Experimental study on influence factors of CH4 displacement by CO2

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.04.017

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to study influence of multi-factor coupling on CH₄ production and CO₂ sequestration effect in the process of CH₄ displacement by CO₂, displacement experiment was carried out under conditions of different gas injection temperature(θ), pressure (P) and water content of coal samples (W). Variation characteristics of CH₄ output rate (η) and CO₂ storage rate (ξ) under different conditions were researched and analyzed. Then, η and ξ quadratic regression response surface models were built based on response surface methodology, separate influence of gas injection temperature (A), gas injection pressure (B) and moisture content (C) on η and ξ and interaction between each factor were investigated. The results show that η increases along with increase of θ and P, while decreases with that of W. ξ increases with increase of P, while decreases with that of θ and W. Among all influencing factors, A, B, and C are significant terms of η, B and C are those of ξ, and influence degree of primary term on η and ξ is C>B>A. That of interaction term on η is: BC>AC>AB, and the interaction between AC and BC is significant, while AB interaction is not. Influence degree of interaction term on ξ is AB>AC>BC, and interaction between AB and AC is extremely significant, while that between BC is not. The average deviations between experimental values outside coding interval of η and ξ of the 4 groups and predicted values of the model are 3.64% and 2.605%, respectively.

Key words: CH₄ displacement by CO₂, CH₄ output rate, CO₂ storage rate, influencing factors, Interaction

JIANG Yanhang, BAI Gang, ZHOU Xihua, WANG Siqi, WANG Lianhua, FAN Chaojun. Experimental study on influence factors of CH₄ displacement by CO₂[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(4): 113-121.

