0029445‐12

12
Carl Carman Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Hannes Leetaru Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey
Christopher Korose Prairie Research Institute,
Illinois State Geological
Survey

13
Executive Summary
Purpose of the project was to conduct a pre-feasibility assessment for commercial-scale CO2 geological
storage complexes in the East Sub-Basin of the Illinois Basin. This work will be used to advance the
experience and knowledge about scaling up from demonstration to commercial-scale storage (CCS), and
eventually readying sites for more than 50 million tonnes injection from one or more industrial sources.
To accomplish this, the project formed a CCS coordination team with varied backgrounds to evaluate
aspects of developing an integrated CCS project, including regulatory, legislative, technical, public policy,
commercial and financial requirements. We developed a plan and strategy to address the technical and
non-technical challenges to enable an economically feasible and publicly acceptable integrated CCS
project. A significant output of this high-level technical evaluation of the East Sub-Basin was to identify
suitable site(s) within the storage complex(es) that include detailed subsurface characterization and risk
identification, along with evaluation of potential industrial CO2 sources for sequestration.

14
Project Summary

Objectives
The CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin is a broad area extending through east-central Illinois and west-
central Indiana, generally trending from Marion and Fayette Counties (IL) in the southwest part of the
study area through Vigo and Vermillion Counties (IN) in the northeast (1).

East Sub-Basin work has built upon the FutureGen DOE initiative, research of the DOE’s Regional Carbon
Sequestration program, and other DOE funded projects such as the evaluation of the Cambrian-
Ordovician strata and reservoir characterization studies in the Mississippian Cypress Sandstone. Recent
geological research has focused on a high porosity, arkosic zone within the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone
as a prospective storage resource play in the region.
.

Figure 1. Pre-feasibility study area, CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin. Major sources of CO2 in the broad region are shown as
circles, sized by relative emissions (modified from US EPA, 2017), and the area contains multiple saline storage complexes,
regionally extensive seals, and opportunities for CO2-EOR.

The East Sub-Basin study area has a number of potential geologic sequestration targets (1), including
three significant deep saline reservoirs: (Mt. Simon Sandstone, Knox Group, St. Peter Sandstone), with
multiple overlying seals (Eau Claire Shale, Maquoketa Shale, New Albany Shale). Additionally, potential
carbon dioxide enhanced oil and gas recovery (CO2-EOR and CO2-EGR) and storage opportunities in
Pennsylvanian and Mississippian strata exist in the region. CO2-EOR recovery has the potential to be
economically significant by improving oil recovery and providing possible storage of anthropogenic CO2,

15
and CO2-EOR reservoirs could potentially be co-located (stacked) with saline storage options. Recent
research has focused on a high porosity, highly arkosic zone within the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone.
Based on this work, we present a conceptual CO2 source and storage network, which focuses on the
arkosic zone in the Lower Mt. Simon as a prospective storage resource play in the Illinois East Sub-Basin
region.

Figure 2. Generalized geologic column of the Illinois Basin (thickness not to scale) with storage complexes (reservoirs and
seals) identified in Cambrian and Ordovician Strata in the Illinois Basin. Tertiary seal and oil reservoirs are identified in the
overlying strata.

Commercialization of large-scale Carbon Capture and Storage in the Illinois Basin may be realized by
taking advantage of CCS tax credits (under 26. U.S. Code § 45Q and 2018 FUTURE Act amendments)
and potential revenue from sale of CO2 for EOR. A 45-metric ton (50 million ton) CO2 storage operation
would primarily target capacious saline reservoirs able to store this large volume at a single location, the
cost of which may be offset, at least partially, by regional CO2 EOR interests in the long-term. Topical
report DOE/FE0029445‐1 provides a summary of carbon storage incentives and legislation of potential
16
relevance to development of commercialization of large-scale carbon capture and impacts on this
project.

Obstacles/hurdles to the adoption of commercial-scale CCS remain, however, e.g. in the US EPA Class VI
Underground Injection Control permitting process for CO2 injection wells, and pore space ownership and
long-term liability for subsurface CO2.

Accomplishments and Benefits of this Project

Identifying geological storage sites suitable for storage of over 50 million tonnes of CO2 is essential for
developing commercial-scale CCS projects to address greenhouse gas emissions from industrial
sources. There are relatively few large carbon storage projects in deep saline reservoirs, and this gap
in development knowledge is addressed by the research in this project. Our work shows that that the
storage capacity is available for CCS commercial projects. The analysis of the different CO2 sources
suggests that there is a need for more drilling and 2D seismic reflection data in order to better
understand the geologic and economic risk in each area. The data from this study is being used within
the NRAP Toolkits to move toward validating technologies to ensure storage permanence and to
improve reservoir storage efficiency. The knowledge gained will contribute to best practice manuals
about CCS technology and issues that will be of broad use to other sites and future commercialization
efforts.
The Pre-feasibilty CarbonSAFE Illinois East-Sub-Bbasin project resulted in the funding of the Feasibility
Wabash CarbonSAFE project in Indiana (DE-FE0021626). Objectives of the Wabash project are to
establish the feasibility of developing a commercial-scale geological storage complex at the Wabash
Valley Resources (WVR) LLC’s Wabash Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plant in Vigo
County, Indiana, for storage of 50 million tonnes or more of CO2.

Pre-Feasibility Regional Assessment

Large-scale anthropogenic CO2 sources (>100,000 tonnes/year) were catalogued for the CarbonSAFE
Illinois East Sub-Basin project source assessment (Topical Report DOE/ FE0029445‐2) to study the
potential for commercial-scale (50 million metric tons or more) carbon capture and storage in the
region. The portfolio of the source network is diverse, consisting of fossil-base power production,
ethanol production operations, chemical development, and refinery facilities, most of which are
relatively new or modernized (i.e. post year 2000) increasing the likelihood for successful transition to
carbon capture capable.

Topical report DOE/FE0029445-9 ten facilities (Figure 3) are selected from the source network portfolio
and reviewed as potential sources for commercial-scale geological storage in a regional CO2 source and
storage network study. (Blakley et al., 2019). Annual emissions data for each facility were collected
from the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium and United States Environmental Protection
Agency (US EPA) databases. Facilities listed in Table 1 , were considered in a regional commercial-scale
CO2 source and storage network study presented here.

17
Table 1. Selected large-scale anthropogenic CO2 sources (>100,000 tonnes/year) considered in the CarbonSAFE Illinois – East
Sub-Basin source and storage network study.

Facility/Company Class City County State CO2 Tonnes Source Feedstock/Fuel

Abbott Power Plant Power Plant, Steam Champaign Champaign IL 236,628 EPA (2017) Natural Gas,
(University of Generation Fuel Oil, Coal
Illinois)
Archer Daniels Ethanol Production, Decatur Macon IL 4,490,465 EPA (2017) Coal, Corn
Midland Co. Injection of CO2
Waste
City Water, Light, & Power Plant Springfield Sangamon IL 2,631,577 EPA (2017) Coal
Power
Cronus Fertilizer Urea, Ammonia Tuscola Douglas IL N/A N/A Natural Gas
Plant (in
development)
Edwardsport Power Power Plant Edwardsport Knox IN 3,431,750 EPA (2017) Coal, Petcoke
Station
Gibson Generating Power Plant Owensville Gibson IN 16,331,848 EPA (2017) Coal
Station
Gibson City Energy Ethanol Production, Gibson City Ford IL 175,020 EPA (2017) Natural Gas,
Waste Fuel Oil, Corn
Prairie State Power Plant Marissa Washingto IL 11,086,886 EPA (2017) Coal
Generating n
Company
Marathon Petroleum Refinery, Robinson Crawford IL 1,723,628 EPA (2017) Natural Gas,
Petroleum Co. Petroleum Product Crude oil
Robinson Refinery Supplier
Wabash Valley Ammonia Terre Haute Vigo IN 1,570,000 Company Coal, Petcoke
Resources (in Projection
development)

18
Figure 3. Selected anthropogenic CO2 sources in the CarbonSAFE Illinois – East Sub-Basin region (CO2 emissions greater than
100,000 tonnes/year) are shown as red circles and include plant names.

Regional Geologic Assessment

The study area has numerous potential geologic sequestration targets, including three deep saline
reservoirs with corresponding seals, and there is potential enhanced oil recovery (EOR) opportunities
within shallower Mississippian reservoirs. Recent research has focused on a high porosity, highly arkosic
zone within the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone. Based on this work, we present a conceptual CO2 source
and storage network, which focuses on the arkosic zone in the Lower Mt. Simon as a prospective storage
resource play in the Illinois East Sub-Basin region.

The DOE/FE0029445-9 topical report summarizes the regional geology and potential geologic
sequestration targets of the East Sub-Basin including three significant deep saline reservoirs with
corresponding seals, and potential CO2-EOR opportunities (Figure 2). Recent geological research has
focused on a high porosity, arkosic zone within the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone as a prospective storage
resource play in the region. No actual CCS project would proceed far without site‐specific data, but the
regional‐scale inferences about both reservoir and caprock quality will help project operators identify
Midwestern subregions that may provide suitable sequestration targets for specific CO2 sources.

19
Deep Saline Storage

Mt. Simon Sandstone

The Mt. Simon Sandstone is considered the most significant sequestration target in the Midwest of the
United States and is present throughout the study area. The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the prime storage
reservoir target for CO2 storage in the Illinois Basin because of its thickness, available pore space, depth
and saline water content. Characterization of the Mt. Simon was performed largely through extensive
evaluation within the Illinois Basin by the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) as part
of the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (RCSP) program. Several reference studies have
assessed the physical characteristics of the Mt. Simon relative to storage capacity (Medina et al., 2011;
Medina and Rupp, 2012), rate of injection (Barnes et al., 2009; Birkholzer and Zhou, 2009), reactivity of
CO2 (Bowen et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2011), and Mt. Simon mineralogy (Lovell and Bowen, 2013).

The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the target reservoir for two CCS demonstration projects. The Illinois Basin –
Decatur Project (IBDP) located at the Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) facility in Decatur, IL, began CO2
injection into the Mt. Simon Sandstone in late 2011 at a rate of 1,000 metric tons/day (1102 tons/day)
over a 3-year period for a total of 1 MT (1,102,311 million tons) CO2.
The IBDP project is now in post-injection monitoring phase through 2020. Illinois Industrial Carbon
Capture and Storage Project (IL-ICCS) 1 mile north of IBDP, began injecting 2,000 - 3,000 metric tons/day
(2,205 – 3,307 tons/day) in April 2017 for an expected five-year duration and cumulative storage of 4.75
MT (5.24 million tons). To date the IL-ICCS project has injected over 1,175,000 metric tons (1,295,216
tonnes) CO2 in the Mt. Simon Sandstone.

Brine salinity affects CO2 solubility and brine density and is important in understanding the storage
capacity of the formation. The map of brine salinity within the Mt. Simon Sandstone in Illinois and
Indiana shows a complex distribution of total dissolved solids and suggest that the northern and parts of
the western areas of Illinois are unsuitable for storage since they salinities are less than 10,000 mg/l

20
which is the US EPA definition of potable water.

Figure 4. Concentration of total dissolved components in the Mt. Simon Sandstone reservoir waters increases from fresh
water in the north to concentrated brines in the south (from Mehnert and Weberling, 2014).

21
Figure 5. Regional thickness of combined Mt. Simon Sandstone and Argenta formations.

In the East Sub-Basin study area, the Mt. Simon Sandstone can be 1,000 to over 2,000 feet (305 to
over 610 m) in thickness (Figure 5) occurring 6,000 to 10,000 feet (1829 to 3048 m) in depth (Figure
6). The north-central portion of the study area has the thickest Mt. Simon Sandstone, whereas the
western and southern flanks of the Illinois Basin have a Mt. Simon that either thin or not present
(Leetaru and McBride, 2009). The Mt. Simon Sandstone can be divided into Lower, Middle, and Upper
sections based on petrophysical, depositional and diagenetic attributes (Leetaru and McBride, 2009;
Medina and Rupp, 2012; Freiburg et al., 2016).
The Lower Mt. Simon is considered the best potential reservoir for carbon storage, with the highest
quality reservoir found within an arkosic zone. Lower Mt Simon well logs and regional trends indicate
porosity and permeability are 16.3% and 11.1 mD (Mehnert et al., 2014). The Hinton #7 well, located in
the Manlove Natural Gas Storage Field, Champaign Co., Illinois, has 215 feet (66 m) of excellent quality
reservoir in the arkose zone with porosity and permeability values up to 25% and 600 mD. At IBDP and
IL-ICCS the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone has porosity and permeability as high as 27% and 400 mD, and a
mean (log) porosity of 16.6%. Lateral continuity of the reservoir in the Lower Mt. Simon is uncertain
because of limited well control, but most wells within the southern half of the Mt. Simon depocenter
that penetrate the Lower Mt. Simon show the occurrence of a porous zone (Figure 7).

22
Figure 6. Regional Structure (elevation in feet) of the Mt. Simon Formation in the expanded East Sub-Basin study area.

The Middle and Upper Mt. Simon generally demonstrate poorer reservoir properties except in thin tidal
flat channel sands in the Upper Mt. Simon where they are utilized for natural gas storage (Morse and
Leetaru, 2005). The Middle Mt. Simon is the tightest section of the Mt. Simon, with porosity below 10%
and permeabilities below 10 mD. Regional log averages of Upper Mt. Simon porosity and permeability
are 8.5% and 5.4 mD, respectively, although more porous and permeable units are present.

23
Figure 7. Mapped extent of the regional thickness (feet) of the highly arkosic zone in the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone.

Cambro‐Ordovician Knox Group and the St. Peter Sandstone

The Knox project (DE‐FE0002068) conducted studies during 2009–2014 to investigate and validate the
utility of the Cambro‐Ordovician Knox Group and St. Peter Sandstone geologic strata for underground
storage of carbon dioxide in the Illinois and Michigan Basins covering the states of Illinois, Indiana,
Kentucky, and Michigan. In the subsurface of the midwestern United States, the Knox and associated
strata extend continuously over an area approaching 500,000 sq. km, about three times as large as the
State of Illinois (DE‐FE0002068). In the southern part of the study area sequestration opportunities in
the Cambrian and Ordovician Knox Group and the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone.

Knox Carbonates
The Knox Dolomite Megagroup comprises the Cambrian, Lower Ordovician, and lowermost Middle
Ordovician rocks of the Illinois Basin which overly the Mt. Simon Sandstone (Buschbach, 1975). The Knox
Group is an attractive target for CO2 sequestration as these strata are laterally extensive and contain beds
of porous and permeable dolomites and sandstones with overlying tight shale and carbonate beds. The
Knox succession thickens in a southeast direction; its thickness ranges from nearly 800 ft (243 m) in the
extreme northwest to nearly 8,000 ft (2,430 m) in the Reelfoot Rift in the extreme southeastern part of
Illinois (DE‐FE0002068). There are over 2,000 feet (610 m) of Knox carbonates present in most of the East
Sub-Basin. The Potosi Dolomite, a formation within the Knox, is characterized by up to 7 feet (2 m) thick
vuggy intervals and brecciated zones that suggest a paleokarst environment (Freiburg and Leetaru, 2012),
and is a viable storage target as reservoir modeling suggests that it could contain approximately 90 million
metric tons (99 million tons) of CO2 from a single injection well (Will et al., 2014). A comprehensive

24
evaluation of the lateral and vertical lithologic variations of the rocks within the Upper Cambrian through
Lower Ordovician succession (Sauk II–III sequences) deposits in Illinois that could serve as a reservoir or
seal for CO2 storage is presented in Lasemi and Khorasgani, 2014.

St. Peter Sandstone

Figure 8. Regional thickness (feet) of the St. Peter Sandstone.

The St. Peter Sandstone (Figure 8) provides another alternative storage target, although reservoir
conditions are unsuitable for long term CO2 storage regionally. The Middle Ordovician‐age St. Peter
Sandstone is a widespread, lithologically distinct, typically pure quartz arenite lithostratigraphic unit
found throughout the upper Midwest, USA (DE‐FE0002068). The topical report DOE/FE0002068‐6
summarizes the stratigraphy of the St. Peter Sandstone (Barnes and Ellett, 2014). In the northern part of
the Illinois Basin, the St. Peter Sandstone is a major aquifer where it is around 325 ft (~100 m) thick,
occurring at shallow depths with less than 10,000 mg/L TDS (total dissolved solids) making it unsuitable
for any storage project. Additionally, where the St. Peter Sandstone occurs near surface it is extensively
mined for silica sand where it occurs near the surface an important silica sand source.

Topical report DOE/FE0002068‐7 (Will et al., 2014) addresses the question of whether or not the St.
Peter Sandstone may serve as a suitable target for CO2 sequestration at locations within the Illinois
Basin, where it lies at greater depths (below the underground source of drinking water [USDW]). The
following may be inferred from reservoir flow simulation using the rock properties expected in the study
area (Will et al., 2014): at depths of 3,500 ft. (1065 m) an injection rate of 3.2 MTPA for a 30 year period
may be achieved with a single well; at 4,000 feet (1220 m) and deeper, two or more injection wells
would be required. In the southwestern part of the study area where the Mt. Simon Sandstone is
25
unsuitable for long term commercial storage the St. Peter may provide a viable storage reservoir. St.
Peter Sandstone thins eastward and southward throughout the basin into Indiana and Kentucky where
the formation pinches out rapidly and is therefore not suitable as a CO2 storage target.

CO2-EOR and Storage Possibility in Illinois East Sub-Basin

The Illinois Basin is a hydrocarbon-bearing intracratonic basin with regionally significant CO2 storage
resources and commercial development potential. In terms of CO2 storage resources, the Illinois Basin
has 1.6 to 3.2 billion metric tons (1.8 to 3.5 billion tons) of estimated storage in coal seams, 140 to 440
million metric tons (154 to 485 million tons) in mature oil reservoirs (US DOE 2012), and 41 to 421
billion metric tons (45 to 464 billion tons). of estimated CO2 storage resources in saline reservoirs (US
DOE 2015). Conventional oil reservoir resource target for CO2-EOR in the ILB is 0.9 to 1.3 billion barrels
recoverable (MGSC 2005), not including potential residual oil zones (ROZs).

CO2-EOR recovery in the Illinois Basin has the potential to be economically significant by improving oil
recovery and providing possible storage of anthropogenic CO2, and CO2-EOR reservoirs could potentially
be co-located (stacked) with saline storage options. CO2-EOR interests in the wider region may assist the
economics of a storage project long-term, via potential revenue from sale of CO2 for EOR and/or by
taking advantage of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) tax credits under 26. U.S. Code § 45Q (and 2018
FUTURE Act amendments).

The topical report DOE-FE0029445-10 discusses the potential development and implementation of CO2-
EOR and CO2-EGR opportunities that may be available in the Illinois Basin that could supplement deep
saline storage. Enhanced oil recovery through miscible, near miscible, and immiscible CO2 flooding in the
ILB can be economically significant because it would improve recovery from oil fields and will result in
storage of anthropogenic CO2. Reservoir flow simulation suggested that there could be between 6 to
12% additional oil recovered using CO2 injection in both immiscible and miscible conditions.
The Ordovician through Pennsylvanian succession in southern Illinois contains several sandstone,
limestone, and dolomite reservoirs that are prolific oil producers (Figure 9) in a number of oil fields in
which both stratigraphic and structural controls were responsible for petroleum entrapment. Carbonate
reservoirs selected for CO2-EOR include the reservoir intervals developed in the Ordovician
“Galena/Trenton” (Kimmswick Limestone), Devonian Geneva Dolomite Member of the Grand Tower
Limestone, and Mississippian Ullin, Salem, St. Louis, and St. Genevieve limestone units. Siliciclastic
reservoirs including, Aux Vases, Yankeetown (“Benoist”), Bethel, and Cypress sandstones are also good
candidates for miscible/near miscible CO2-EOR.

