Advanced geophysical underground coal gasification monitoring

Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) produces less surface impact, atmospheric pollutants and greenhouse gas than traditional surface mining and combustion. Therefore, it may be useful in mitigating global change caused by anthropogenic activities. Careful monitoring of the UCG process is essential i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inMitigation and adaptation strategies for global change Vol. 21; no. 4; pp. 487 - 500
Main Authors Mellors, Robert, Yang, X., White, J. A., Ramirez, A., Wagoner, J., Camp, D. W.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.04.2016
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) produces less surface impact, atmospheric pollutants and greenhouse gas than traditional surface mining and combustion. Therefore, it may be useful in mitigating global change caused by anthropogenic activities. Careful monitoring of the UCG process is essential in minimizing environmental impact. Here we first summarize monitoring methods that have been used in previous UCG field trials. We then discuss in more detail a number of promising advanced geophysical techniques. These methods – seismic, electromagnetic, and remote sensing techniques – may provide improved and cost-effective ways to image both the subsurface cavity growth and surface subsidence effects. Active and passive seismic data have the promise to monitor the burn front, cavity growth, and observe cavity collapse events. Electrical resistance tomography (ERT) produces near real time tomographic images autonomously, monitors the burn front and images the cavity using low-cost sensors, typically running within boreholes. Interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) is a remote sensing technique that has the capability to monitor surface subsidence over the wide area of a commercial-scale UCG operation at a low cost. It may be possible to infer cavity geometry from InSAR (or other surface topography) data using geomechanical modeling. The expected signals from these monitoring methods are described along with interpretive modeling for typical UCG cavities. They are illustrated using field results from UCG trials and other relevant subsurface operations.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1381-2386
1573-1596
DOI:10.1007/s11027-014-9584-1