Control of Lateral Gas Leakage for Underground Gas Storage in Large-Scale, Low-Permeability Lithologic Reservoirs

Despite converting large, laterally unbounded, highly connected low-permeability lithologic gas reservoirs—without faults or fixed lithological boundaries—into underground gas storage, the evolution of transition zone pressures and the mechanisms of gas escape under multiple injection–production cycles remain poorly understood. This knowledge gap critically hinders the safe and efficient operation of such facilities. A core–transition zone injection–withdrawal model for the S4 underground gas storage was developed using the numerical well test module of Saphir software v4.20. The model quantifies transition zone pressure dynamics over ten injection–withdrawal cycles and elucidates how the interplay of formation permeability and operating conditions governs gas leakage. During multi-cycle injection–withdrawal operations, formation pressure in the transition zone steadily accumulates under the combined influence of core zone gas crossflow and local gas advection equilibrium within the non-utilizable region. Assessed by the transition zone boundary formation pressure, suppressing gas leakage depends primarily on total injection and withdrawal volume, followed by the injection schedule and, lastly, the location of the boundary injection well. To achieve cost-effective containment, we therefore recommend prioritizing a shorter injection duration, moderately reducing total injection and withdrawal volume, and increasing the distance between the boundary injection wells and the transition zone. Under the geological conditions of the S4 UGS, by sequentially adjusting the injection duration, reducing the total injected–withdrawal gas volume to 6000 × 104 m3, and increasing the distance between boundary injection wells and the transition zone to 900 m, the transition zone boundary pressure rise over ten cycles was controlled to below 1 MPa, thereby effectively preventing gas leakage.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Processes
Published
2025-10-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13103201
Primary Topic
Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Control of Lateral Gas Leakage for Underground Gas Storage in Large-Scale, Low-Permeability Lithologic Reservoirs

B. S. Zhang, Xin Lai, Yunhe Su, Wenjing Zhao et al.
Processes
Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
article

Control of Lateral Gas Leakage for Underground Gas Storage in Large-Scale, Low-Permeability Lithologic Reservoirs

B. S. Zhang, Xin Lai, Yunhe Su, Wenjing Zhao, Guosheng Ding, Li Ou, Hongcheng Xu, Yanqi Wu, Shujuan Xu
article en

Abstract

Despite converting large, laterally unbounded, highly connected low-permeability lithologic gas reservoirs—without faults or fixed lithological boundaries—into underground gas storage, the evolution of transition zone pressures and the mechanisms of gas escape under multiple injection–production cycles remain poorly understood. This knowledge gap critically hinders the safe and efficient operation of such facilities. A core–transition zone injection–withdrawal model for the S4 underground gas storage was developed using the numerical well test module of Saphir software v4.20. The model quantifies transition zone pressure dynamics over ten injection–withdrawal cycles and elucidates how the interplay of formation permeability and operating conditions governs gas leakage. During multi-cycle injection–withdrawal operations, formation pressure in the transition zone steadily accumulates under the combined influence of core zone gas crossflow and local gas advection equilibrium within the non-utilizable region. Assessed by the transition zone boundary formation pressure, suppressing gas leakage depends primarily on total injection and withdrawal volume, followed by the injection schedule and, lastly, the location of the boundary injection well. To achieve cost-effective containment, we therefore recommend prioritizing a shorter injection duration, moderately reducing total injection and withdrawal volume, and increasing the distance between the boundary injection wells and the transition zone. Under the geological conditions of the S4 UGS, by sequentially adjusting the injection duration, reducing the total injected–withdrawal gas volume to 6000 × 104 m3, and increasing the distance between boundary injection wells and the transition zone to 900 m, the transition zone boundary pressure rise over ten cycles was controlled to below 1 MPa, thereby effectively preventing gas leakage.

ProcessesVol. 13(10)
Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development (CN), China National Petroleum Corporation (China) (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.