From 2003-2005, the MGSC assessed oil reservoirs and fields in the Illinois Basin (Finley, 2005). Data
were assessed at the reservoir level, e.g. average reservoir properties to estimate original oil in place
(OOIP) and temperature and pressure gradients were applied to average reservoir depths to estimate
miscibility classification. Similarly, CO2 storage and oil recovery factors (derived from oil production
results and simulation work) were applied to the OOIP values, based on reservoir groupings of similar
lithologies and whether the CO2-miscibility type was miscible or immiscible. The combinations of

26
Figure 9. General stratigraphic column of the Ordovician through Middle Pennsylvanian succession in southern Illinois
showing formal and informal units. Oil productive intervals are shown as solid circles (modified from Huff and Seyler, 2010).

temperature and pressure creating the largest near-miscible range were used as criteria for assigning
miscibility classes to the oil reservoirs based on depth. Estimations between 240 to 380 million barrels of
27
oil (MMBO) are potentially recoverable in CO2-miscible reservoirs, with a miscible- CO2-flooding storage
potential of 58 to 180 million metric tons (64 to 198 million tons).

The MGSC regional CO2-EOR results have largely been presented in map form (Figure 10), at the field-
summary level. Although this representation has been an effective tool for illustrating the regional CO2-
EOR overview in the Illinois, but it tends to draw a focus to the deeper center of the basin where fields
with predominantly miscible conditions are located, and the field-level representation masks additional
conditions for miscibility in the outer-lying (and generally, shallower) belts of predominantly near-
miscible and immiscible oil fields.

Figure 10. CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin CO2-EOR area of study. Field-level results (solid colors) from MGSC Phase I
work (Finley, 2005) were supplemented with reservoir-level results (hachured lines), showing an additional level of CO2-
miscibility information for oil fields in the area.

For example, by supplementing the field representations with reservoir-level results, fields outside the
predominantly miscible zone in the deeper center of the Illinois Basin (Figure 10, i.e. predominantly
near-miscible and some predominantly immiscible fields) are shown to have at least one reservoir with
miscible conditions for CO2 flooding. Similarly, the deeper fields in the center of the basin shown to be
predominantly miscible (e.g. Clay City Consolidated) also contain shallower reservoirs in the near-
miscible and immiscible categories.
28
In addition, related studies have identified and assessed ROZs in sandstone and carbonate formations
throughout the region to determine the CO2 storage and EOR resource potential. ROZs have large
associated storage potential, especially because they are believed to occur in regional fairways with
multiple, stacked, porous and permeable formations separated by laterally extensive caprocks. ROZs do
not exist in isolation: because potential ROZ fairways in different formations overlap, there is potential
for vertically stacked ROZs at any given site. Chesterian sandstones, including the Cypress, Benoist,
Hardinsburg, and Waltersburg Sandstones (Figure 9), have analogous lithology and texture, and form
thick and extensive sandstone belts in the Illinois Basin. Likewise, thick, coarser textured sandstone belts
with thin oil reservoirs and vast CO2 storage potential are also known to occur, albeit at shallower
depths, within the Caseyville and Tradewater Formations of the Lower and Middle Pennsylvanian.
Additional ROZ potential exists in thick, water-bearing Lower and Middle Mississippian and Lower
Paleozoic formations as well. The Carper Sandstone is an example of this type of reservoir, which,
despite some oil production in brownfield settings, is relatively understudied. Finally, certain carbonate
formations such as the Mississippian Ullin Limestone and the Devonian Geneva Dolomite (Figure 9) are
also thick and extensive with characteristics indicative of ROZs, including oil shows with high water cut in
areas where production is attempted.

Ongoing studies will highlight key reservoirs in primary fields of interest and provide the basis for
targeted oilfield and site-specific work in assessing the feasibility of industrial-scale CO2 storage and CO2-
EOR. In areas without known oil fields, numerous opportunities exist for saline reservoir storage – both
as strict saline storage and as storage associated with ROZs. The associated storage potential in these
ROZ fairways, not accounting for main pay zones or underlying brine formations, is estimated to 6.9
billion tonnes for continuous CO2 flooding.

Seals
Eau Claire Shale

29
Figure 11. Regional thickness of the Eau Claire Shale.

The Eau Claire Formation (Figure 11) has been identified as the primary seal that would prevent the
upward migration of supercritical CO2 following injection into the underlying Mount Simon Sandstone
(Leetaru and McBride, 2009; Medina et al., 2011; Medina and Rupp, 2012; Carroll et al., 2013; Lahann et
al., 2014). The Eau Claire consists of dolomite, dolomitic sandstone, siltstone, and shale, with regional
variations in dominant lithology across the Basin. In east-central Illinois and west-central Indiana, the
lowermost Eau Claire facies, directly overlying the Mt. Simon, is dominated by shale and tight siltstone.
The Eau Claire Formation and laterally equivalent Bonneterre Formation extend across the Midwest,
existing at least in some parts in Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, and
Missouri (Gutstadt, 1958). The Eau Claire ranges in thickness from approximately 100 feet (30 m) in
western Illinois to more than 1,200 feet (300 m) in southern Illinois (30 to 300 m) reaching maximum
thickness of approximately 2,750 ft. (838 m) in the Rough Creek Graben of western Kentucky (Sargent
1991).

30
Maquoketa Shale

Figure 12. Regional thickness of Maquoketa shale formation.

The Ordovician Maquoketa Shale (Figure 12) is a laterally continuous impermeable confining layer
composed of a heterogeneous sequence of carbonates, silts, and clay-rich rock units which functions as
a seal in the Cambro-Ordovician storage complex in the Illinois Basin.

Topical report DOE-FE0029445‐11 provides a regional evaluation of the seal capacity of the Maquoketa
Shale Group in the CarbonSAFE-Illinois Basin (IB) study area (Figure 13). A regional-scale lithofacies
model was developed, based on the wireline response of gamma-ray (GR), neutron (NPHI), and density
(RHOB) logs. Two control wells in Macon Co., IL and Gibson Co., IN, provided Elemental Log Analysis
(ELAN) log, a probabilistic mineralogical model based on the observed log response from multiple
borehole geophysical tools based on known values of mineral responses to such tools (Medina et al.,
2019) and portable X-ray fluorescence (pXRF) for elemental compositional analysis that were used to
calibrate and verify the log-based interpretations.

Mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) analysis were performed on 28 samples from 3 wells in
White Co., Gibson Co., and Pike Co., in southwest IN to examine the rock grain density, porosity, and
permeability. Data from thin sections, additional pXRF, and X-ray diffraction (XRD) from this sample set
was incorporated into the regional lithofacies analysis.
31
The Maquoketa Group was separated into five lithofacies: (1) limestone; (2) muddy limestone; (3)
calcitic/dolomitic shale; (4) silty shale; and (5) shale. These five lithofacies can be grouped into three
major units consisting of an upper clastic, middle carbonate, and lower clastic, which is consistent

Figure 13. Isopach map of the Lower Maquoketa Group in the CarbonSAFE-Illinois Basin (IB). The cross section illustrates the
relative position of the Middle Unit that enhances the thickening of the Lower Unit. The red rectangle indicates the
prefeasibility study area.

32
With previously proposed stratigraphic subdivisions of the Brainard Shale, Fort Atkinson Limestone, and
Scales Shale, respectively (Gray, 1972).

Overall, the thickness of the Lower Unit of the Maquoketa Group increases to the east in the study area;
Figure 13 illustrates that trend. The relative stratigraphic position of the middle unit (carbonate-rich),
varies from middle to lower (relative to the entire Maquoketa Group) in the west (shallower portions of
the Illinois Basin), to upper in the deeper portions of the Illinois Basin towards the east.

New Albany Shale

The Devonian-Mississippian New Albany Shale is an important hydrocarbon source and impermeable,
laterally continuous seal for CCS in Illinois Basin. The New Albany Shale is more than 460 ft thick in the
southern part of the Illinois Basin in southeastern Illinois and western Kentucky. Along the margins of
the Illinois Basin it thins with the exception of west-central Illinois where it can reach thickness of more
than 300 ft.

Storage Complexes in the East Sub-Basin

The Mt. Simon has excellent properties for large-scale carbon storage: it is deeply buried with pressures
and temperatures maintaining CO2 as supercritical; contains highly saline formation fluids; has storage
capacity (12 to 172 GT; US DOE, 2015); is overlain by numerous laterally extensive sealing formations;
and has suitable petrophysical characteristics for injection.

The Knox Project DE‐FE0002068 developed regional CO2 storage resource estimates for the Knox
[DOE/FE0002068‐19 (Harris et al., 2014)] and St. Peter Sandstone [DOE/FE0002068‐6 (Barnes and Ellett,
2014 )] for use in future version of the DOE’s North American CO2 Storage Resource Atlas. US DOE
regional study assessed the potential storage capacity of these units, through numerically simulated CO2
injection, at various reservoir conditions (Leetaru, 2014a). Simulation determined that each reservoir
independently has capacity to store almost 90 million tonnes of CO2 at a single site.
Although many CO2-EOR reservoirs could potentially be co-located (stacked) with saline storage options,
the Cypress Sandstone will be used as a proxy for CO2-EOR reservoirs for this discussion. The Cypress
has numerous opportunities for saline reservoir sequestration in the East Sub-Basin areas without oil
fields – both as strict saline storage and storage associated with ROZ.

Recent work in the East Sub-Basin region has focused on a high porosity, highly arkosic zone within
the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone. Because of the sparsity of wells in the Illinois Basin that penetrate
the Lower Mt. Simon, the lateral extent of this reservoir is not well known. Figure 7 shows the
preliminary interpolated regional extent and thickness of this ‘arkosic zone,’ from which updated CO2
storage resource estimates were derived.

Previous regional storage estimates of the Mt. Simon Sandstone assumed a conservative 8% porosity
over the entire Mt. Simon thickness. However, log analysis shows the arkosic zone in the Lower Mt.
Simon has average porosities approaching 19%. Using an average porosity representative of the arkosic
zone (20%) yields total Mt. Simon CO2 storage resource estimates ranging from 2.0 to 27.5 billion tonnes
33
over the East Sub-Basin project area (primary and secondary areas of interest). The incremental storage
(0.4 to 5.0 billion metric tons or 0.44 to 5.5 billions tons) in the refined arkosic zone map represents
roughly a 22% increase in the estimated Mt. Simon storage resource over the East Sub-Basin study area,
and highlights the importance of this reservoir zone as a prospective storage resource play (SPE, 2016)
within the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone in the eastern Illinois Basin.

Table 2. Regional CO2 storage resource estimates (million metric tons) for saline formations in the Illinois East sub-basin. *The P50
scenario was not assessed for the Knox group, but a reasonable P50 approximation is 36% of the P90 storage value. Figures have
been rounded.

Reservoir CO2 Storage Resource -

East Sub-Basin (Mt)
P10 P50 P90
Cypress Sandstone 8 38 105
St. Peter Sandstone 83 325 877
Knox Carbonate 1,662 5,157* 14,325
Mt. Simon Sandstone 1,997 9,988 27,468
Total 3,750 15,508 42,775

Regional data in the US DOE’s NATCARB system were used to estimate the CO2 storage resource of
the four reservoirs in the East Sub-Basin (Table 2): the Mt. Simon Sandstone, Knox Group, St. Peter
Sandstone, and the Cypress Sandstone. The storage resource estimates are based on regional
assessment work for the US DOE-NETL (RCSP and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
Site characterization programs and are supplemented with new mapping focused on the lower Mt.
Simon Sandstone.

34
Figure 14. Stratigraphic correlation chart for the main units under assessment in the CarbonSAFE prefeasibility region.

Topical Report: DOE-FE0029445-7 assesses the storage resource estimate (SRE) for the Paleozoic units in
this study focused on five intervals as reservoirs: 1) limestone and dolomite from the Trenton/Black River
Group (Upper Ordovician), 2) the Middle Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, 3) primary target reservoir
rocks of the upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician and Upper Cambrian Knox Supergroup, including a
separate assessment for the lower Knox Potosi Dolomite (Unit 4b), and 5) Mount Simon Sandstone
(Figure 14).

A comprehensive data set consisting of wireline logs, petrophysical information (core measured porosity
and permeability), stratigraphic information, and existing well location data was complied. The IGWS
finished the calculation of Storage Resource Estimates (SRE’s) using 5 methodologies: (1) SREs using a
fixed value of porosity; (2) using an average porosity (per well, per unit) from wireline-derived porosity;
(3) using an average porosity for each unit, for the entire region, from wireline-derived porosity; (4) a
depth-dependent porosity model for the St. Peter and Mt. Simon Sandstones only; and (5) SREs using
National Energy Technology Laboratory’s CO2 ¬Storage Prospective Resource Estimation Excel Analysis
(CO2-SCREEN). NETL’s CO2 Storage Prospective Resource Estimation Excel Analysis (CO2-SCREEN)
(Goodman et al., 2016). CO2-SCREEN is a tool developed by the US-DOE-NETL and is intended to aid
users with SRE estimation in saline aquifers. The number of data points varies from method to method,
and, in general, tends to decrease with depth and older stratigraphic intervals (Table 3).

35
Table 3. Number of wells used in each method.

# of Wells

Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 4b Unit 5

Method I Average porosity 162 147 60 22 27
Method II Wireline logs (per well) 49 48 28 11 11
Method III Wireline logs (regional average) 162 147 60 22 27
Method IV Diagenetic model -- 147 -- -- 27
Method V DOE/NETL SCREEN 50 50 28 11 11

The report displays resultant SREs volumes using georeferenced produced maps (using ArcMap 10.5.1)
and boxplots. Figure 15, Figure 16, and Figure 17 illustrate total storage potential estimates for the St.
Peter Sandstone, Knox Supergroup, and the Mt. Simon, respectively. Boxplots allow for comparing data
statistics (mean values and variability) between five methods employed for the SRE calculations.
Differences observed in SRE results from the five methods are mainly attributable to differences in the
data used for porosity in each method.

36
Figure 15. Storage resource estimates (SREs) for the St Peter Sandstone (unit 3). This map represents results with efficiency
factor E p100 (E=1). Values are total storage capacity per unit area, per county.

37
Figure 16. Storage resource estimates (SREs) for the Knox Supergroup (unit 4). This map represents results with efficiency
factor E p100 (E=1). Values are total storage capacity per unit area, per county.

38
Figure 17. Storage resource estimates (SREs) for the Mount Simon Sandstone (unit 5). This map represents results with
efficiency factor E p100 (E=1). Values are total storage capacity per unit area, per county.

Regional Screening
Guidelines for regional screening assessment were adapted from the FutureGen proposal that dealt with
site selection criteria, where the land above a proposed target formation(s) must not intersect dams,
water reservoirs, hazardous materials storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or other sensitive
features. This East Sub-Basin regional screening level assessment will consider the location and
proximity to structural features, natural gas storage areas (active and inactive), and Class 1 injection
wells. In addition, proximity to groundwater resources are considered here, primarily pertaining to the
areal extent of the Mahomet Sole Source Aquifer.

Site‐specific sensitive features and protected areas such as wetlands, national or state parks, protected
or historical areas, Native American tribal lands, species-sensitive areas, dams, reservoirs, etc., are
excluded from this regional screening assessment. Site-specific data and information regarding
proximity to existing natural gas storage areas, structural features, surrounding municipal infrastructure
development, groundwater resources, environmental monitoring, and local sensitive biological areas are
summarized later in the report in the attached site assessment summary tables (Appendix).

Structural Elements
Regional mapping has identified structural features and closures known in the East Sub-Basin study area
(Figure 18). The USGS seismic hazard maps indicate much of the East Sub-Basin study area to be less
than 20% (Peak acceleration expressed as a percent of gravity (%g) based on the USGS hazard map.
39
Topical report DOE/FE0002068‐11 (Hickman, 2014) describes how finding suitable sites are problematic
in areas such as the southern Illinois Basin, which have been affected by numerous tectonic episodes
since at least the late Precambrian, leading to countless faults throughout the region.
Site-specific characterization efforts would be a requirement before development of any sequestration
project.

Figure 18. Mapped regional structural features.

Natural Gas Storage Fields

Illinois has 28 underground natural gas storage fields with a total storage capacity just over 1 trillion cubic
feet of natural gas, which is more than one-tenth of the U.S. storage total (U.S. EIA Annual, 2012-17). The
state of Indiana has 21 natural gas storage fields with a combined total capacity of 113 billion cubic feet
(U.S. EIA Annual, 2012-17). Natural gas storage fields in Illinois and Indiana have used a variety of
Cambrian to Pennsylvanian age strata for underground gas storage reservoirs for the past 60+ years (Table
4).

40
Table 4. Gas Storage Fields in Illinois and Indiana (EIA-191 Monthly Underground Gas Storage Reports, 2019).
Total Field
Capacity
State County Gas Storage Field Company Reservoir Status (Mcf)

IL Champaign Manlove Field Peoples Gas Light & Coke Company Mt. Simon Active 179,061,167

IL Coles Ashmore Ameren Illinois Pennsylvanian Active 3,706,523

IL Coles Eden Ameren Illinois Cypress Active 1,403,351

IL Coles Freeburg Ameren Illinois Cypress Active 6,935,776

IL Coles Glasford Storage Field Ameren Illinois Niagarian Active 12,734,923

IL Coles Hookdale Ameren Illinois Benoist Active 1,027,106

IL Douglas Cooks Mills Natural Gas Pipeline Co Of America Cypress, Rosiclare Active 6,750,000

IL Fayette Loudon Natural Gas Pipeline Co Of America Devonian Active 80,000,000

IL Gallatin Mills Egyptian Gas Storage Corporation Tar Springs Active 1,075,000
Galesville,
IL Kankakee Herscher Natural Gas Pipeline Co Of America Mt Simon Active 114,500,000

IL Kankakee Herscher Northwest Natural Gas Pipeline Co Of America Mt. Simon Inactive 17,500,000

IL La Salle Troy Grove Nicor Mt. Simon Active 79,976,000

IL Livingston Ancona Nicor Mt. Simon Active 172,826,000

IL Livingston Pontiac Nicor Galesville Active 18,737,000

IL Livingston Pontiac Nicor Mt. Simon Active 42,864,000

IL Logan Lincoln Storage Field Ameren Illinois Lincoln Active 12,335,029

IL Logan Lincoln Storage Field Ameren Illinois Niagarian Active 12,335,029

IL Logan Shanghai Ameren Illinois Galesville Active 12,096,636

IL Madison St. Jacob Enable Mississippi River Trans Corp St. Peter Active 4,100,000

IL Marion Centralia Ameren Illinois Petro Active 654,231

IL McDonough Sciota Ameren Illinois Mt. Simon Active 5,269,415

IL Mclean Hudson Nicor Mt. Simon Active 46,854,000

IL Mclean Lake Bloomington Nicor Mt. Simon Active 49,538,000

IL Mclean Lexington Nicor Mt. Simon Active 52,185,000

IL Morgan Waverly Southwest Gas Storage Company St. Peter Active 51,100,000

IL St. Clair Hillsboro Ameren Illinois St. Peter Active 28,122,101

41
IL St. Clair Tilden Ameren Illinois Cypress Active 2,697,615

IL Williamson Johnston City Ameren Illinois Tar Springs Active 1,744,648

IL Winnebago Pecatonica Nicor Mt. Simon Active 3,286,000

IN Cass Grass Creek Northern Indiana Public Svc Mt Simon Inactive 17,880,050
Trenton,
IN Cass Royal Center Northern Indiana Public Svc Mt. Simon Active 16,621,217

IN Clark Sellersburg Indiana Gas Company Dba Vectren Knox Active 1,444,517

IN Clark Wolcott Indiana Gas Company Dba Vectren Trenton Active 7,389,240

IN Daviess Loogootee Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Bethel Sand Inactive 296,006

IN Greene Dixon Citizens Energy Group Devonian Active 2,780,000

IN Greene Howesville Citizens Energy Group Devonian Active 4,250,000

IN Greene Mineral City Citizens Energy Group Devonian Active 2,083,000

IN Greene Simpson Chapel Citizens Energy Group Devonian Active 2,200,000

IN Greene Switz City Citizens Energy Group Devonian Active 5,635,000

IN Greene Worthington Citizens Energy Group Devonian Active 13,200,000

IN Knox Monroe City Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Mansfield Active 5,338,377

IN Knox Monroe City Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Staunton Active 173,738

IN Knox Oaktown Texas Gas Transmission Corporation Stanton Active 1,051,852

IN Lawrence Leesville Texas Gas Transmission Corporation Geneva Active 3,800,000

IN Monroe Hindustan Indiana Gas Company Dba Vectren Muscatatuck Active 2,907,561

IN Monroe Unionville Indiana Gas Company Dba Vectren Muscatatuck Active 12,842,969

IN Pike Alford Texas Gas Transmission Corporation Cypress Active 2,518,753

IN Pike White River Indiana Gas Company Dba Vectren Cypress Sand Active 800,000

IN Posey Oliver Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Sebree Active 150,150

IN Posey Oliver Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Staunton Active 2,696,066

IN Spencer Midway Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Tar Springs Active 3,064,543

IN Sullivan Wilfred Texas Gas Transmission Corporation Geneva Active 4,787,966

42
Class I Disposal Wells
Well location and injection reservoir information for active Class I disposal wells (hazardous or non‐
hazardous waste) for Illinois and Indiana were previously obtained from the US EPA Region 5 and are
presented in Table 5. The majority of the wells listed in the Table 5 are outside of the East Sub-Basin
study area. In the Illinois Basin, tens-of-millions of gallons of wastewater have been injected annually
into the Potosi Dolomite of the Knox Group. The Potosi's excellent reservoir properties have been
further documented by a chemical waste disposal project at Tuscola, Douglas County, IL, that has
injected over 50 million metric tons (55 million tons) of CO2 equivalent of liquid chemical waste into the
Potosi through the Cabot-Tuscola #2 well (Leetaru, 2014). Although outside of the study area,
approximately 100 miles to the south CO2 was successfully injected into numerous intervals within the
Knox at the Blan well in Hancock County, Kentucky (Bowersox, 2013).
Table 5. Class I Disposal Well Data from Illinois and Indiana.