Figures/Tables 13

Tab.1

Fig.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

Tab.6

Tab.7

Tab.8

Tab.9

Fig.2

Fig.3

Tab.10

References 17

[1]	季鹏飞, 林海飞, 孔祥国, 等. 注氮促排煤体瓦斯数值模拟研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(11):127-134. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.11.018
	JI Pengfei, LIN Haifei, KONG Xiangguo, et al. Numerical simulation research on coal gas drainage by nitrogen injection[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(11):127-134. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2021.11.018
[2]	HUANG Jinxin, XU Guang, HU Guozhong, et al. A coupled electromagnetic irradiation, heat and mass transfer model for microwave heating and its numerical simulation on coal[J]. Fuel Process Technology, 2018; 177:237-245. doi: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2018.04.034
[3]	韩俊杰, 梁卫国, 张建功, 等. 煤层处置二氧化碳模拟实验研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 2014, 39(3):531-536.
	HAN Junjie, LIANG Weiguo, ZHANG Jiangong, et al. Simulation experiment of carbon dioxide storage in coal seam[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2014, 39(3):531-536.
[4]	BAI Gang, JIANG Yanhang, LI Xueming, et al. Quantitative experimental investigation of CO₂enhancement of the desorption rate of adsorbed CH₄ in coal[J]. Energy Reports, 2020, 6: 2336-2344. doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2020.08.036
[5]	FANG Huihuang, SANG Shuxun, LIU Shiqi. Numerical simulation of enhancing coalbed methane recovery by injecting CO₂ with heat injection[J]. Petroleum Science, 2019, 16(1):32-43. doi: 10.1007/s12182-018-0291-5
[6]	杨宏民, 梁龙辉, 冯朝阳, 等. 注气压力对不同注源气体置驱效应的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(9):122-128. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.09.021
	YANG Hongmin, LIANG Longhui, FENG Chaoyang, et al. Study on influence of injection pressure on replacement effect for different injection gases[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27(9):122-128. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.09.021
[7]	杨宏民, 鲁小凯, 陈立伟. 不同注源气体置换-驱替煤层CH₄突破时间的差异性分析[J]. 重庆大学学报, 2018, 41(2):96-102.
	YANG Hongmin, LU Xiaokai, CHEN Liwei. Difference analysis of breakthrough time of different source gas replacement-displacement coalbed methane[J]. Journal of Chongqing University, 2018, 41(2):96-102.
[8]	周西华, 韩明旭, 白刚, 等. CO₂注气压力对瓦斯扩散系数影响规律实验研究[J]. 煤田地质与勘探, 2021, 49(1):81-86,99.
	ZHOU Xihua, HAN Mingxu, BAI Gang, et al. Experimental study on the influence of CO₂ injection pressure on gas diffusion coefficient[J]. Coal Geology & Exploration, 2021, 49(1):81-86,99.
[9]	BAI Gang, ZENG Xiaokun, LI Xueming, et al. Influence ofcarbon dioxide on the adsorption of methane by coal using low-field nuclear magnetic resonance[J]. Energy & Fuels, 2020, 34 (5):6113-6123. doi: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c00474
[10]	黎力, 梁卫国, 李治刚, 等. 注热CO₂驱替增产煤层气试验研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 2017, 42(8):2044-2051.
	LI Li, LIANG Weiguo, LI Zhigang, et al. Experimental investigation on enhancing coalbed methane recovery by injecting high temperature CO₂[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2017, 42(8):2044-2051.
[11]	吴迪, 刘雪莹, 孙可明, 等. 热力作用下煤层注CO₂驱替CH₄试验研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 2016, 41 (1) :162-166.
	WU Di, LIU Xueying, SUN Keming, et al. Experimental research on methane displacement in coalbed by carbon dioxide under thermo-mechanical action[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2016, 41 (1) :162-166.
[12]	尹光志, 蒋长宝, 许江, 等. 煤层气储层含水率对煤层气渗流影响的试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2011, 30(增2):3401-3406.
	YIN Guangzhi, JIANG Changbao, XU Jiang, et al. Experimental study of influences for water content in coalbed gas reservoirs on methane seepage[J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2011, 30(S2):3401-3406.
[13]	魏建平, 位乐, 王登科. 含水率对含瓦斯煤的渗流特性影响试验研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 2014, 39 (1) :97-103.
	WEI Jianping, WEI Le, WANG Dengke. Experimental study of moisture content influences on permeability of coal containing gas[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2014, 39 (1):97-103.
[14]	周西华, 姜鹏飞, 白刚, 等. CO₂驱替CH₄置换效率测试与分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(2):8-13. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.02.002
	ZHOU Xihua, JIANG Pengfei, BAI Gang, et al. Test and analysis of displacement efficiency of CO₂ replacing CH₄[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(2): 8-13. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2020.02.002
[15]	刘丹丹, 刘衡, 李德文, 等. 基于响应曲面法煤矿粉尘浓度测量装置优化研究[J]. 煤炭科学技术, 2020, 48(4):224-229.
	LIU Dandan, LIU Heng, LI Dewen, et al. Optimization of coal dust concentration measurement device based on response surface methodology[J]. Coal Science and Technology, 2020, 48(4): 224-229.
[16]	周西华, 牛玉平, 白刚, 等. 煤吸附CO₂体积影响因素试验研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(12):85-90. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.12.014
	ZHOU Xihua, NIU Yuping, BAI Gang, et al. Experimental study on factors affecting volume of CO₂ adsorbed by coal[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(12):85-90. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.12.014
[17]	狄军贞, 赵微, 朱志涛, 等. 响应曲面法优化强化混凝工艺处理微污染水[J]. 环境工程学报, 2017, 11(1):27-32.
	DI Junzhen, ZHAO Wei, ZHU Zhitao, et al. Treatment of response surface methodology to optimize enhanced coagulation process for micro-polluted water[J]. Chinese Journal of Environmental Engineering, 2017, 11(1) : 27-32.