State County Well Name Company Formations

Eminence, Potosi
IL Vermilion Allied Chemical Corp 1 Allied Chemical Corp & Franconia
IL Douglas US Industrial Chemical 1 US Industrial Chemical Eminence, Potosi
IL Douglas Cabot Corp. Tuscola 1 Cabot Corp Eminence, Potosi
IL Douglas Cabot Corp. Tuscola 2 Cabot Corp Eminence, Potosi
Oneota,
IL Douglas Cabot Corp. Tuscola 3 Cabot Corp Eminence, Potosi
IL Clark Velsicol Chemical Corp 1 Velsicol Chemical Corp Salem
IL Clark Velsicol Chemical Corp 2 Velsicol Chemical Corp Devonian
IL Clark Velsicol Chem Corp. Obs. 1 Owner Devonian
Elmhurst-Mt.
IL Putnam Waste Disposal 1 Jones and Laughlin Steel Simon
IN Allen Leuenberger 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co
IN Allen Wakeland 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co
IN Cass Burton 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Cass Conn 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Cass Finell 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Cass Johnson 0-85 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Cass Schmaltz 2 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Cass Skinner 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Eau Claire
IN Elkhart Hoskin Mfg WD-1 Hoskin Mfg. Mt. Simon
IN Fulton Burns 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Fulton Morphet 1 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Fulton Sommers 2 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
IN Fulton Todd 0-121 Northern Indiana Public Service Co Mt. Simon
Eau Claire, Mt.
IN Porter Bethlehem Steel WD-1 Bethlehem Steel Simon
Eau Claire, Mt.
IN Porter Bethlehem Steel WD-1C Bethlehem Steel Simon

43
 Eau Claire, Mt.
IN Porter Bethlehem Steel WD-2C Bethlehem Steel Simon
Eau Claire, Mt.
IN Porter INDOT DW-1 Indiana Dept. of Transportation Simon
IN Porter Indiana General WD-1 Stoltemberg Construction Co Mt. Simon
IN Porter Pfizer Chemical Co 2 Pfizer Chemical Co Mt. Simon
Eau Claire, Mt.
IN Porter Midwest Steel WD-1 Midwest Steel Simon
IN Porter Steel Midwest Steel WD-2 Midwest Steel Mt. Simon
IN LaPorte Criterion Catalyst Co WD-1 Criterion Catalyst Co Mt. Simon
IN LaPorte Criterion Catalyst Co WD-2 Criterion Catalyst Co Mt. Simon
IN Lake Inland Steel Co WD-1 Inland Steel Co Mt. Simon
IN Lake Inland Steel Co 2 Inland Steel Co Mt. Simon
IN Lake Midco Remedial Corp WD-1 Midco Remedial Corp Mt. Simon
IN Lake US Steel WD-1 US Steel Mt. Simon
IN Posey General Electric Co 1 General Electric Co Bethel
IN Posey General Electric Co WD-2 General Electric Co Bethel, Cypress
IN Elkhart Hoskin Mfg WD-1 Hoskin Mfg. Mt. Simon
IN Vermillion Newport Chemical Plant WD-1 Food Machinery and Chemical Co Mt. Simon

Groundwater resources
Regional information about Illinois and Indiana aquifer resources in the East Sub-Basin study area
(separated into shallow unconsolidated aquifers material, Shallow Bedrock Aquifers and Cambrian-
Ordovician Sandstone Aquifers) were reviewed. Site specific aquifer information is summarized later in
the report in the site assessment summary tables. Within the East Sub-Basin screening area, and within
30 miles of 5 of our reviewed CO2 sources, is the Mahomet Sole Source Aquifer (SSA) (Figure 19). The
SSA designation would affect project planning if any Federal financial assistance was involved; proposed
projects that are funded entirely by state, local, or private concerns are not subject to SSA review by EPA
(see notes below from US EPA Notice of Final SSA Determination, 3/19/2015). However, a US EPA
Underground Injection Control Program Class VI permit would be required for CO2 injection, to assure
the protection of groundwater resources at the site location.

44
Figure 19. Location of assessed CO2 sources in relation to the Mahomet Sole source aquifer in blue (source US EPA).

Legal definitions from US EPA (FRL–9923–75–Region 5, 2015):

Following publication of this determination, “no commitment for Federal financial assistance (through a
grant, contract, loan guarantee, or otherwise) may be entered into for any project which the
Administrator determines may contaminate such aquifer through a recharge zone so as to create a
significant hazard to public health, but a commitment for Federal financial assistance may, if authorized
under another provision of law, be entered into to plan or design the project to assure that it will not so
contaminate the aquifer.” 42 U.S.C. 300h-3(e). EPA may review any such proposed projects and, where
possible, make suggestions or recommendations to plan or design the project to ensure it will not
contaminate the aquifer system to create a significant hazard to public health. Proposed projects that
are funded entirely by state, local, or private concerns are not subject to SSA review by EPA.
The project review area for this SSA consists of the designated SSA area plus three watersheds adjacent
to the designated SSA area that provide recharge to the Mahomet Aquifer System. These watersheds
are the Sugar Creek, the Sangamon River near Fisher, and the Tributary to the Middle Fork Vermilion
River.

Site‐specific sensitive features related to groundwater resources such as proximity to dams, reservoirs,
and community water supply wells are not included in this regional screening assessment, although
would need to be considered for CO2 project site selection and screening.

45
Assessment of the National Risk Partnership’s CO2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools
The CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin team explored and assessed the carbon sequestration site
characterization National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) Toolset, developed by the National
Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), and Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory (PNNL). Specifically, the Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) tool was run using
inputs derived from verified regional geologic data.

The St. Peter Sandstone was identified as the most practical underground source of drinking water
(USDW) for the CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin assessment. Brine and CO2 leakage rates as well as total
brine and CO2 leaked from a hypothetical injection well borehole into the USDW were estimated at a
hypothetical monitoring well. Multiple scenarios were run to investigate: 1) the impact of increasing the
distance of the monitoring well from the injection well, and 2) the effect of low vs. high permeability
borehole cement.

Several issues and recommendations were produced from the assessment and provided to PNNL for
consideration and/or implementation in the subsequent generation of the NRAP Toolset software.
Additional details on the simulations performed are available in the topical report number DOE/
FE0029445-6.

Wabash CarbonSAFE Feasibility Project

The CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin is a broad area extending through east-central Illinois and west-
central Indiana, generally trending from Marion and Fayette Counties (IL) in the southwest part of the
study area through Vigo and Vermillion Counties (IN) in the northeast (Figure 1).

Within the East Sub-Basin region, there is the potential to develop several carbon capture and/or
storage projects. One such project site, the Wabash CarbonSAFE site, is located just north of the
municipality of Terre Haute (population ~61,000) in northern Vigo County, Indiana. Vigo County is
largely rural with mixed agricultural and woodland areas but dominated by the city of Terre Haute
(Figure 20) which lies on the east side of the Wabash River.

46
Figure 20 . Topographic map base for Vigo County, Indiana (source Esri).

Terre Haute and the surrounding region has a long history of industrial development and subsurface
natural resource activities, both of which are technologically related. It has been an industrial and
manufacturing hub for many years and has a long legacy of underground coal mining and oil and gas
production. Consequently, the populous is accustomed to the application of new technologies, including
specifically drilling and injection. There are active oil and gas production operations and storage fields in
the county. Additionally, the county contains many rail lines, electrical transmission lines and numerous
large, high volume oil and gas pipelines. At the intersection of an interstate highway, a major US
highway corridor and numerous state roads, the population is familiar with heavy truck traffic and
associated commercial and transportation elements.

47
Effective stakeholder engagement has been proven to be a critical component in the success of
numerous CCS activities and is essential if the technology is to be widely developed in the future. Topical
report DOE/FE0029445‐8 report contains a stakeholder assessment and highlights some engagement
activities conducted during the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin Prefeasibility study that is intended to
lay the groundwork and provide recommendations for the Wabash CarbonSAFE Feasibility project. The
analysis sets the stage for identifying and understanding the concerns of key stakeholders, describes
actions currently underway, highlights perceptions of potential benefits and risks of project activities,
and provides recommendations for short- and long-term forms of engagement.

Case study work for the Illinois East Sub-Basin has focused on Wabash Valley Resources (WVR) ammonia
plant retrofit taking place at the former US DOE Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plant
located near Terre Haute, IN, as a CO2 source for further feasibility study and site characterization.

Recommendations for consideration when developing the stakeholder engagement strategy for projects
in the Illinois East Sub-Basin in general and related to the Wabash CarbonSAFE project specifically
include: drawing clear lines of responsibility between Wabash Valley Resources and ISGS-led Wabash
CarbonSAFE that allow the projects to manage integration and messaging; the need for ISGS and other
partners to maintain objectivity and remain trusted sources of information; monitoring of social media
and continuing to engage with key stakeholder groups; and providing support for key stakeholders to
become sources of project information and project champions.

Business, Legal, and Permitting Landscape in Indiana

Topical Report: DOE-FE0029445-4 summarizes the policy, regulatory, legal, and permitting requirements
to-date for the siting of a CO2 injection and storage project in the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin pre-
feasibility study area. Where applicable, the East Sub-Basin case study focuses on a proposed CCS site
location in West Terre Haute, Indiana.

Commercialization of large-scale Carbon Capture and Storage in the Illinois Basin may be realized by
taking advantage of CCS tax credits (under 26. U.S. Code § 45Q and 2018 FUTURE Act amendments) and
potential revenue from sale of CO2 for EOR. A 45-metric ton (50 million ton) CO2 storage operation
would primarily target capacious saline reservoirs able to store this large volume at a single location, the
cost of which may be offset, at least partially, by regional CO2 EOR interests in the long-term.

Obstacles/hurdles to the adoption of commercial-scale CCS remain, however, e.g. in the US EPA Class VI
Underground Injection Control permitting process for CO2 injection wells, and pore space ownership and
long-term liability for subsurface CO2. At the WVR plant site, the current owner of the subsurface rights
has extensive holdings and is known, but confidential at this time. In the broader region, pore space
owners may need to be identified.

Wabash Valley Resources have taken steps to move toward CCS commerciality, having had recent
discussions with the Indiana State Legislature and involvement in the drafting and adoption of Indiana
Senate Bill 442, signed into Public Law 291 by the Governor of Indiana on May 8, 2019. The law
establishes that CCS operations at WVR would be a pilot project in need of Class VI Underground
Injection Control permit by the US EPA; provides for the use of eminent domain, if needed, for the

48
pooling of subsurface pore space for CO2 injection; and provides for the assumption of long-term
ownership of the injected CO2 by the State of Indiana. From the Indiana General Assembly (2019), the
law:

Provides that if the operator of the pilot project is not able to reach an agreement with an
owner of property to acquire: (1) ownership of underground strata or formations located under
the surface of the property; or (2) ownership or other rights to one or more areas of the surface
of the property for purposes of establishing and operating monitoring facilities required by the
EPA; the operator of the pilot project may exercise the power of eminent domain to make the
acquisition. Provides that the pilot project operator's acquisitions by eminent domain must be
made through the law on eminent domain for gas storage, which provides that a condemnor,
before condemning any underground stratum or formation, must have acquired the right to
store gas in at least 60% of the stratum or formation by a means other than condemnation.
Amends the law on eminent domain for gas storage to make it applicable to the pilot project
operator's acquisitions by eminent domain. Provides that the state of Indiana, upon the
recommendation of the director of the department of natural resources and review by the state
budget committee, may obtain ownership of: (1) the carbon dioxide stored in the underground
strata and formations; and (2) the underground strata and formations in which the carbon
dioxide is stored; 12 years after pilot project underground injections begin or, if the
underground injections cease in less than 12 years, after the underground injections cease.
Urges the legislative council to assign to an appropriate interim study committee for the 2019
interim the task of studying the geologic storage of carbon dioxide.

The data, analyses, and modeling generated by geological characterization as part of feasibility studies
at the WVR site will be the foundation information for potential US EPA Class VI injection well permitting
and will aid continued steps toward commercial-scale CCS at the WVR site and in the wider Illinois East
Sub-Basin region.

Wabash Valley Resources LLC

In 2016, Wabash Valley Resources LLC (WVR, formerly Quasar Syngas LLC) acquired the Wabash
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Plant north of Terre Haute, IN (Figure 21), the initial step
in repurposing the facility for the production of ammonia for the domestic fertilizer market by 2021.
DOE/FE0029445‐3 addresses a screening level estimate of capital and operating costs for CO2
compression and dehydration surface equipment for the Wabash Valley Resources facility near Terre
Haute, IN to support the business development assessment of the economic viability and explore
conditions under which CCS project therein might be revenue positive. Although the assessment was
preliminary, this estimate is based upon a significant amount of Trimeric in-house project experience
and data extracted from projects of a similar nature that are applicable to the CarbonSAFE project.
Trimeric completed the following tasks as part of this analysis:
1. Created a simulation to model the process to compress and dehydrate CO2 evolved from a
Rectisol® CO2 capture system at 1 psig to typical pipeline pressure of 2,200 psig
2. Estimated purchased equipment costs for CO2 compression using the power requirements
estimated in Item 1 and a previous budgetary quotation provided by MAN Turbo in February
2017 for an integrally geared centrifugal compressor at similar inlet and outlet conditions
3. Estimated purchased equipment costs for CO2 dehydration using in‐house cost data from
prior CO2 dehydration projects
49
 4. Estimated fixed capital investment for CO2 compression and dehydration equipment using
typical Lang factors used on past projects
5. Estimated fixed and variable annual operating costs using rules of thumb published in
literature and used in prior projects

The WVR facility is located directly adjacent to a main railroad line and near an existing nearby ammonia
pipeline. The facility can accept coal or petcoke, as feedstock, from several refineries in the region. The
feedstock will be converted in the gasifier to syngas and then the hydrogen used to produce ammonia.
The syngas will be purified using the Rectisol process to removes acid gases (H2S and CO2), which results
in a very pure CO2 stream that can be readily compressed and transported for storage or other
utilization. The separated CO2 will be greater than 95% pure, and WVR has increased the separation and
planned capture of CO2 from 65% to 95% of the gas stream, which equates to 179 tonnes/hour or,
nominally, 1.57 MT/year.

Figure 21. Aerial view of the WVR IGCC plant site, showing location of proposed stratigraphic test well. Inset map shows the
site’s location within the Illinois Basin.

The reliability of the existing gasification infrastructure, simplicity of the design modifications for CO2
separation, high purity of their CO2 streams, and experience of the operations and management team
are all advantages to this proposed carbon management project.

50
 Topical report DOE-FE0029445‐12 develops the feasibility plan that draws upon regional assessment
work in the East Sub-Basin as it pertains to risk and data needs to characterize the WVR site, highlights
plans for data acquisition to support characterization efforts. Site-specific data gathering has included
assessing proximity to existing natural gas storage areas, structural features, surrounding municipal
infrastructure development, groundwater resources, environmental monitoring, and local sensitive
biological areas. Structural feature information was compiled from Nelson (1995). Aquifer information
was compiled from University of Illinois (2019) and Indiana Department of Natural Resources (2019).
Information has been summarized in Table 6 with possible associated risks and impacts to potential CCS
development. Site-specific screening criteria data has been summarized in Appendix A for the each of
the facilities highlighted in Topical Report DOE/FE0029445-9 Regional Roadmap for Source Network and
Storage Deployment.

Table 6. Site screening criteria (modified from Quintessa 2019).

Site Assessment Summary:

Wabash Valley Resources (WVR)
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood
Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation

Severity
Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 1 -5 -5
kilometers (km) of a suitable geological sequestration reservoir at the Wabash
storage area Valley Resource (WVR) site. The nearest
deep well into the Mt. Simon surface, at
nearly 5,450 feet (1661 m) deep, is the
Distance to suitable Newport Chemical Plant #WD-1
geologic formation approximately 22 miles (35 km) north of
WVR. site. A stratigraphic test well is
necessary to verify the characteristics of
the Upper and Lower Mt. Simon
Sandstone in the absence of nearby deep
well data.

51
 Location must have reservoir with 20 Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the 3 -3 -3
feet (6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Mt Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness between 2,000 to 2,250 feet (610
to 686 m) thick at the WVR facility. The
nearest deep well penetrating the Lower
Mt. Simon is the Duke Energy Indiana #1
Reservoir Thickness
IGCC, approximately 51 miles (82 km)
south of the WVR site. In the Duke
Energy well the Mt. Simon Sandstone is
nearly 2,000 feet (610 m) thick with the
Lower Mt. Simon over 800 feet (244 m)
thick.
The proposed geologic formation for There are no nearby wells that have 3 -3
sequestration must support a CO2 penetrate the lower Mt. Simon Sandstone
Injection Rate injection rate of 1 MT (1,102,311 tons) and the reservoir quality is unknown in
Capacity of CO2 per year for up to 30 years. this location. Due to the fact of limited
regional data for the Lower Mt. Simon
deeper well data is still needed.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the 3 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Mt. Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
Depth and capacity have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and depth between 5,000 to 6,000 feet (1524 to
of Saline Formation temperature conditions above the CO2 1829 m) deep. Top of Mt. Simon is
(if Saline Formation supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). estimated to be approximately 6,100 feet
is the preferred The deep saline formation must have (1859 m) deep at the site
sequestration option) sufficient storage capacity for the
planned life of the plant (30 years) under
these conditions.
Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 3 -1 -1
Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated to be less
Availability of than 50 feet (15 m) thick. At the WVR
secondary reservoirs site, the St. Peter is expected to be porous
but less than 50 feet (15 m) thick.
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (CO2- The WVR facility is near the northern 2 -1 -1
EOR) reservoirs are the target, then the extent of the most significant oil
Proximity to Oil
site must be 50 miles (80 km) or closer producing region in the Illinois Basin
Fields
to oil fields that are deep enough for (Figure x). The potential may exist for
miscible EOR methods. stacked CO2-EOR and saline storage.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 1
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic
Seismic Risk activity will exceed 14% G within 50
years (USGS, 2014; based on 2014 long-
term model; 760 meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected The La Salle Anticlinorium (Figure 18) is 1 -4 -5
by any known historically active or approximately twenty miles to the west of
hydraulically transmissive faults. The the WVR site. New seismic reflection
Relation of Primary proposed seal must have a low data acquired over the site suggest no
Seal to Active or
differential in-situ caprock or target resolvable faults within a 10-mile (16 km)
Transmissive Faults
formation stress and high mechanical radius of the site.
seal strength relative to injection
pressure

52
 The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map for the Eau Claire 1 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), Shale (Figure 11) is estimated to between
be regionally extensive, and be 750 to 1000 feet (229 to 305 m) thick.
continuous over the entire projected CO2 The Newport Chemical Plant #WD-1 well
plume boundary after injection of 50 is (22 miles [35 km] to the north) has over
MT (55 million tons) of CO2. It must 850 feet (259 m) of Eau Claire Formation
Primary Seal have sufficiently low vertical and has safely served as a disposal well
permeability and have sufficiently high that accepted millions of gallons of
capillary entry pressure to provide a wastewater. The Eau Claire at the WVR
barrier to migration of CO2 out of the site is expected to be around 900 feet (274
target formation. m) thick.

Not required but preferred. Secondary Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 1 -2 -2
seal should overlie the primary caprock Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
seal, be largely continuous, be greater between 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 m). The
than 10 feet (3 m) thick throughout and Maquoketa Shale is over 275 feet (84 m)
Secondary Seal
cover at least 75 percent of the projected thick at this location.
plume after injection of 50 MMT CO2.

Not required The New Albany Shale is estimated be

Tertiary Seal approximately 100 feet (30 m) thick at this
location.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within State Line Gas Storage Field (abandoned) 2 -3 -9
the estimated CO2 plume radius. is approximately 7 miles (11 km) to the
southwest of the WVR site in Vigo Co.,
Gas Storage IN. Wells in the field are relatively
shallow, with a maximum depth of
approximately 2,181 feet (665 m) into the
Silurian.
Is there any seismic reflection data There is over 20 miles (32 km) of recent
Seismic data available at this site? This is not a 2D seismic reflection data across the site.
availability requirement, but it reduces subsurface
uncertainty.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity of over 1 -2 -2
mg/L 200,000 mg/L at Newport Chemical Plant
22 miles (35 km) to the north); the WVR
Reservoir salinity
site is expected to have Mt. Simon
salinities (Figure 4) similar to Newport
chemistry data.
Boreholes Abandoned boreholes penetrating the None within 22 miles (35 km). 1 -2 -2
penetrating injection reservoir interval may allow leakage Information summarized in Data
reservoir into shallower horizons Assessment Section.
Identify a potential scenario where The Eau Claire Formation is not organic 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
primary seal becomes a target for shale rich and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary
for unconventional
gas production, and operators object to seal) is unlikely to be an unconventional
petroleum production
CCS injection petroleum target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause This must be addressed during the 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays permitting of the well and is dependent on
permitting issues
the regulatory agency.
Near Surface Impacts

53
 The land above the proposed No known sensitive surface features or 2 -3 -6
sequestration formation must not protected biological species.
Sensitive features
intersect large dams, water reservoirs,
above sequestration
hazardous materials storage facilities,
area
Class 1 injection wells, or other
sensitive features.
Proposed target formation for CO2 Unconsolidated/surficial deposits above 3 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an bedrock at the site are estimated to be
underground source of drinking water approximately 50 feet (15 m) thick.
Sequestration Indiana DNR Aquifer Systems Maps
impacts on drinking denote the Pennsylvanian Carbondale
water Group as the predominant bedrock aquifer
system in the area. The WVR site is not
located in a drinking water protection area,
or above a sole source aquifer.
Access to There must be sufficient access to the Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for land surface above the proposed issues with access
CO2 leakage sequestration area to implement a CO2
monitoring leakage monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area Needs to be addressed by Wabash Valley
must be located where the project can Resources
Mineral Rights in the obtain, purchase, or get a waiver of
CO2 sequestration
subsurface mineral rights. (unless
area recovery of coal-bed methane or oil is a
part of the sequestration process).

Data Assessment
Data sets were compiled in the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin study area to assess the state of data
availability (DOE-FE0029445-5) documenting penetration into or through the Ordovician system and the
Cambrian Eau Claire Shale. Any available datasets for the Mt. Simon within 50 miles (80 km) of the
Wabash Valley Resources facility were compiled and assessed to determine data deficiency.

The deepest drilled well nearest the WVR plant penetrates the Upper Mt. Simon and is the Newport
Chemical Plant #WD-1 (Table 7), located approximately 22 miles (35 km) north. It has fair reservoir
quality and was used as a disposal well for millions of gallons of wastewater. This well only penetrated
the top 900 feet (274 m) of the Mt. Simon, so the Lower Mt. Simon remains unexplored in the local
Wabash area. Data for Newport Chemical Plant #WD-1 include geophysical logs (Gamma, Neutron, SP,
and Resistivity) collected in 1960, Mt. Simon core analysis, and a single brine sample analysis. Outside
our study area, the Duke Edwardsport, Knox County, IN and Gibson Power Plant well, Gibson County, IN
located 50 and 75 miles (80 and 121 km) south of the WVR facility, respectively] penetrated the fair
quality reservoirs of Upper Mt. Simon. Modern log suites and well documentation is available for each
well.

Allied Chemical Corporation, Vermillion, IL is the nearest penetration into the Lower Mt. Simon at 41.5
miles (67 km) north of the WVR site approximately 1.65 miles (2.66 km) outside of the East Sub-Basin
study area]. Modern log suites and well documentation is available for that well. There are relatively
few well penetrations into the Lower Mt Simon within the Illinois Basin.

54
 Table 7. Nearest wells to the proposed site which penetrate selected formations.

API Well Latitude Longitude Distance Total Depth State County Penetration
Name (DD) (DD) (miles) (ft)
120192399601 Hinton 40.263803 -88.412651 72 6,550 IL Champaign Argenta

164778 Duke 38.799755 -872531572 51 10,050 IN Knox Precambrian

1
117407 Pensinger 39.261227 -87.0925092 26 6,751 IN Clay Mt. Simon
4
125110 Newport 39.85023 -87.422848 21 6164 IN Vermillion Mt. Simon

157501 Summers 39.616094 -87.048861 22 4668 IN Parke Eau Claire

124283 Biglow & 39.527835 -87.311665 6 3490 IN Vigo Knox

Millikin
124289 Lovelace 39.559684 -87.387565 3 3160 IN Vigo St. Peter

The Hinton #7 well, located in Manlove Gas Storage Field, Champaign Co., Illinois, 75 miles (121 km)
northwest of the Wabash site. Data from the Hinton #7 include geophysical logs (Gamma, Neutron, SP,
and Resistivity), Mt. Simon core analysis, and brine sample analysis. Rotary sidewall plug samples from
the Hinton #7 Mt. Simon were acquired from the ISGS Samples Library inventory and thin sections were
prepared (Figure 22). A major focus has been on the characterization of the Lower Mt. Simon,
considered the best potential reservoir for carbon storage, with the highest quality reservoir found
within a high porosity, highly arkosic zone.

55
Figure 22. Thin Section photomicrographs of Hinton #7 well core plugs in the Mt. Simon Sandstone.

Lower Mt Simon well logs and regional trends indicate porosity and permeability are 16.3% and 11.1
millidarcies [mD]) (Mehnert et al., 2014). The Hinton #7 well, has 215 feet (66 m) of excellent quality
reservoir in the arkose zone with porosity and permeability values up to 25% and 600 mD. At IBDP and
IL-ICCS injection sites, the Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone has porosity and permeability as high as 27% and
400 mD, and a mean (log) porosity of 16.6%. Lateral continuity of the high-quality reservoir in the Lower
Mt. Simon is uncertain because of limited well control, but most wells within the southern half of the
Mt. Simon depocenter that penetrate the Lower Mt. Simon show the occurrence of a porous zone.

Deep wells (that penetrate the Maquoketa or Knox formations above the Mt. Simon) within 10 miles (16
km) of the site are listed in Table 8.

Table 8. Locations and well information for wells within ten miles of the proposed stratigraphic test well drill site which
penetrate the Maquoketa or Knox formations.

API Lat. Long. TD TD Formation (ft)

(DD) (DD) (ft)

56
 166909 39.47124 -87.4017 3561 Knox*
124283 39.52784 -87.3117 3490 Knox
124289 39.55968 -87.3876 3160 St. Peter

157261 39.56867 -87.268 3000 St. Peter

124214 39.46217 -87.4183 2980 Trenton

124049 39.40416 -87.3893 2933 Trenton

166365 39.46422 -87.2916 2760 Trenton
124985 39.63516 -87.398 2577 Black River
124981 39.64009 -87.4525 2566 Trenton
124943 39.65123 -87.3288 2466 Trenton
123994 39.40683 -87.3986 1950 Muscatatuck
124039 39.40427 -87.387 1803 Muscatatuck

Data Acquisition
2-D seismic reflection profiles
The ISGS has acquired a 2D seismic reflection profile was acquired in the southern portion of the East
Sub-Basin study area through western Richland Co., IL., across Noble Oil Field. Noble Field lies along a
major structural feature called the Clay City Anticline, a long, sinuous, southward-plunging anticlinal
nose with numerous small areas of closure. The Clay City Anticline hosts numerous oil pools (known
collectively as Clay City Consolidated Oil Field) in several reservoirs and has produced over 360 million
barrels of oil.

Noble Oil Field has undergone characterization research for two current DOE projects focused on the
potential of Residual Oil Zones (ROZ) in the Illinois basin. The Cypress Sandstone, Illinois’s most prolific
oil producing formation and a potential saline carbon storage target, was characterized in detail to
determine the presence and extent of a brownfield ROZ (DE-FE0024431). In Noble Field, the Cypress
Sandstone is characterized by a thick (100 ft, 30 m) Cypress Sandstone with significant thinning of the
sandstone on both the south and west side of the field (Figure 23).

Building on Cypress characterization work, DE-FE0031700 will use Noble Field as a field laboratory site to
validate the Cypress ROZ and provide valuable information about the potential of the field for stacked
CO2-EOR and associated storage. Part of the study includes the drilling of a new well, collection of core
samples, and the acquisition of modern suite of wireline logs (including sonic). To compliment the
project, seismic reflection data has been acquired approximately one mile from the proposed drill site.
Velocity information collected from the wireline logs will be correlated with the seismic data to validate
the usage of seismic reflection to advance Cypress mapping efforts and further characterize the
sequestration potential of the area.

In addition, the seismic data has enabled greater characterize of the deeper strata such as the
Precambrian basement and the Mt. Simon Sandstone storage reservoir in this part of the East Sub-Basin
study area. The approximate Precambrian surface below Noble Field Area appears to be heavily faulted
57
and may also be a Precambrian paleotopographic high (Figure 24). There is onlap of the overlying
reflectors across the Precambrian surface. The final interpretation will be completed after drilling of a
nearby well and will then be integrated into the regional structural analysis of the Illinois Basin.

Figure 23. Thickness of the Cypress Sandstone in Noble Field. Location of 2D seismic reflection shown as the red line across
the Noble Field.

58
Figure 24. Seismic reflection across the Noble Field Areas (overlies the Clay City Anticline). The Base of Knox reflector shows a
broad anticlinal feature in the Noble Field Area. The Top of Precambrian is structurally complex and needs further analysis
and integration with other regional seismic reflection profiles. The vertical scale is in seconds.

Regional Deep Saline Storage Landscape

The stratigraphic cross section (Figure 25) displays variability of the potential reservoir and overlying
sealing strata as well as the lack of penetrations into or through the full thickness of Mt. Simon interval.
The Lower Mt. Simon reservoir has been successfully used to store CO2 at the US DOE funded IBDP and IL-
ICCS study areas; a major focus has been on the characterization of the Lower Mt. Simon. Lower Mt Simon
well logs and regional trends indicate porosity and permeability are 16.3% and 11.1 mD (Mehnert et al.,
2014). The high porosity, highly arkosic interval, considered the best potential reservoir for carbon
storage, has been identified near the base of the lower Mt. Simon. Because of the sparsity of wells in the
Illinois Basin that penetrate this reservoir, the lateral extent of this lower reservoir is not well known. The
Hinton #7 well, has 215 feet (66 m) of excellent quality reservoir in the arkose zone with porosity and

59
Figure 25. Structural cross section using deep wells near the proposed drill site; datum: Top of St. Peter
Sandstone.

60
permeability values up to 25% and 600 mD. Although the Duke Energy Indiana IGCC well, Knox Co., IN,
penetrates through the entire Mt. Simon storage complex, core measured porosity and permeability data
are not available below the Middle Mt. Simon. Drilling in Vermillion Co., IN or Clay Co., IN has not
penetrated such a high porosity zone, but these wells may lack the depth of penetration needed. A
geological characterization borehole must be completed in order to determine the potential reservoir
quality, heterogeneity, and capability for long-term and large-scale storage at the WVR facility.

Reservoir Simulation

Geocellular Model
A preliminary assessment of the proposed Wabash Valley Resources area was completed evaluating
simulated injection of an injection simulation of 50 million tonnes of CO2 into the Mt. Simon Sandstone
unit and predicting the injected CO2 plume lateral extent. To carry out the evaluation in the proposed
East Sub-Basin area (i.e. Wabash Valley Resources facility), a preliminary static geocellular model of the
Mt. Simon Sandstone was built using constrained structural surfaces (i.e. for storage unit and its
subunits) and available geophysical log data from wells that penetrate the Mt. Simon Sandstone unit.
The primary wells used as the basis for the model included the Newport Chemical Plant WD-1 well
(Newport 1), and the Hinton Brothers #7 well (Hinton #7). Each well is discussed in more detail in the
previous section on data availability. Available log suites include neutron, density and sonic porosity as
well as core plug analysis data were compiled. Given the observed Mt Simon heterogeneity, it is
uncertain how representative the wells are of the geology of the proposed location, however, based on
regional mapping, there is a strong possibility that all three units of The Mt. Simon (Upper, Middle and
Lower) exists at the location. Additionally, well data from the previous pilot work in Decatur, Illinois
(Decatur) was supplemented to the analysis.

A grid that covers a surface area of 16 x 16.1 km (10 x 10 mi) was created with 264 cells in the X
direction and 265 cells in the Y direction and spacing of 61 m x 61 m (200 ft x 200ft). Surfaces for the
tops of the Upper, Middle and Lower units of the Mt Simon were based on from regional and local
mapping. The lower zone was further divided into a fourth zone, referred to as Arkosic, the high
permeability and porosity Lower Mt. Simon that has been identified in the Hinton #7 and is the main
injection target at the Decatur project. The Upper Mt Simon was 96.0 m (315 ft) thick, the Middle Mt
Simon zone was 330.7 m (1085 ft) thick, the Lower Mt Simon zone was 63.7 m (209 ft) thick, and the
Arkosic zone was 61.0 m (200 ft) thick. The model was discretized vertically into 70 layers with the
thickness of each proportionally determined between the zones.

61
Figure 26. Cross-plot of porosity and permeability results from core plug testing from the Newport well used for the Upper
and Middle Mt. Simon model zones.

Separate zones in the model were created since the units consistently display noticeable distributions in
petrophysical properties. In the Upper and Middle Mt. Simon, porosity was modeled using the Newport
1 data through geostatistical methods and the permeability transformed using regression model based
on cross-plotting core data (Figure 26). The Lower and Arkosic was based on analysis of the
petrophysical properties from Hinton #7 and Decatur project. At Decatur, a single regression model of
permeability and porosity was found insufficient and thus the core analysis data was divided into five
different separate models (Figure 27).

62
Figure 27. Cross-plot of porosity and permeability results from core plug testing from the Decatur project used for the Lower
Mt. Simon and Arkosic model zones. Points and fitted curves are colorized by which facies each was assigned. Equations for
each regression model and associated r2 values are also shown and colorized according to match the corresponding facies.

Five separate facies were created in the model to represent these different porosity-permeability
relationships and randomly distribute in the two zones based on proportions observed at the Decatur
project and Hinton #7. Porosity was distributed randomly within each facies based on distributions from
the two wells and the different transforms were used to calculate permeability (Figure 28 and Figure
29). Table 9 contains model dimensions and the resulting statistics of permeability and porosity of the
different zones and Table 10 contains statistics of model volumetrics.

63
Figure 28. Distribution of porosity in final model as viewed from the south west looking north east.

Figure 29. Distribution of permeability in final model as viewed from the south west looking north east.

The complete static earth model is the foundation of the simulated fluid flow modeling performed to
determine the suitability of Mt. Simon Sandstone for storing 50 million tonnes of CO2 at this location and
predict the lateral CO2 plume extent. After discussion with project geologists, the current geocellular
model is seen as a reasonable possible reservoir architecture and represents a middle ground in terms
of reservoir quality. The Mt. Simon sandstone storage complex is regionally extensive, hence calculated
bulk, net and pore volumes in Table 10 is constrained by the model dimension.

64
Table 9. Model summary

Model size 52800 x 53000 x 3109.76 ft3

Cell number (x, y, z) 264 x 265 x 70
Cell Dimension 61.0 m x 61.0 m (200 ft x200 ft)
Total number of cells 4897200
Total number of zones 4+
Total number of layers 70
Formation Units Upper Mt. Simon (Secondary storage unit), Middle Mt. Simon (Baffle/Seal unit),
Lower Mt. Simon (Primary storage unit), Arkosic Zone (Primary storage unit)
Model (top, bottom) Upper Mt. Simon, Precambrian basement
Unit Min Max Mean
Upper Mt. Simon 0.0403 0.2164 0.0928
Porosity Statistics Middle Mt. Simon 0 0.1047 0.0839
Lower Mt. Simon 0.0306 0.2799 0.1663
Arkosic 0.030 0.280 0.1619
Units Min (mD) Max(mD) Mean (mD)
Upper Mt. Simon 0 112.3 8.814
Permeability (Kx)
Middle Mt. Simon 8.11E-09 14.8645 4.2096
Statistics
Lower Mt. Simon 0.0001 1948.3 40.54
Arkosic 0.0016 2017.05 134.9

Table 10. Bulk, net and pore volume for constructed model assuming net-to-gross ratio of 0.6, 0.8 and 1.

Net to gross
0.6 0.8 1
Zones Bulk Vol Net Vol Pore Vol Net Vol Pore Vol Net Vol Pore Vol
106 m3 106 m3 106 m3 106 m3 106 m3 106 m3 106 m3
(× 109 ft3) (× 109 ft3) (× 109 ft3) (× 10 ft )
9 3
(× 109 ft3) (× 109 ft3) (× 109 ft3)
Upper 25100 15000 249 20000 331 25100 413
Mt. Simon (886) (531) (8.78) (708) (11.7) (886) (14.6)
Middle 86800 52100 778 69400 1040 86800 1300
Mt. Simon (3060) (1840) (27.5) (2450) (36.6) (3060) (45.8)
Lower 16600 9970 295 13300 394 16600 493
Mt. Simon (586) (352) (10.4) (469) (13.9) (586) (17.4)
15900 9510 274 12700 365 15900 456
Arkosic
(560) (336) (9.68) (448) (12.9) (560) (16.1)
144000 86600 1600 115000 2130 144000 2660
Total
(5100) (3060) (56.4) (4080) (75.2) (5100) (93.9)

Fate and Transport of Injected CO2

Landmark’s, NEXUS (Desktop version 5000.4.12) compositional simulator was used to perform reservoir
simulations. Simulation results will be used to make preliminary assessment of CO2 storage resource and
associated changes in pressure within the Mt. Simon formation at the proposed East Sub-Basin site at
WVR facility.

65
Three relative permeability curves were generated for the Mt Simon representing various quality of
rocks (Figure 30): 1) High quality with permeability greater than 100 md, 2) intermediate quality with
permeability between 1 md and 100 md, and 3) low quality with permeability lower than 1 mD. The
curve for high quality rock was based on lab measurements of samples from lower Mt. Simon in Decatur
conducted by Schlumberger Reservoir Laboratories, Houston, Texas, in 2015 (unpublished report). The
other two curves were generated based on general knowledge from the literature using the Brooks-
Corey function (Krevor et al., 2012; Lahann et al., 2014). The initial reservoir temperature and pressure
was 122.6 °F and 2179 psia at 4843 ft. The initial pressure estimated is a based on an assumption of an
average hydrostatic gradient of about 0.45 psi/ft, which is equivalent to field measurements at the
Decatur storage site. The Mt. Simon at Wabash Valley Resources is assumed an infinite-acting aquifer.

1.0

0.8
Krw_high
Relative Permeability

Krg_high
0.6
Krw_mid
Krg_mid
0.4 Krw_low
Krg_low

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Water Saturation

Figure 30. CO2 and brine relative permeability curves used in the reservoir model.

A radial Carter-Tracy analytical function (Carter and Tracy, 1960) surrounding the reservoir model, was
used to represent infinite-acting aquifer in simulations. The analytical aquifer function was assigned or
attached only to peripheral boundary grid cells. A combination of the model and the analytical aquifer
function represent are assumed to represent an aquifer with infinite lateral extent.

Numerous reservoir simulations were performed to evaluate the feasibility of injecting 50 million tonnes
of CO2 into the Mt. Simon at WVR. The maximum injection pressure gradient was constrained at 0.64
psi/ft for all simulations. This is equivalent to 90% of the estimated fracturing gradient (0.71 psi/ft) of
the Mt. Simon formation at the Decatur site. Maintaining a maximum pressure gradient at 0.64 psi/ft
prevents formation fracturing during injection.

Based on information for the WVR facility, its CO2 capture capacity ranges between 120 and 179 metric
tons per hour. The estimated operating time of this plant is about 7200 hours per year i.e. 82% of a year
(9.84 months). Assuming all the capture CO2 will be injected into the subsurface, between 0.86 and 1.29
million tonnes of CO2 can be stored in 82% of a year. If the plant operates continuously the annual CO2
66
injection would range between 1.05 and 1.57 million tonnes per year. Reservoir simulations were
performed based a maximum CO2 capture capacity of 1.57 million tonnes per year.

A detailed evaluation of the static reservoir model indicate that the Lower Mt. Simon has the highest
permeability compared to middle and upper Mt. Simon. The bottom section (about 93 ft) of the Lower
Mt. Simon has the highest permeability (Figure 31, top). As a result, three simulation scenarios were
performed to evaluate sensitivity of well injectivity, and pressure change to the perforated interval. The
simulations differ the perforated interval through which CO2 is injection, i.e., 93 ft (Case 1), 160 ft (Case
2), and 200 ft (Case 3).

Two additional simulations, namely Case 4 and Case 5, in which the daily injection rates were not
constrained to the CO2 capture capacity of the WVR facility at Terre Haute, Indiana. About 93 ft and 409
ft of the bottommost or deepest section of the lower Mt. Simon were modeled as the perforated intervals
in Case 3 and Case 4 simulations.

Figure 311 (bottom) shows a cross-section of CO2 saturation distribution which preferential migrates up
dip. Pressure buildup during injection could be as high as 434 psi but would dissipate during post-injection
period.

Figure 31. Horizontal permeability distribution (top) and CO2 saturation distribution using a (bottom). Hot colors indicate low
permeability or CO2 saturation. Cooler colors indicate high permeability or CO2 saturation.

67
Figure 32. Horizontal permeability distribution (top) and CO2 saturation distribution using a (bottom). Hot colors indicate low
permeability or CO2 saturation. Cooler colors indicate high permeability or CO2 saturation.

Simulation results suggest that it would take about 32.1 years to inject 50 million tonnes of CO2 via the
93 ft perforated interval (Case 1). Simulation results also predict that 50 million tonnes of CO2 can be
injected via 160 ft (Case 2) and 200 ft (Case 3) perforated intervals in the Lower Mt. Simon after about
32 years for both cases. However, when injection rate is unconstrained it could take about 30.3 years
and 26.9 years to inject 50 million tonnes of CO2 via the 93 ft (Case 4) and 409 ft (Case 5) perforated
intervals, respectively.

Results presented in Table 11 suggest that the maximum pressure change (Δpmax) due to CO2 injection
within a margin of error of ±1 psi in the 93 ft (Case 1), 160 ft (Case 2), and 200 ft (Case 3) perforated
interval simulations are similar. This is because CO2 injection rate was constrained at a maximum value
(qmax) 80,997 Mscf/d in these simulation cases. In a scenario where the injection rate is unconstrained,
as is in Case 4 and Case 5, Δpmax and qmax increase with the product of thickness (H) and permeability (k)
of the perforated interval, i.e. kH (Table 11).

Results also indicate that the maximum CO2 injection rate increases with perforated interval.
Table 11. Plume extents of different simulated scenarios.

Perforated interval Plume extent (ft)

Simulatio Rate qmax
H (ft) kH (mD. Δpmax (psi) Equiv. Radius Frailey 2014
n case constraint (Mscf/d)
ft)
Case 1 Yes 93 2,392 434 80,997 12,799
Case 2 Yes 160 1,959 433 80,997 12,893
Case 3 Yes 200 1,799 435 80,997 12,943
Case 4 No 93 2,392 489 89,253 13,359
Case 5 No 409 1,419 565 100,000 12,943

68
Frailey 2013 discusses plume size correlations developed using a right circular cylinder with storage
efficiency values derived from Monte Carlo simulation for the purpose of producing a reliable estimate
of plume size at the end of an injection period during the site screening process.

An example from Frailey 2013, evaluates a source with annual emissions of 1 M tonnes/year looking to
inject for 30 years, or an ultimate storage mass of 30 M tonnes, and the site has a geologic formation
with a net thickness of 91.4 m (300 ft) with an effective porosity of 10%, the unit storage mass is:

30Mtonnes = 3.28Mtonnes/m
91.4m/0.1 1.0Mtonnes/ft

Using a value of 3.28 M tonnes/m (1.0 M tonnes/ft) on the x-axis of Figure 32, the plume radius
corresponding to the P50 storage efficiency radius is about 4450 m (14,600 ft); P90 storage efficiency
radius is 2789 m (9150 ft), and P10 storage efficiency radius is 4907 m (16,100 ft).

Figure 33. Plume size radius (feet) correlation using cumulative mass injection (M tonnes), effective porosity
(fraction) and net thickness (feet) (1 ft = 0.3048 m).

Predicting Plume Size Using Storage Efficiency E

69
Figure 34. Comparison of simulation predictions to plume size correlation developed by Frailey, 2013. Plume size radius (feet)
correlation using the cumulative mass injection (M tonnes), effective porosity (fraction) and net thickness (feet)
(1 ft = 0.3048 m).

Predicting Plume Size Using Storage Efficiency E

70
Figure 35. Comparison of simulation predictions to plume size correlation developed by Frailey, 2013. Plume size area (square
miles) correlation using cumulative mass injection (M tonnes), effective porosity (fraction) and net thickness (feet)
(1 mile = 1.609 km; 1 ft = 0.3048 m).

The predicted CO2 plume size for the 93 ft perforated interval simulation case reasonable matches the
Frailey 2013 CO2 plume size correlations (Figure 33, Figure 34, ).

Stratigraphic test well and 2D seismic reflection profiles

The Wabash CarbonSAFE project intends to drill and acquire wireline logs for a stratigraphic test well at
the Wabash Valley Resources (WVR) facility to approximately 8,300 feet (2530 m) deep, to determine
the feasibility for the geologic sequestration of 45 metric tons (50 million tons) or more of injected CO2.
The characterization plan will include retrieving whole core samples for description, testing, and
analysis. The primary characterization target for this project is the Mt. Simon Sandstone; we intend to
drill completely through the Mt. Simon in order to obtain samples of the underlying Precambrian
basement rocks. Whole core samples will be collected in the arkosic Lower Mt. Simon and an interval of
the Upper Mt Simon into the overlying Eau Claire Shale. To supplement the coring program, sidewall
cores will be collected at select depths, including the Precambrian. Final coring intervals will be
determined with the refinement of the Wabash CarbonSAFE drilling and sampling procedures. Similarly,
the well testing program has yet to be finalized, but may include a vertical seismic profile (VSP), fluid
sampling, step rate tests, and/or pressure fall-off testing.

Approximately 20 miles (32 km) of 2D seismic reflection data have been acquired in the vicinity of the
WVR plant site (in two acquisition lines, each approximately ten miles [16 km] in length). The data
acquisition was primarily on existing roadways across part of Vigo County, Indiana, and Edgar County,
Illinois. Results from the 2D seismic reflection processing and stratigraphic well logging, sampling, and
71
testing will be used to update conceptual geologic models and will be integrated into static geologic and
dynamic reservoir models to fully characterize the geology of the WVR site.

72
References:

Barnes, D. A., D. H. Bacon, and S. R. Kelley, 2009, Geological sequestration of carbon dioxide in the Cambrian
Mount Simon Sandstone: Regional storage capacity, site characterization, and large-scale injection feasibility,
Michigan Basin: Environmental Geosciences, v. 16, no. 3, p. 163–183, doi: 10.1306/eg.05080909009.

Barnes, D. A., and K.M. Ellett, 2014, Geological Carbon Sequestration Storage Resource Estimates for the
Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, Illinois and Michigan Basins, USA, U.S Department of Energy, Topical Report
DOE/FE0002068‐6, 63 p.

Birkholzer, J. T., and Q. Zhou, 2009, Basin-scale hydrogeologic impacts of CO2 storage: Capacity and regulatory
implications: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, v. 3, no. 6, p. 745–756.

Blakley, C., Carman, C., Garner, D., Damico, J., and Korose, C., 2018. Data Gap Assessment
Subtask 4.1, Topical Report: DOE/FE0029445-5. U.S. Department of Energy.

Blakley, C., Carman, C., Monson, C., Freiburg, J., and Korose, C., 2019. Developing CO2 Source and Storage
Opportunities across the Illinois Basin Subtask 5.3 – Regional Roadmap for Source Network and Storage
Deployment, Topical Report: DOE/FE0029445-9. U.S. Department of Energy

Blakley, C., Korose, C., Leetaru, H., and Carman, C., 2019 CarbonSAFE East Sub-Basin Site Feasibility Plan
Subtask 4.5 – Topical Report: DOE-FE0029445‐12. U.S. Department of Energy.

Blakley, C., Webb, N., Lasemi, Y., Askari, Z., Korose, C., Grigsby, N., and Carman, C., 2019. A Summary of CO2-
Enhanced Oil Recovery Options in the Illinois East Sub-Basin. Topical Report: DOE-FE0029445-10 U.S.
Department of Energy.

Bowen, B. B., R. Ochoa, N. D. Wilkens, J. Brophy, T. R. Lovell, N. E. Fischietto, C. Medina, and J. Rupp, 2011,
Depositional and diagenetic variability within the Cambrian Mount Simon Sandstone: Implications for carbon
dioxide sequestration: Environmental Geosciences, v. 18, no. 2, p. 69–89.

Bowersox, J. R. 2013. Evaluation of Phase 2 CO2 injection testing in the deep saline Gunter Sandstone
reservoir (Cambrian–Ordovician Knox Group), Marvin Blan No. 1 Well, Hancock County, Kentucky: Series
12, Contract Report 53. Kentucky Geological Survey.

Buschbach, T.C. 1975. Cambrian System. In: Willman, H.B., Atherton, E., Buschbach, T.C., Collinson, C., Frye,
J.C., Hopkins, M.E., Lineback, J.A., Simon, J.A. (eds.), Handbook of Illinois Stratigraphy, p. 34-46.

Carman, C., Damico, J., Blakley, C., White, S., Bacon, D., and Brown, C., 2018. An Assessment of the National
Risk Assessment Program’s CO2 Sequestration Leakage Modeling Tools Topical Report: DOE/FE0029445-6. U.S.
Department of Energy.

Carroll, S. A., W.W. McNab, Z. Dai, and S. C. Torres, 2013, Reactivity of Mount Simon Sandstone and the Eau
Claire Shale under CO2 storage conditions: Environmental Science & Technology, v. 47, p. 252–261.

73
Carter, R.D. and Tracy, G.W. 1960. An Improved Method for Calculating Water Influx. Trans., AIME 219: 415.

Finley, R. (2005). An Assessment of Geological Carbon Sequestration Options in the Illinois Basin: Final Report
to the United States Department of Energy, Contract: DE-FC26-03NT41994, 581p.

Frailey SM, Estimating CO2 plume size: A correlation for site screening, In International Journal of Greenhouse
Gas Control, Volume 13, 2013, Pages 230-234, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.11.033

Freiburg, J. T. and Leetaru, H. E. Controls on porosity development and the potential for CO2 sequestration or
wastewater disposal in the Cambrian Potosi Dolomite (Knox Group): Illinois Basin. In 41st Annual Eastern
Section AAPG Meeting. Program Abstracts, 2012.

Freiburg, J. T., Ritzi, R. W., and Kehoe, K. S. (2016). Depositional and diagenetic controls on anomalously high
porosity within a deeply buried CO2 storage reservoir—The Cambrian Mt. Simon Sandstone, Illinois Basin, USA.
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 55, 42-54.

Goodman, A., Sanguinito, S., and J. S. Levine, 2016, Prospective CO2 saline resource estimation methodology:
Refinement of existing US-DOE-NETL methods based on data availability: International Journal of Greenhouse
Gas Control, v. 54, Part 1, p. 242-249.

Gray, H. H., 1972, Lithostratigraphy of the Maquoketa Group (Ordovician) in Indiana. Department of Natural
Resources Geological Survey Special Report 7. 31 pp.

Greenberg, S., Korose, C., Need, Z., and Rupp, J., 2019. Stakeholder Analysis Report Subtask 3.3 CarbonSAFE
Illinois East Sub-Basin, Topical Report: DOE/FE0029445‐8. U.S Department of Energy.

Harris, D. C., Ellet, K., and Rupp, J., 2014, Geologic characterization and carbon storage resource estimates for
the Knox Group, Illinois Basin, Illinois, Indiana, and Kentucky, U.S. Department of Energy, Topical Report
DOE/FE0002068‐19.

Hickman, J. B., 2014, Analysis of fault seal potential for Knox reservoirs in the southern Illinois Basin, U.S.
Department of Energy, Topical Report DOE/FE0002068‐11, 20 p.

Huff, B. G., Seyler, B., 2010. Oil and Gas Geology. In D. R. Kolata and C. K. Nimz (Eds), Geology of Illinois, Illinois
State Geological Survey, pp. 283–298.

Indiana Department of Natural Resources Aquifer Systems Maps, 2019 available from:
https://www.in.gov/dnr/water/4302.htm.

Indiana General Assembly, 2019 Session, Senate Bill 442 (Public Law 291, 05/08/2019) Digest, available at:
http://iga.in.gov/legislative/2019/bills/senate/442#digest-heading .

Korose, C., Rupp, J., and Greenberg, S., 2018. Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 –
Topical Report: DOE-FE0029445-4. U.S. Department of Energy.

Krevor, S.C.M., Pini R., Zuo L. and Benson S.M. (2012). Relative permeability and trapping of CO2 and water in
sandstone rocks at reservoir conditions. Water Resources Research, 48, W02532.
74
Lahann, R., Rupp, J., Medina, C. R., 2014, An evaluation of the seal capacity and CO2 retention properties of the
Eau Claire Formation (Cambrian). Environmental Geosciences, v. 21, no. 3, p. 83-106.

Lasemi, Y., and Z.A. Khorasgani, 2014, Stratigraphy of the Cambro‐Ordovician Succession in Illinois, U.S.
Department of Energy, Topical Report DE‐FE0002068, 43 p.

Leetaru, H. E. and McBride, J. H. (2009). Reservoir uncertainty, Precambrian topography, and carbon
sequestration in the Mt. Simon Sandstone, Illinois Basin. Environmental Geosciences, 16(4), 235-243.

Leetaru, H. E. (2014). An Evaluation of the Carbon Sequestration Potential of the Cambro-Ordovician Strata of
the Illinois and Michigan Basins. Final Report. Champaign, IL: Illinois State Geological Survey, Prairie Research
Institute.

Liu, F., Ellett, K., Xiao, Y., and Rupp, J. A. (2013). Assessing the feasibility of CO2 storage in the New Albany Shale
(Devonian–Mississippian) with potential enhanced gas recovery using reservoir simulation: International
Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, Volume 17, p. 111-126.

Lovell, T. R., and B. B. Bowen, 2013, Fluctuations in sedimentary provenance of the Upper Cambrian Mount
Simon Sandstone, Illinois Basin, United States: Journal of Geology, v. 121, no. 2, p. 129–154, doi:
10.1086/669230.

Medina, C. R., J. A. Rupp, and D. A. Barnes, 2011, Effects of reduction in porosity and permeability with depth
on storage capacity and injectivity in deep saline aquifers: A case study from the Mount Simon Sandstone
aquifer: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, v. 5, no. 1, p. 146–156, doi:
10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.03.001.

Medina, C. R. and Rupp, J. A. (2012). Reservoir characterization and lithostratigraphic division of the Mount
Simon Sandstone (Cambrian): Implications for estimations of geologic sequestration storage capacity.
Environmental Geosciences, 19(1), 1-15.

Medina, C., Rupp, J., Lahann, R., and Eldridge, J., 2019 Evaluation of Caprock Integrity of the Upper Ordovician
Units within the CarbonSAFE Prefeasibility Study Region, Topical Report: DOE-FE0029445‐11. U.S. Department
of Energy.

Medina, C., Ellett, K., and Rupp, J. 2019 Evaluation of Geologic Carbon Storage Resource Estimates (SREs) of
Cambrian Ordovician Units within the CarbonSAFE Prefeasibility Study Region, Topical Report: DOE-FE0029445-
7 U.S. Department of Energy.

Mehnert, E., J. Damico, S. Frailey, H. Leetaru, R. Okwen, B. Storsved, and Valocchi, A. (2014). Basin-scale
modeling for CO2 sequestration in the basal sandstone reservoir of the Illinois Basin—Improving the geologic
model: Energy Procedia, v. 63, p. 2949–2960.

Mehnert, E, Weberling PH. Groundwater salinity within the Mt. Simon Sandstone in Illinois and Indiana. Illinois
State Geological Survey Circular 582; 2014, 23 p.

MGSC (Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium) 2005, An Assessment of Geological Carbon

Sequestration Options in the Illinois Basin. DOE Report, DE-FC26-03NT41994.
75
Morse, D. G. and Leetaru, H. E. 2005. Reservoir characterization and three-dimensional models of Mt. Simon
gas storage fields in the Illinois Basin. Illinois State Geological Survey Circular 567.
Nelson, W.J., 1995, Structural Features in Illinois: Illinois State Geological Survey Bulletin 100, 144 p.

Quintessa Ltd., 2019, Generic CO2 FEP Database, Version 1.1.0. Open access on-line database.
http://www.quintessa.org/co2fepdb/.

Sargent, M.L., 1991, Sauk Sequence: Cambrian System through Lower Ordovician Series. In M.W. Leighton, D.R.
Kolata, D.F. Oltz, and J.J. Eidel, eds., Interior cratonic basins; Tulsa, Oklahoma, AAPG Memoir 51, 75-86.

Sexton, A, and McKaskle, R., 2018. Subtask 5.2 - Transportation and Infrastructure Assessment, Topical Report:
DOE/FE0029445‐3. U.S Department of Energy.

Trabucchi, C., 2018. Summary of Carbon Storage Incentives and Potential Legislation: East Sub-Basin Project
Subtask 3.1 Business and Financial Case Study, Topical Report: DOE/FE0029445‐1. U.S Department of Energy.

Udegbunam, E. O., Beaty, D. S. and Fagan, J. P. 1993. Strategies for improved oil recovery from Aux Vases
reservoirs in McCreery and McCullum waterflood units, Dale Consolidated Field, Franklin County, Illinois:
Champaign, IL. Illinois State Geological Survey, 39.

University of Illinois, 2019, Illinois State Water Survey, Illinois Groundwater Resources Interactive Map
Program, available from:
https://univofillinois.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=53380686a48d437583155052fc49d
117.

U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, 2012, The United
States 2012 Carbon Utilization and Storage Atlas, Fourth Edition.

United States Department of Energy, (2015). Carbon Storage Atlas: 5th edition: Washington, D.C., U.S.
Department of Energy, 113 p.
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity, Total Number of
Existing Fields and Total Storage Capacity, Annual, 2012-17.

US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), FRL–9923–75–Region 5, 3/19/2015, Sole Source Aquifer (SSA)
Designation of the Mahomet Aquifer System in East-Central Illinois, US EPA Notice of Final SSA Determination,
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-03-19/pdf/2015-06365.pdf And
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-02/documents/mahomet-ssa-project-review-area-map-
20150210.pdf

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2017, Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, Facility Level Information on

76
Greenhouse Gases Tool, available from: https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do

United States Geological Survey (USGS), (2014). Seismic Hazard Maps for the Conterminous United States:
Two-percent probability of exceedance in 50 years map of peak ground acceleration (map). Retrieved from
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/hazmaps/conterminous/index.php#2014 .

United States Geological Survey (USGS), (2018). Introduction to the National Seismic Hazard Maps: Frequency
of Damaging Earthquake Shaking Around the U.S. (map). Retrieved from
https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/learn .

Vinodkumar, P., O’Brien, K., and Korose, C., 2018. An assessment of potential CO2 Sources throughout the
Illinois Basin Subtask 5.1 – CO2 Source Assessment, Topical Report: DOE/FE0029445‐2. U.S Department of
Energy.

Will, R., Smith, V. and Leetaru, H. E. 2014. Utilization of the St. Peter Sandstone in the Illinois Basin for CO2
Sequestration, Topical Report DOE/FE0002068‐7. U.S. Department of Energy, 54.

Acknowledgments
This project (DE-FE0029445) was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy through the National Energy
Technology Laboratory (NETL). Through a university grant program, IHS software (Petra) was used for geologic
modeling and Landmark software (Nexus) was used for the reservoir modeling and simulation in this project.
We would also like to thank Wabash Valley Resources (WVR) LLC for their collaboration in the development of
the related CarbonSAFE feasibility study (Wabash CarbonSAFE).

77
 Appendix

Site Assessment Summary:

Abbott Power Plant
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood
Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation

Severity
Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 2 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area sequestration reservoir at the Abbott Power
Plant site. The nearest deep well is the
Hinton #7, located in the Manlove Natural
Distance to suitable
Gas Storage Field, Champaign Co., Illinois,
geologic formation
approximately 14 miles (23 km) from Abbott
Power Plant. In the Hinton #7 well the Mt.
Simon Sandstone surface was encountered at
approximately 4000 feet (1219 m) deep.
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 2 -3 -3
(6m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness between 2,250 to 2,500 feet (686 to
762 m) thick at the Abbott Power Plant
facility. The Hinton #7 well has 215 feet (66
Reservoir Thickness m) of excellent quality reservoir in the Lower
Mt, Simon arkose zone with porosity and
permeability values up to 25% and 600 mD.
Due to the fact of limited regional data for the
Lower Mt. Simon deeper well data is still
needed.
The proposed geologic formation for From the Hinton well the upper Mt. Simon 2 -3
Injection Rate sequestration must support a CO2 injection should have an average permeability of 150
Capacity rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per mD and lower Mt. Simon has zones may be
year for up to 30 years. over 1 Darcy.
78
 If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt. 2 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
Depth and capacity of have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and around 4,000 feet (1219 m). In the Hinton #7
Saline Formation (if temperature conditions above the CO2 well, the Mt. Simon Sandstone is at a drill
Saline Formation is the supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The confirmed depth of approximately 4,000 feet
preferred sequestration deep saline formation must have sufficient (1219 m).
option) storage capacity for the planned life of the
plant (30 years) under these conditions.

Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 2 -1 -1

Sandstone (Figure 8) is estimated to between
200 to 250 feet thick (61 to 76 m). Abbott
Availability of
Power Plant has suitable porosity and
secondary reservoirs
permeability for storage, but it is a freshwater
aquifer with dissolved solids of under 10,000
mg/L.
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) No oil fields for EOR are available 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must
Proximity to Oil Fields be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields
that are deep enough for miscible EOR
methods.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 1
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 8% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected by The mapped northern extent of the Tuscola 2 -4 -5
any known historically active or Anticline (Figure 18) is approximately 10
hydraulically transmissive faults. The miles (16 km) south of the site. The Tuscola
Relation of Primary
proposed seal must have a low differential Anticline underwent major uplift in the very
Seal to Active or
in-situ caprock or target formation stress late Mississippian and early Pennsylvanian
Transmissive Faults
and high mechanical seal strength relative Periods (Nelson 1995). Recommended that
to injection pressure new 2D seismic reflection data be acquired if
storage pursued.
The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map for the Eau Claire 2 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Shale (Figure 11) is estimated to between 500
regionally extensive, and be continuous to 750 feet (152 to 229 m) thick. The Eau
over the entire projected CO2 plume Claire Formation is over 475 feet (145 m)
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of thick 14 miles (23 km) north at The Manlove
Primary Seal CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical Gas Storage Field safely stored natural gas
permeability and have sufficiently high for over 60 years. The Eau Claire Formation
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier at the Abbott Power Plant should be of
to migration of CO2 out of the target similar thickness and rock properties to that
formation. found at the Manlove Gas Storage Field.

79
 Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 2 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 m). The
Secondary Seal
(3 m) thick throughout and cover at least Maquoketa Shale is around 200 feet (61 m)
75 percent of the projected plume after thick at this location.
injection of 50 MMT CO2.
Not required The New Albany Shale (a regional shale in
Tertiary Seal southern Illinois) is less than 100 feet (30 m)
thick.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the The Manlove Gas Storage Field (Table 4), 2 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. approximately 14 miles (23 km) to the
Gas Storage
northwest of the Abbott facility, injects into
the Upper Mt. Simon Sandstone.
Is there any seismic reflection data Seismic reflection data exists 14 miles (23
available at this site? This is not a km) to the north at Manlove Gas Storage
requirement, but it reduces subsurface Field, a 25 mile N-S profile approximately 10
Seismic data
uncertainty. miles (16 km)to the west, and a 25 mile (40
availability?
km) E-W profile approximately 10 miles (16
km) to the south. Recommended that new 2D
seismic reflection data be acquired.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity of over 1 -2 -2
mg/L 100,000 mg/L (Figure 4) at Manlove Gas
Reservoir salinity Storage Field (14 miles [23 km] to the north);
the proposed site should have similar salinity
values.
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the None within 14 miles (23 km). 1 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating reservoir interval may allow leakage into
injection reservoir shallower horizons

Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays
permitting issues
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No known sensitive surface features or 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, protected biological species. The Abbott
Sensitive features water reservoirs, hazardous materials Power Plant is within 2 miles (3 km) of
above sequestration storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or eastern mapped boundary of the Mahomet
area other sensitive features. Aquifer. This aquifer is defined by the federal
government as a sole source aquifer (SSA).

Proposed target formation for CO2 The Abbott Power Plant is within 2 miles of 2 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground eastern mapped boundary of the Mahomet
source of drinking water Aquifer (Figure 20). This aquifer is defined
Sequestration impacts
by the federal government as a sole source
on drinking water
aquifer (SSA). Illinois State Water Survey
Illinois Groundwater Resources Maps
identify the unconsolidated/surficial deposits
80
 above bedrock at the site are between 200 to
300 feet (61 to 91 m) thick with major sand
and gravel aquifer identified in the
unconsolidated material. Additionally, maps
included bedrock aquifers in the
Pennsylvanian and Devonian Shallow
Bedrock Aquifers (within 500 feet [152 m]
depth).
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access.
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by Abbott Power
be located where the project can obtain, Plant.
purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
Mineral Rights in the mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
CO2 sequestration area methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Decatur, IL
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood

Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation
Severity

Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 1 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area sequestration reservoir at the Archer Daniels
Distance to suitable Midland (ADM) site. There are 4 deep wells
geologic formation within a 2-mile (3 km) radius supporting the
injection projects at ADM facility. These
boreholes penetrated through the Mt. Simon

81
 Sandstone into the underlying granitic
bedrock.
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 1 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness between 1,500 to 1,750 feet (457 to
Reservoir Thickness 533 m) thick at the ADM facility. The Mt
Simon Sandstone is drill hole confirmed to be
approximately 1500 feet (457 m) thick at the
borehole locations.
The proposed geologic formation for Successful large-scale demonstration project 1 -3
sequestration must support a CO2 injection (1 million metric tons (1102311 tons) over
rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per three years at a rate of 1,000 metric tons
year for up to 30 years. (1102 tons) per day) completed and ongoing
industrial-scale demonstration injection
project (up to 5 million metric tons over
approximately three years at a rate of 3,000
Injection Rate
tons [2721 metric tons] per day) within 2
Capacity
mile (3 km) radius at the ADM facility. The
Lower Mt. Simon Sandstone has an average
porosity of 22% and permeability of 200 mD,
with greater than 10% porosity over most of
its thickness. Individual beds can have
porosity as high as 28% and permeability
over 1,000 mD.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt. 1 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
Depth and capacity of have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and around 5,000 feet (1524 m). Top of Mt.
Saline Formation (if temperature conditions above the CO2 Simon is approximately 5,550 feet (1692 m)
Saline Formation is the supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The drill hole confirmed at the site. Reservoir
preferred sequestration deep saline formation must have sufficient temperature is 122°F, and the reservoir is
option) storage capacity for the planned life of the 100% saturated with formation salinity of
plant (30 years) under these conditions. 200,000 ppm.
Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 1 -1 -1
Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated to between
Availability of 150 to 200 feet (46 to 61 m) thick. At the
secondary reservoirs ADM site, the St. Peter is approximately 225
feet (69 m) thick with porous and
permeability favorable for injection.
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) Oil fields within the 50-mile (80 km) 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must surrounding area are predominantly near-
Proximity to Oil Fields be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields miscible. The potential may exist for stacked
that are deep enough for miscible EOR CO2-EOR and saline storage.
methods.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 1
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 9% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis

82
 The primary seal must not be intersected by Regional mapping, and 2D seismic data 1 -4 -5
any known historically active or analysis in the vicinity of the ADM facility
hydraulically transmissive faults. The does not indicate the presence of faulting
Relation of Primary proposed seal must have a low differential (Figure 18). Recent 2D seismic reflection
Seal to Active or in-situ caprock or target formation stress data near the proposed site does not show any
Transmissive Faults and high mechanical seal strength relative resolvable faults. There are no known
to injection pressure regional faults or fractures mapped within a
25-mile (40 km) radius of the proposed site.

The primary seal must have sufficient The Eau Claire Formation (Figure 11) is 1 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be about 500 ft thick at the site. It consists of
regionally extensive, and be continuous shale, tight siltstones and limestone with
over the entire projected CO2 plume lowermost 200 ft shale (61 m). The Eau
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of Claire Formation average core measured
Primary Seal
CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical horizontal permeability is 0.000344 mD. The
permeability and have sufficiently high median permeability of the Eau Claire
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier samples tested is 0.000026 mD and median
to migration of CO2 out of the target porosity is 4.7%.
formation.
Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 1 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 m). The
Secondary Seal (3 m) thick throughout and cover at least Maquoketa Shale is over 200 feet (61 m)
75 percent of the projected plume after thick at this location.
injection of 50 MMT CO2.
Not required The New Albany Shale is approximately 125
Tertiary Seal feet (38 m) thick at this location.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the Lincoln Gas Storage Field (Table 4), 2 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. approximately 30 miles [30 km] away in
Logan Co., IL., injects into the Silurian which
occurs less than 1,500 feet (457 m) deep.
Gas Storage
The Manlove Gas Storage Field (Table 4),
approximately 40 miles (64 km) northeast in
Champaign, Co., IL., injects into the Upper
Mt. Simon
Is there any seismic reflection data There is over 80 miles (129 km) of recent 2D
available at this site? This is not a seismic reflection data near the site. One E-
requirement, but it reduces subsurface W profile extends over a 50-mile (80 km)
uncertainty. distance in northern Sangamon Co. through
Seismic data
central Macon Co. ending northeast of the
availability?
Archer Daniels Midland Facility in Decatur
and the second E-W profile extends due east
of the CWLP facility through Christian Co.
ending in Macon Co.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity of over 1 -2 -2
Reservoir salinity mg/L 200,000 mg/L at the site (Figure 4).
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the Wells penetrating the injection reservoir are 1 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating reservoir interval may allow leakage into not abandoned.
injection reservoir shallower horizons

83
 Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays
permitting issues
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No known sensitive surface features or 1 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, protected biological species. The ADM
water reservoirs, hazardous materials facility is immediately adjacent to Lake
storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or Decatur, a 2,800-acre (11 km2) reservoir
Sensitive features other sensitive features. which serves primarily as a water source for
above sequestration commercial and industrial purposes. The
area ADM facility is within 10 miles (16 km) of
southern mapped boundary of the Mahomet
Aquifer (Figure 20). This aquifer is defined
by the federal government as a sole source
aquifer (SSA).
Proposed target formation for CO2 The ADM facility is within 10 miles (16 km) 1 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground of southern mapped boundary of the
source of drinking water Mahomet Aquifer. Illinois State Water
Survey Illinois Groundwater Resources Maps
identify the unconsolidated/surficial deposits
Sequestration impacts
above bedrock at the site between 100 to 200
on drinking water
feet (30 to 61 m) thick. Aquifer potential
exists within unconsolidated material with the
major sand and gravel aquifers present at the
site. No bedrock aquifer systems are mapped
in the area.
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access.
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by ADM.
be located where the project can obtain,
Mineral Rights in the purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
CO2 sequestration area mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

City, Water, Light and Power (CWLP)
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance

84
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood
Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation

Severity
Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 2 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area sequestration reservoir at the City, Water,
Light, and Power (CWLP) site. The
McMillen #2, approximately 24 miles (39
km) to the east, is the stratigraphic hole
Distance to suitable drilled in support of the CarbonSAFE Macon
geologic formation project. The Mt. Simon Sandstone upper
contact has been confirmed at 5135 feet
(1565 m) depth. Two wells within 25 miles
(40 km) of the CWLP facility in Morgan Co.,
penetrate the upper Mt. Simon Sandstone at a
depth of approximately 4,100 feet (1250 m).
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 2 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness over 1,000 feet (305 m) thick at the
CWLP site. The McMillen #2,
approximately 24 miles (39 km) to the east,
penetrated through the Mt. Simon Sandstone,
which is approximately 1200 feet (366 m)
thick, into the underlying granitic bedrock.
Reservoir Thickness
There are 4 deep wells within a 2-mile (3-km)
radius supporting the injection projects at
Archer Daniels Midland facility in Decatur,
IL (approximately 30 miles from the Cronus
site). These boreholes penetrated through the
Mt. Simon Sandstone, which is
approximately 1500 feet (457 m) thick, into
the underlying granitic bedrock.
The proposed geologic formation for Successful large-scale demonstration project 2 -3
sequestration must support a CO2 injection (1 million metric tons (1102311 tons) over
rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per three years at a rate of 1,000 metric tons
year for up to 30 years. (1102 tons) per day) completed and ongoing
Injection Rate
industrial-scale demonstration injection
Capacity
project (up to 5 million metric tons over
approximately three years at a rate of 3,000
tons [2721 metric tons] per day) within 2
mile (3 km) radius at the ADM facility. Due
85
 to the fact of limited regional data for the
Lower Mt. Simon deeper well data is still
needed.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt. 2 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
Depth and capacity of
have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and around 4,000 feet (1219 m). Several wells
Saline Formation (if
temperature conditions above the CO2 within 25 miles (40 km) of the CWLP facility
Saline Formation is the
supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The in Morgan Co., penetrate the upper Mt.
preferred sequestration
deep saline formation must have sufficient Simon Sandstone at a depth of approximately
option)
storage capacity for the planned life of the 4,000 feet (1219 m).
plant (30 years) under these conditions.
Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 2 -1 -1
Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated to between
Availability of 200 to 250 feet (61 to 76 m) thick. Well data
secondary reservoirs confirms average thickness around 200 feet
(61 m) around the CWLP area but thickness
ranges vary across Sangamon County.
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) Oil fields within the 50-mile (80 km) 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must surrounding area are predominantly near-
Proximity to Oil Fields be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields miscible. The potential may exist for stacked
that are deep enough for miscible EOR CO2-EOR and saline storage.
methods.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 1
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 9% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected by Regional mapping, and 2D seismic data 2 -4 -5
any known historically active or analysis in the vicinity of the CWLP site does
hydraulically transmissive faults. The not indicate the presence of faulting (Figure
Relation of Primary proposed seal must have a low differential 18). Recent 2D seismic reflection data near
Seal to Active or in-situ caprock or target formation stress the proposed site does not show any
Transmissive Faults and high mechanical seal strength relative resolvable faults. There are no known
to injection pressure regional faults or fractures mapped within a
25-mile (40 km) radius of the proposed site.
The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map for the Eau Claire 2 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Shale (Figure 11) is estimated to between 250
regionally extensive, and be continuous to 500 feet (76 to 152 m) thick. Available
over the entire projected CO2 plume well data confirmed Eau Claire Shale
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of thickness about 500 ft (152 m) thick around
Primary Seal
CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical the CWLP site.
permeability and have sufficiently high
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier
to migration of CO2 out of the target
formation.

86
 Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 2 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 m). The
Secondary Seal (3 m) thick throughout and cover at least Maquoketa Shale is over 200 feet (61 m)
75 percent of the projected plume after thick at this location.
injection of 50 MMT CO2.
Not required The New Albany Shale is approximately 200
Tertiary Seal feet (61 m) thick at this location.

Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the Lincoln Gas Storage Field (Table 4) is 2 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. approximately 20 miles [32 km] away in
Logan Co., IL. injects into the Silurian which
occurs less than 1,500 feet (458 m) deep.
Gas Storage Waverly Gas Storage Field (Table 4) is
approximately 25 miles [40 km] away) in
Morgan Co., IL., injects into the Ordovician
St Peter Sandstone in excess of 1,750 feet
(533 m) deep.
Is there any seismic reflection data There is over 80 miles (129 km) of recent 2D
available at this site? This is not a seismic reflection data near the site. One E-
requirement, but it reduces subsurface W profile extends over a 50-mile (80 km)
uncertainty. distance in northern Sangamon Co. through
Seismic data
central Macon Co. ending northeast of the
availability?
Archer Daniels Midland Facility in Decatur
while the second E-W profile extends due
east of the CWLP facility through Christian
Co. ending in Macon Co.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity range 1 -2 -2
Reservoir salinity mg/L between 75,000 to 100,000 mg/L at the site
(Figure 4).
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the None within 24 miles (39 km). 1 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating
reservoir interval may allow leakage into
injection reservoir
shallower horizons
Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays
permitting issues
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No known sensitive surface features or 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, protected biological species. CWLP owns
water reservoirs, hazardous materials and manages Lake Springfield
Sensitive features storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or (approximately 5 miles [8 km] southeast of
above sequestration other sensitive features. the facility), a 4200-acre (17 km2) reservoir
area with primary purpose to serve as the source
of drinking water for the city of Springfield
and several nearby communities. CWLP
facility is within 25 miles (40 km) of

87
 southern mapped boundary of the Mahomet
Aquifer (Figure 20). This aquifer is defined
by the federal government as a sole source
aquifer (SSA).

Proposed target formation for CO2 The CWLP facility is within 25 miles (40 2 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground km) of southern mapped boundary of the
source of drinking water Mahomet Aquifer. Illinois State Water
Survey Illinois Groundwater Resources Maps
identify the unconsolidated/surficial deposits
Sequestration impacts
above bedrock at the site are up to 50 feet (15
on drinking water
m) thick. Aquifer potential exists within
unconsolidated material with the major sand
and gravel aquifer identified east of the site
within 5 miles (8 km). No bedrock aquifer
systems are mapped in the area.
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access.
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by CWLP.
be located where the project can obtain,
Mineral Rights in the purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
CO2 sequestration area mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

Cronus Fertilizer Plant
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5
Importance
Likelihood

Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation
Severity

Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis

88
 Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 2 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area sequestration reservoir at the Cronus
Fertilizer site. Wells that penetrate the surface
of the Mt. Simon, less than 10 miles (16 km)
Distance to suitable away from the site, are classified gas storage
geologic formation wells at The Tuscola Gas Storage Field and
waste disposal wells for Cabot and U.S
Industrial Chemical projects have drill
confirmed depth of approximately 4,000 feet
(1219 m).
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 2 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness over 2,000 feet (610 m) thick at the
Cronus Fertilizer site. There are 4 deep wells
within a 2-mile radius supporting the
injection projects at Archer Daniels Midland
facility in Decatur, IL (approximately 30
Reservoir Thickness
miles [48 km] from the Cronus site). These
boreholes penetrated through the Mt. Simon
Sandstone (approximately 1500 feet [457 m]
thick) into the underlying granitic bedrock.
Due to the fact of limited regional data for the
Lower Mt. Simon deeper well data is still
needed.
The proposed geologic formation for Successful large-scale demonstration project 2 -3
sequestration must support a CO2 injection (1 million metric tons (1102311 tons) over
rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per three years at a rate of 1,000 metric tons
year for up to 30 years. (1102 tons) per day) completed and ongoing
Injection Rate
industrial-scale demonstration injection
Capacity
project (up to 5 million metric tons over
approximately three years at a rate of 3,000
tons [2721 metric tons] per day) within 2
mile (3 km) radius at the ADM facility.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt. 2 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and around 4,000 feet (1219 m). Wells that
Depth and capacity of
temperature conditions above the CO2 penetrate the surface of the Mt Simon, less
Saline Formation (if
supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The than 10 miles (16 km) away from the site, are
Saline Formation is the
deep saline formation must have sufficient classified gas storage wells at The Tuscola
preferred sequestration
storage capacity for the planned life of the Gas Storage Field and waste disposal wells
option)
plant (30 years) under these conditions. for Cabot and U.S Industrial Chemical
projects have drill confirmed depth of
approximately 4,000 feet (1219 m).
Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 2 -1 -1
Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated to between
Availability of 150 to 200 feet (46 to 61 m) thick. Well data
secondary reservoirs around the proposed Cronus Fertilizer site
confirms regional thickness range.

89
 If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) Fields within the 50 miles (80 km) are 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must identified immiscible to near-miscible with
Proximity to Oil Fields be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields potential for miscible EOR in a reservoir or
that are deep enough for miscible EOR two in select fields.
methods.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 2
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 10% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected by The proposed Cronus site lies on the 2 -4 -5
any known historically active or immediate western side of the Osman
hydraulically transmissive faults. The Monocline (Figure 18) with the larger
proposed seal must have a low differential Tuscola Anticline less than 10 miles (16 km)
Relation of Primary in-situ caprock or target formation stress to the east and the Cooks Mills anticline less
Seal to Active or and high mechanical seal strength relative than 15 miles (24 km) to the south. Regional
Transmissive Faults to injection pressure mapping efforts identify uplift began in the
Pennsylvanian (Nelson 1995). This
interpreted faulted interval needs to be
verified by seismic reflection. More analysis
needs to be completed.
The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map for the Eau Claire 2 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Shale (Figure 11) is estimated to between 500
regionally extensive, and be continuous to 750 feet (152 to 229 m) thick. The Eau
over the entire projected CO2 plume Claire Formation is over 550 feet (168 m)
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of thick less than 10 miles (16 km) away at The
Primary Seal
CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical Tuscola Gas Storage Field.
permeability and have sufficiently high
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier
to migration of CO2 out of the target
formation.
Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 2 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 m). The
Secondary Seal
(3 m) thick throughout and cover at least Maquoketa Shale is over 200 feet (61 m)
75 percent of the projected plume after thick at this location.
injection of 50 MMT CO2.
Not required The New Albany Shale (a regional shale in
Tertiary Seal southern Illinois) typically up to 100 feet (30
m) thick in the region.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the Cook Mills Consolidated Storage Field 2 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. (Table 4), approximately 10 miles (16 km)
away in Douglas and Coles Co., IL., injects
into the Mississippian strata between 1,600 to
Gas Storage 2,700 feet (488 to 823 m) is the nearest field.
The Manlove Gas Storage Field, which
injects into the Upper Mt. Simon, is 30 miles
(48 km) to the north of the proposed Cronus
Site.

90
 Is there any seismic reflection data Nearest seismic reflection data are 25-mile
available at this site? This is not a (40 km) N-S profile approximately 5 miles (8
requirement, but it reduces subsurface km) to west and 25-mile (40 km) E-W profile
uncertainty. approximately 10 miles (16 km) to the north.
Seismic data
Approximately 10 miles (16 km) away
availability?
(southwest Champaign Co. into northwest
Coles Co.), a cluster of 5 shorter profiles are
available. Recommended that new 2D
seismic reflection data be acquired.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity (Figure 4) 2 -2 -2
Reservoir salinity mg/L of over 100,000 mg/L at the proposed.
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the Wells that penetrate the upper Mt. Simon are 2 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating reservoir interval may allow leakage into within 10 miles (16 km). No wells penetrate
injection reservoir shallower horizons the Lower Mt. Simon within 30 miles (48
km).
Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays
permitting issues
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No known sensitive surface features or 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, protected biological species. The proposed
water reservoirs, hazardous materials Cronus facility is within 15 miles (24 km) of
Sensitive features
storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or southern mapped boundary of the Mahomet
above sequestration
other sensitive features. Aquifer (Figure 20). This aquifer is defined
area
by the federal government as a sole source
aquifer (SSA). The Cronus site is near
multiple Class I disposal wells (Table 5).
Proposed target formation for CO2 The proposed Cronus facility is within 15 2 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground miles (24 km) of southern mapped boundary
source of drinking water of the Mahomet Aquifer. Illinois State Water
Survey Illinois Groundwater Resources Maps
identify the unconsolidated/surficial deposits
above bedrock at the site are generally
between 100 to 200 feet (30 to 61 m) thick
Sequestration impacts with areas reaching thickness of 300 feet (91
on drinking water m). Aquifer potential exists within
unconsolidated material with the major sand
and gravel aquifer identified west of the site
within 10 miles (16 km). Additionally, maps
included bedrock aquifers in the
Pennsylvanian and Devonian Shallow
Bedrock Aquifers (within 500 feet [152 m]
depth) within 5 miles (8 km) east of the site.

91
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access.
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by Cronus Fertilizer.
be located where the project can obtain,
purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
Mineral Rights in the mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
CO2 sequestration area methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

Edwardsport Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Plant
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood
Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation

Severity
Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 3 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area storage reservoir target at the Edwardsport
Distance to suitable IGCC Plant. The Duke Energy Indiana
geologic formation IGCC #1 well, located at this site in Knox,
Co, IN, encountered the Mt. Simon surface at
a depth of 7,950 feet (2423 m).
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 3 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness between 1750 to 2000 feet (533 to
610 m). In Duke Energy Indiana IGCC #1
Reservoir Thickness the Mt Simon Sandstone is approximately
1,900 feet (579 m) thick. The Lower Mt.
Simon, considered the best potential reservoir
for carbon storage, is over 800 feet (244 m)
thick.
92
 The proposed geologic formation for Drilling has confirmed the presence of the 3 -3
Injection Rate sequestration must support a CO2 injection Mt. Simon Sandstone at this site. Well
Capacity rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per testing would be a required to determine
year for up to 30 years. injection capacity.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt 3 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
Depth and capacity of
have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and between 7,000 to 8000 feet (2134 to 2438 m).
Saline Formation (if
temperature conditions above the CO2 The Duke Energy Indiana IGCC #1 well
Saline Formation is the
supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The encountered the Mt. Simon surface at a depth
preferred sequestration
deep saline formation must have sufficient of 7,950 feet (2423 m) at this site.
option)
storage capacity for the planned life of the
plant (30 years) under these conditions.
Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 3 -1 -1
Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated less than 50
Availability of feet (15 m) thick. At the Edwardsport IGCC
secondary reservoirs site, the St. Peter is expected to be porous but
too thin for injection.
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) The Edwardsport IGCC Plant is located east 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must of the most significant oil producing region in
be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields the Illinois Basin. The potential exists for
Proximity to Oil Fields that are deep enough for miscible EOR stacked CO2-EOR and saline storage in many
methods. fields within a 50-mile (80 km) distance
especially north, west, and south of the
Edwardsport Power Station.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 2
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 21% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected by There are no known regional faults or 2 -4 -5
any known historically active or fractures mapped within a 25-mile (40-km)
hydraulically transmissive faults. The radius of the proposed site (Figure 18).
Relation of Primary
proposed seal must have a low differential
Seal to Active or
in-situ caprock or target formation stress
Transmissive Faults
and high mechanical seal strength relative
to injection pressure

The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map for the Eau Claire 3 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Shale (Figure 11) is estimated to between 750
regionally extensive, and be continuous to 1000 feet (229 to 305 m) thick. The Eau
over the entire projected CO2 plume Claire Shale is drill hole confirmed to be
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of approximately 750 feet (229 m) thick in the
Primary Seal
CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical Duke Energy Indiana IGCC #1 well.
permeability and have sufficiently high
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier
to migration of CO2 out of the target
formation.

93
 Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 3 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 m). The
Secondary Seal (3 m) thick throughout and cover at least Maquoketa Shale is over 250 feet (76 m)
75 percent of the projected plume after thick at this location.
injection of 50 MMT CO2.

Not required The New Albany Shale is estimated be

Tertiary Seal approximately 150 feet (46 m) thick at this
location.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the Edwardsport IGCC Plant is within 20 miles 2 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. (32 km) of 5 gas storage fields. Oaktown
Gas Storage Field, (Table 4) approximately
14 miles (23 km) away in Knox Co., IN, with
injection wells around 700 feet deep into the
Pennsylvanian, Mineral City GSP (Table 4)
and Simpson Chapel GSP (Table 4) in
Gas Storage
Greene Co., IN. (approximately 20 miles [32
km] away) injecting into the Silurian and
Devonian with depths less than 1,700 feet
(518 m), and Loogootee GSP (Table 4) in
Daviess Co., IN. (approximately 20 miles [32
km] away) with wells not exceeding 600 feet
(183 m) in the Mississippian.
Is there any seismic reflection data There is no known seismic reflection data
Seismic data available at this site? This is not a available in the area.
availability? requirement, but it reduces subsurface
uncertainty.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity of over 1 -2 -2
Reservoir salinity mg/L 200,000 mg/L at the site (Figure 4).
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the Penetration through the Mt. Simon at the 1 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating
reservoir interval may allow leakage into facility.
injection reservoir
shallower horizons
Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause This must be addressed during the permitting 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays of the well and is dependent on the regulatory
permitting issues
agency.
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No known sensitive surface features or 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, protected biological species.
Sensitive features
water reservoirs, hazardous materials
above sequestration
storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or
area other sensitive features.

94
 Proposed target formation for CO2 Unconsolidated/surficial deposits above 3 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground bedrock at the site are estimated to be less
source of drinking water than 100 feet (30 m) thick. Indiana DNR
Aquifer Systems Maps denote the
Sequestration impacts
Pennsylvanian Carbondale Group as the
on drinking water
predominant bedrock aquifer system in the
area. The Edwardsport IGCC Plant is not
located in a drinking water protection area, or
above a sole source aquifer.
There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
Access to
surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access
sequestration area for
area to implement a CO2 leakage
CO2 leakage
monitoring program.
monitoring
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by Edwardsport IGCC
be located where the project can obtain, Plant and Duke Energy
Mineral Rights in the purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
CO2 sequestration area mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

Gibson Station – Duke Energy
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood

Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation
Severity

Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 3 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area storage reservoir target at the Gibson Station.
Distance to suitable The Duke-Gibson WDW #2 well, located at
geologic formation this site in Gibson, Co, IN, encountered the
Mt. Simon surface at a depth of
approximately 11,000 feet (3353 m).

95
 Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 3 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness between 750 to 1000 feet (229 to
305 m). In Duke Energy WDW #2,
approximately 670 feet (204 m) of the Mt
Reservoir Thickness Simon Sandstone was drilled without
indication of breakthrough to the basement.
Approximately 35 miles (56 km) west in
Wayne Co., IL. Cisne Community #1 well
recovered 364 feet (111 m) of Mt. Simon to a
maximum depth of 11,514 feet (3509 m).
The proposed geologic formation for There are no nearby wells that have penetrate 3 -3
sequestration must support a CO2 injection the lower Mt. Simon Sandstone and the
rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per reservoir quality is unknown in this location.
Injection Rate
year for up to 30 years. A stratigraphic test well is necessary to verify
Capacity
the characteristics of the Upper and Lower
Mt. Simon Sandstone in the absence of
nearby deep well data.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt 3 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
Depth and capacity of have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and between 10,000 and 11,000 feet (3048 to
Saline Formation (if temperature conditions above the CO2 3353 m). Top of Mt. Simon was drill hole
Saline Formation is the supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The confirmed at the site at approximately 11,000
preferred sequestration deep saline formation must have sufficient feet (3353 m) deep.
option) storage capacity for the planned life of the
plant (30 years) under these conditions.

Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 3 -1 -1

Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated between
thickness between 100 to 150 feet (30 to 46
Availability of
m). At the Gibson Generating Station, the St.
secondary reservoirs
Peter is expected to be porous but is too thin
(drill confirmed less than 150 feet [30 m]) for
injection.
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) The Gibson Station is located east of the most 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must significant oil producing region in the Illinois
be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields Basin. The potential exists for stacked CO2-
Proximity to Oil Fields that are deep enough for miscible EOR EOR and saline storage in many fields within
methods. a 50-mile (80-km) distance especially north,
west, and south of the Edwardsport Power
Station.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 2
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 38% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis

96
 The primary seal must not be intersected by Gibson Station is less than 5 miles (8 km) 2 -4 -5
any known historically active or east of the northern mapped extent of the
hydraulically transmissive faults. The Wabash Valley Fault System (north-northeast
proposed seal must have a low differential trended system extending across southeastern
in-situ caprock or target formation stress Illinois, southwestern Indiana, and into
Relation of Primary and high mechanical seal strength relative Kentucky [Figure 18]).
Seal to Active or to injection pressure The time of structural movement in the
Transmissive Faults Wabash Valley Fault System cannot be
defined more precisely than post-late
Pennsylvanian, pre-Pleistocene most appear
to die out within the Knox Group; only a few
visibly offset the prominent basal Knox
(Cambrian) reflector (Nelson 1995).
The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness (Figure 11) map of the 2 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Eau Claire Shale indicates thickness range
regionally extensive, and be continuous between 750 to 1,000 feet (229 to 305 m).
over the entire projected CO2 plume The Eau Claire Shale is drill hole confirmed
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of to be approximately 920 feet (280 m) thick in
Primary Seal CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical the Duke Energy WDW #2 well.
permeability and have sufficiently high
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier
to migration of CO2 out of the target
formation.
Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map for the Maquoketa 2 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 300 to 400 feet (91 to 122 m) at this
Secondary Seal (3 m) thick throughout and cover at least location. Drill hole confirmed thickness at
75 percent of the projected plume after Gibson Station record the thickness at
injection of 50 MMT CO2. approximately 300 feet (91 m).

Not required The New Albany Shale is estimated be less

Tertiary Seal than 150 feet (46 m) thick at this location.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the Giro East GSP (White River – Table 4), 2 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. Monroe City GSP (Table 4), and Alford GSP
(Table 4) are northeast within 30 miles (48
Gas Storage km) of the Gibson Station. Wells in these
fields inject into the Pennsylvanian and
Mississippian strata with maximum injection
well depths less than 1500 feet (457 m).
Is there any seismic reflection data Approximately 10 miles (16 km) to the north
available at this site? This is not a is E-W regional seismic profile and
requirement, but it reduces subsurface approximately 30 miles (48 km) to the west is
Seismic data
uncertainty. N-S regional seismic profile. Additionally,
availability?
E-W seismic survey data exists 10 to 20
miles (16 to 32 km) east and south from the
Gibson Station.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity of over 2 -2 -2
Reservoir salinity mg/L 200,000 mg/L at the site (Figure 4).

97
 Abandoned boreholes penetrating the Penetration through the Mt. Simon at the 2 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating
reservoir interval may allow leakage into facility.
injection reservoir
shallower horizons
Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause This must be addressed during the permitting 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays of the well and is dependent on the regulatory
permitting issues
agency.
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No protected biological species. Located 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, immediately south of the power facility is
Sensitive features
water reservoirs, hazardous materials Gibson Lake (Broad Pond), man-made lake
above sequestration
storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or measuring around 3,500 acres (14 km2),
area
other sensitive features. which is used as cooling pond for the plant.

Proposed target formation for CO2 Unconsolidated/surficial deposits above 3 -5 -5

sequestration must not be an underground bedrock at the site are estimated to be less
source of drinking water than 100 feet (30 m) thick. Indiana DNR
Aquifer Systems Maps denote the
Sequestration impacts
McLeansboro Group as the predominant
on drinking water
bedrock aquifer system in the area. The
Gibson Generating Station is not located in a
drinking water protection area, or above a
sole source aquifer.
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 2 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by Gibson Station –
be located where the project can obtain, Duke Energy.
Mineral Rights in the purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
CO2 sequestration area mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

Marathon Robinson Refinery
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity

98
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood
Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation

Severity
Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 3 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area storage reservoir at the Robinson Refinery
site. The nearest deep well is the Abe Reedy
Distance to suitable
A-1 approximately 9 miles (14 km) away in
geologic formation
Main Consolidated Oil Field, Crawford Co.,
IL. The surface of the Mt. Simon is drill
confirmed at 8,162 feet (2488 m).
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 3 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness between 1,750 to 2,000 feet (533 to
610 m) thick at the Marathon Robinson
Refinery facility. The nearest deep well
Reservoir Thickness penetrating the Lower Mt. Simon is the Duke
Energy Indiana #1 IGCC, approximately 30
miles (48 km) away. In the Duke Energy well
the Mt. Simon Sandstone is nearly 2,000 feet
(610 m) thick with the Lower Mt. Simon over
800 feet (244 m) thick.
The proposed geologic formation for Due to limited regional data for the Lower 3 -3
Injection Rate sequestration must support a CO2 injection Mt. Simon deeper well data is needed.
Capacity rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per
year for up to 30 years.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt. 3 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
Depth and capacity of have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and between 7,000 to 8,000 feet (2134 to 2438
Saline Formation (if temperature conditions above the CO2 m). The surface of the Mt. Simon is drill
Saline Formation is the supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The hole confirmed at 8,162 feet (2488 m) in the
preferred sequestration deep saline formation must have sufficient Abe Reedy A-1 well approximately 9 miles
option) storage capacity for the planned life of the (14 km) south in Main Consolidated Oil
plant (30 years) under these conditions. Field, Crawford Co., IL.

Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 3 -1 -1

Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated between 50 to
100 feet (15 to 30 m) thick. St. Peter
Availability of
Sandstone thickness is typically less than 100
secondary reservoirs
feet (30 m) near the Robinson Refinery it can
increase to 250 feet (76 m) thick in northern
Crawford Co. into southern Clark Co., IL.

99
 If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) The Robinson Refinery is located the 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must northern extent of the most significant oil
be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields producing region in the Illinois Basin. The
Proximity to Oil Fields
that are deep enough for miscible EOR potential exists for stacked CO2-EOR and
methods. saline storage in fields within the 50-mile
(80-km) search radius.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 2
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will about 23% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected by The Robinson Refinery is less than 5 miles (8 3 -4 -5
any known historically active or km) southwest of southern extent of the
hydraulically transmissive faults. The Marshall-Sidell Syncline (Figure 18), an
proposed seal must have a low differential elongated, north-trending depression between
in-situ caprock or target formation stress the La Salle Anticlinorium and the east flank
and high mechanical seal strength relative of the Illinois Basin. Approximately 10 miles
Relation of Primary to injection pressure (16 km) west, the Edgar Monocline stretches
Seal to Active or about 60 miles (97 km) separating the La
Transmissive Faults Salle Anticlinorium from the Marshall-Sidell
Syncline to the east. The Edgar Monocline
exhibits a pattern of relief increasing with
depth, typical of La Salle Anticlinorium,
reflecting the progressive growth of the
structure during the late Mississippian and
Pennsylvanian Periods (Nelson 1995).
The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map for the Eau Claire 3 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Shale (Figure 11) is estimated to between 750
regionally extensive, and be continuous to 1000 feet (228 to 305 m) thick. The
over the entire projected CO2 plume Newport Chemical Plant #WD-1 well is (22
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of miles [35 km] to the north) has over 850 feet
CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical of Eau Claire Shale and has safely served as a
Primary Seal
permeability and have sufficiently high disposal well that accepted millions of
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier gallons of wastewater. Eau Claire Shale
to migration of CO2 out of the target thickness data around the Robinson Refinery
formation. facility confirms anticipated thickness to the
Newport Chemical Plant #WD-1.

Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 3 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 200 to 300 feet (61 to 91 m). The
Secondary Seal (3 m) thick throughout and cover at least Maquoketa Shale is over 250 feet (76 m)
75 percent of the projected plume after thick at this location.
injection of 50 MMT CO2.

Not required The New Albany Shale is approximately 100

Tertiary Seal feet (30 m) thick in the area.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the Oaktown Gas Storage Field (Table 4) is 2 -3 -5
Gas Storage estimated CO2 plume radius. approximately 16.50 miles (26.50 km) to the

100
 southeast in Knox Co., IN. Injection wells in
the field are less than 700 feet (213 m) deep
into the Pennsylvanian with the deepest well
in the field at 2,843 feet (867 m) into the
Devonian.
Is there any seismic reflection data There are regional seismic profiles to north,
available at this site? This is not a south, and west of the Robinson Refinery. A
Seismic data requirement, but it reduces subsurface series of 5 to 10 mile (8 to 16 km) seismic
availability? uncertainty. lines have been collected south of the site in
southwest Crawford County and central
Lawrence County.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity of over 2 -2 -2
mg/L 200,000 mg/L at Newport Chemical Plant (22
miles [35 km] to the north); the Robinson
Reservoir salinity
Refinery site is expected to have Mt. Simon
salinities values (Figure 4) similar to
Newport chemistry data.
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the Well penetrations through the Mt. Simon 2 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating reservoir interval may allow leakage into approximately 9 miles.
injection reservoir shallower horizons
Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause This must be addressed during the permitting 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays of the well and is dependent on the regulatory
permitting issues
agency.
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No protected biological species. Allen Lake 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, (Allen Lake Dam) is a small reservoir located
Sensitive features water reservoirs, hazardous materials less than 2 miles (3 km) north of the
above sequestration storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or Robinson Refinery facility.
area other sensitive features.

Proposed target formation for CO2 Illinois State Water Survey Illinois 2 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground Groundwater Resources Maps identify the
source of drinking water unconsolidated/surficial deposits above
bedrock at the site to be less than 25 feet (8
Sequestration impacts m) thick. Major sand and gravel aquifer
on drinking water potential exists less than 10 miles (16 km)
west of the site within the thicker (over 50
feet [15 m]) unconsolidated material. No
bedrock aquifer systems are mapped in the
area.
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access.
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.

101
 The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by Marathon Robinson
be located where the project can obtain, Refinery
Mineral Rights in the purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
CO2 sequestration area mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

One Earth Energy LLC
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood
Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation

Severity
Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The Mt. Simon Sandstone is the primary 1 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area sequestration reservoir at the One Earth
Energy (OEE) site. The nearest deep well is
the Hinton #7, located in the Manlove Natural
Distance to suitable
Gas Storage Field, Champaign Co.,
geologic formation
approximately 12 miles (19 km) from the
OEE site. In the Hinton #7 well, the Mt.
Simon Sandstone is at a drill confirmed depth
of approximately 4,000 feet (1219 m).
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness (Figure 5) map of the Mt 1 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Simon Sandstone indicate estimated
thickness over 2,500 feet (762 m) thick at the
OEE facility. In the Hinton #7 the Mt Simon
Reservoir Thickness is over 2,600 feet (792 m) thick with 300 feet
(91 m) of 10% of greater porosity lower Mt.
Simon. Due to the fact of limited regional
data for the Lower Mt. Simon deeper well
data is still needed.

102
 The proposed geologic formation for From the Hinton well the upper Mt. Simon 2 -3
Injection Rate sequestration must support a CO2 injection should have an average permeability of 150
Capacity rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per mD and lower Mt. Simon has zones may be
year for up to 30 years. over 1 Darcy.
If a deep saline formation is the Regional structure (Figure 6) map of the Mt 1 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must Simon Sandstone indicate estimated depth
Depth and capacity of have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and around 4,000 feet (1219 m). In the Hinton #7
Saline Formation (if temperature conditions above the CO2 well, the Mt. Simon Sandstone is at a drill
Saline Formation is the supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The confirmed depth of approximately 4,000 feet
preferred sequestration deep saline formation must have sufficient (1219 m).
option) storage capacity for the planned life of the
plant (30 years) under these conditions.
Not required Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 1 -1 -1
Sandstone (Figure 8) is estimated to between
250 to 300 feet (76 to 91 m) thick. At the
Availability of
OEE location, the St. Peter has favorable
secondary reservoirs
porosity and permeability for storage, but it is
a freshwater aquifer with dissolved solids of
under 10,000 mg/L.
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) No oil fields for EOR are available 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must
Proximity to Oil Fields be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields
that are deep enough for miscible EOR
methods.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 1
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 7% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected by The Osman Monocline is approximately 3 2 -4 -5
any known historically active or miles west of the site (Figure 18). Uplift
hydraulically transmissive faults. The began in the Pennsylvanian Period; Osman
Relation of Primary proposed seal must have a low differential Monocline appears on maps of the top of the
Seal to Active or in-situ caprock or target formation stress Galena (Trenton) Group (Ordovician) and
Transmissive Faults and high mechanical seal strength relative base of the New Albany Group (Nelson
to injection pressure 1995). This interpreted faulted interval needs
to be verified by seismic reflection. More
analysis needs to be completed.
The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map for the Eau Claire 1 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Shale (Figure 11) is estimated to between 500
regionally extensive, and be continuous to 750 feet (152 to 229 m) thick. The Eau
over the entire projected CO2 plume Claire Formation is over 475 feet (145 m)
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of thick 12 miles (19 km) south at The Manlove
Primary Seal CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical Gas Storage Field safely stored natural gas
permeability and have sufficiently high for over 60 years. The Eau Claire Formation
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier at the OEE should be of similar thickness and
to migration of CO2 out of the target rock properties to that found at the Manlove
formation. Gas Storage Field.

103
 Not required but preferred. Secondary seal Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 1 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet between 100 to 200 feet (30 to 61 m). The
Secondary Seal (3 m) thick throughout and cover at least Maquoketa Shale is approximately 200 feet
75 percent of the projected plume after (61 m) thick at this location.
injection of 50 MMT CO2.

Not required The New Albany Shale (a regional shale in

Tertiary Seal southern Illinois) is not present at the
proposed site.
Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the The Manlove Gas Storage Field (Table 4), 12 1 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. miles (19 km) to the south of the OEE site,
Gas Storage injects into the Upper Mt Simon Sandstone.
Modeling of the plume needs to be
completed.
Is there any seismic reflection data Nearest seismic reflection data is 12 miles (19
Seismic data available at this site? This is not a km) to the south at Manlove Gas Storage
availability? requirement, but it reduces subsurface Field. Recommended that new 2D seismic
uncertainty. reflection data be acquired.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 Mt. Simon reservoir has a salinity of over 1 -2 -2
mg/L 100,000 mg/L (Figure 4) at Manlove Gas
Reservoir salinity Storage Field (12 miles [19 km] to the south);
the proposed site should have similar salinity
values.
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the None within 12 miles (19 km). 1 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating
reservoir interval may allow leakage into
injection reservoir
shallower horizons
Identify a potential scenario where primary The Eau Claire Formation is not organic rich 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas and the Maquoketa Shale (secondary seal) is
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS unlikely to be an unconventional petroleum
petroleum production
injection target in this area
Permitting time and requirements cause 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays
permitting issues
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No known sensitive surface features or 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, protected biological species. The proposed
Sensitive features water reservoirs, hazardous materials site is within 10 miles (16 km) of the limits of
above sequestration storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or the Mahomet Valley aquifer (Figure 20). This
area other sensitive features. aquifer is defined by the federal government
as a sole source aquifer (SSA).

Proposed target formation for CO2 The proposed site is within 10 miles (16 km) 2 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground of the limits of the Mahomet Valley aquifer
source of drinking water (Figure 20). The OEE site location is within a
Sequestration impacts watershed area adjacent to the Mahomet
on drinking water SSA, and the site is within the Mahomet SSA
Project Review area. Illinois State Water
Survey Illinois Groundwater Resources Maps
identify the unconsolidated/surficial deposits

104
 above bedrock at the site are between 100 to
200 feet (30 to 61 m) thick with aquifer
potential within the unconsolidated.
Additionally, maps included bedrock aquifers
in the Pennsylvanian, Silurian, and Devonian
Shallow Bedrock Aquifers (within 500 feet
[152 m] depth) and Cambrian-Ordovician
Sandstone Aquifers (over 500 feet [152 m]
depth).
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access.
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by One Earth Energy.
be located where the project can obtain,
Mineral Rights in the purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
CO2 sequestration area mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

Site Assessment Summary:

Prairie State Generating Company
Risk Element Likelihood
Very Unlikely 1 <1% chance during the project
Unlikely 2 3% chance
Possible 3 10% chance
Likely 4 30% chance
Very Likely 5 >= 90% chance during the project
Impact Severity
Light -1
Serious -2
Major -3
Catastrophic -4
Multi- Catastrophic -5

Importance
Likelihood

Description of
Recommended Site Evaluation
Severity

Characteristics

Reservoir Analysis
Site must be located within 50 miles (80 The St Peter Sandstone is the primary storage 2 -5 -5
km) of a suitable geological storage area reservoir at Prairie State Generating
Distance to suitable Company site. The nearest deep well that
geologic formation penetrated through the St. Peter Sandstone is
the Shaglee Unit #1 approximately 12 miles
(19 km) away in Perry Co, IL. The top of the

105
 St. Peter is approximately 4100 feet (1250 m)
deep in the Shaglee Unit #1 well.
Location must have reservoir with 20 feet Regional thickness map for the St. Peter 2 -3 -3
(6 m) or greater of <10% porosity Sandstone (Figure 8) estimated between
thickness between 150 to 200 feet (46 to 61
m). In the Shaglee Unit #1 well, the St Peter
Reservoir Thickness
Sandstone is approximately 150 feet (46 m)
thick. Wells within a 25-mile (40-km) search
radius have confirmed thickness ranges
reflected in regional maps.
The proposed geologic formation for Drilling has confirmed the presence of the St 2 -3
Injection Rate sequestration must support a CO2 injection Peter Sandstone at this site. Well testing
Capacity rate of 1 million metric tons of CO2 per would be a required to determine injection
year for up to 30 years. capacity.
If a deep saline formation is the The St. Peter Sandstone upper contact is 2 -4 -4
sequestration target, the formation must typically between 3,000 to 4,500 feet (914 to
Depth and capacity of have in-situ hydrostatic pressure and 1372 m) in depth in the area. St Peter
Saline Formation (if temperature conditions above the CO2 thickness and depth can change in a very
Saline Formation is the supercritical point (31o C at 73 atm). The short distance in this area.
preferred sequestration deep saline formation must have sufficient
option) storage capacity for the planned life of the
plant (30 years) under these conditions.
Not required
Availability of
secondary reservoirs
If CO2 enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) Prairie State Generating Company is located 2 -1 -1
reservoirs are the target, then the site must west of the most significant oil producing
be 50 miles (80 km) or closer to oil fields region in the Illinois Basin. The potential
Proximity to Oil Fields
that are deep enough for miscible EOR exists for stacked CO2-EOR and saline
methods. storage within a 50-mile (80 km) distance
north and east of the site.
Must not be in an area of high seismic There is a 2% probability that the Peak 2
hazard (per USGS). Ground Acceleration due to seismic activity
Seismic Risk will exceed 31% G within 50 years (USGS,
2014; based on 2014 long-term model; 760
meters/second).
Seal Analysis
The primary seal must not be intersected by The Elkton Anticline (Figure 18) is 2 -4 -5
any known historically active or approximately twenty miles to the east of the
hydraulically transmissive faults. The Prairie State Generating Company site. The
Relation of Primary proposed seal must have a low differential Elkton Anticline is a north-trending structural
Seal to Active or in-situ caprock or target formation stress high about 6.5 miles (10.5 km) long and 1.5
Transmissive Faults and high mechanical seal strength relative miles (2.5 km) wide (Nelson 1995). This
to injection pressure interpreted faulted interval would need to be
verified by seismic reflection if storage were
considered.

106
 The primary seal must have sufficient Regional thickness map of the Maquoketa 2 -5 -5
thickness (greater than 20 feet or 6 m), be Shale (Figure 12) indicates thickness range
regionally extensive, and be continuous between 100 to 200 feet (30 to 61 m).
over the entire projected CO2 plume Surrounding drill hole data indicates
boundary after injection of 50 MMT of formation thickness between 150 to 200 feet
Primary Seal
CO2. It must have sufficiently low vertical (46 to 61 m).
permeability and have sufficiently high
capillary entry pressure to provide a barrier
to migration of CO2 out of the target
formation.
Not required but preferred. Secondary seal The New Albany Shale is estimated to be less 2 -2 -2
should overlie the primary caprock seal, be 100 feet (30 m) thick at this location.
largely continuous, be greater than 10 feet
Secondary Seal (3 m) thick throughout and cover at least
75 percent of the projected plume after
injection of 50 MMT CO2.

Not required
Tertiary Seal

Gas storage reservoirs cannot be within the Tilden Gas Storage Field (Table 4), St. Clair, 2 -3 -5
estimated CO2 plume radius. Co. is about 2 miles (3 km) to the southwest
of the Prairie State Energy Campus site.
Gas Storage
Tilden Gas Storage Field injects into the
Mississippian Cypress Formation with a basal
depth less than 900 feet (274 m).
Is there any seismic reflection data There are over 30 (north-south and east-west)
Seismic data available at this site? This is not a existing 2D seismic reflection profiles
availability? requirement, but it reduces subsurface collected in central to east central
uncertainty. Washington Co., IL.
Injection reservoir must be over 10,000 St. Peter Sandstone salinity is expected to be 2 -2 -2
Reservoir salinity mg/L more than 10,000 mg/l at the Prairie State
Energy Campus.
Abandoned boreholes penetrating the Penetrations into the St. Peter Sandstone 2 -2 -2
Boreholes penetrating
reservoir interval may allow leakage into within 20 miles (32 km) of the facility.
injection reservoir
shallower horizons
Identify a potential scenario where primary The Maquoketa Shale is unlikely to be an 2 -2 -4
Seal becomes target
seal becomes a target for shale gas unconventional petroleum target in this area
for unconventional
production, and operators object to CCS
petroleum production
injection
Permitting time and requirements cause This must be addressed during the permitting 3 -3 -5
Legal/regulatory
economic delays of the well and is dependent on the regulatory
permitting issues
agency.
Near Surface Impacts
The land above the proposed sequestration No known sensitive surface features or 2 -3 -5
formation must not intersect large dams, protected biological species.
Sensitive features water reservoirs, hazardous materials
above sequestration storage facilities, Class 1 injection wells, or
area other sensitive features.

107
 Proposed target formation for CO2 Illinois State Water Survey Illinois 3 -5 -5
sequestration must not be an underground Groundwater Resources Maps identify the
source of drinking water unconsolidated/surficial deposits above
bedrock at the site approximately 50 feet (15
m) thick. Prairie State Generating Company
Sequestration impacts is east within 5 miles (8 km) of the mapped
on drinking water extent of the Kaskaskia River Alluvial
Aquifer. No bedrock aquifer systems are
mapped in the area. The Prairie State
Generating Company site is not located in a
drinking water protection area, or above a
sole source aquifer.
Access to There must be sufficient access to the land Area is flat lying and appears to have no 1 -3 -3
sequestration area for surface above the proposed sequestration issues with access.
CO2 leakage area to implement a CO2 leakage
monitoring monitoring program.
The proposed CO2 sequestration area must Needs to be addressed by Prairie State
be located where the project can obtain, Generating Company.
Mineral Rights in the purchase, or get a waiver of subsurface
CO2 sequestration area mineral rights. (unless recovery of coal-bed
methane or oil is a part of the sequestration
process).

108