水分 M_ad/%	灰分 A_ad/%	挥发分 V_daf/%	固定碳 F_cd/%	镜质组反射率R_0,max	朗格缪尔体积 V_L/(m³·t^-1)		朗格缪尔压力 P_L/MPa
水分 M_ad/%	灰分 A_ad/%	挥发分 V_daf/%	固定碳 F_cd/%	镜质组反射率R_0,max	CO₂	CH₄	CO₂	CH₄
1.5	9.17	13.24	76.34	1.50	42.781 8	26.287 9	2.208 0	1.571 8

试验序号	θ/℃	P/MPa	W/%	备注
1	30	0.8	2.12	温度影响
2	40	0.8	2.12
3	50	0.8	2.12
4	60	0.8	2.12
5	30	0.6	2.12	压力影响
6	30	1	2.12
7	30	1.2	2.12
8	30	0.8	0.96	水分影响
9	30	0.8	3.28
10	30	0.8	4.25

θ/℃	CH₄体积/L		CO₂体积/L		η/%	ξ/%
θ/℃	注入	产出	注入	封存	η/%	ξ/%
30	119.19	94.09	311.19	273.24	78.94	87.80
40	118.61	104.96	318.69	283.86	88.49	89.07
50	117.85	107.16	344.66	293.74	90.93	85.23
60	119.38	109.47	345.21	284.07	91.70	82.29

P/MPa	CH₄体积/L		CO₂体积/L		η/%	ξ/%
P/MPa	注入	产出	注入	封存	η/%	ξ/%
0.6	117.29	90.29	369.70	269.00	76.98	72.76
0.8	119.19	94.09	311.19	273.24	78.94	87.80
1	119.91	97.445	377.30	324.88	81.27	86.11
1.2	118.16	101.69	381.54	339.23	86.06	88.91

W/%	CH₄体积/L		CO₂体积/L		η/%	ξ/%
W/%	注入	产出	注入	封存	η/%	ξ/%
0.96	151.54	127.69	363.79	321.66	84.26	88.42
2.12	119.19	94.09	311.19	273.24	78.94	87.80
3.28	96.47	74.44	259.56	210.92	77.16	81.26
4.25	74.37	55.93	201.26	157.69	75.21	78.35

Experimental study on influence factors of CH₄ displacement by CO₂

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 13

References 17

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

影响因素	代号	编码及水平			间距
影响因素	代号	-1	0	+1	间距
注气温度/℃	A	40	50	60	10
注气压力/MPa	B	0.8	1	1.2	0.2
含水率/%	C	0.96	2.12	3.28	1.16

编号	A/℃	B/MPa	C/%	η/%	ξ/%
1	40	0.8	2.12	86.23	85.46
2	60	0.8	2.12	89.34	83.63
3	40	1.2	2.12	89.12	84.83
4	60	1.2	2.12	90.26	86.24
5	40	1.0	0.96	88.65	85.15
6	60	1.0	0.96	91.87	83.26
7	40	1.0	3.28	82.89	81.37
8	60	1.0	3.28	83.16	82.23
9	50	0.8	0.96	86.28	84.64
10	50	1.2	0.96	91.25	85.75
11	50	0.8	3.28	81.14	82.96
12	50	1.2	3.28	82.65	83.15
13	50	1.0	2.12	91.12	85.63
14	50	1.0	2.12	89.96	85.57
15	50	1.0	2.12	90.37	85.65
16	50	1.0	2.12	90.82	85.58
17	50	1.0	2.12	89.68	84.78

项目	平方和	自由度	均方	F值	S值
模型	192.88	9	21.43	61.55	<0.000 1
A	7.49	1	7.49	21.51	0.002 4
B	13.24	1	13.24	38.02	0.000 5
C	99.48	1	99.48	285.72	<0.000 1
AB	0.97	1	0.97	2.79	0.139 0
AC	2.18	1	2.18	6.25	0.041 0
BC	2.99	1	2.99	8.60	0.022 0
残差	2.44	7	0.35	—	—
失拟项	1.03	3	0.34	0.98	0.487 3
纯误差	1.41	4	0.35	—	—

项目	平方和	自由度	均方	F值	S值
模型	31.78	9	3.53	35.73	<0.000 1
A	0.26	1	0.26	2.66	0.146 9
B	1.34	1	1.34	13.61	0.007 8
C	10.33	1	10.33	104.52	<0.000 1
AB	2.62	1	2.62	26.56	0.001 3
AC	1.89	1	1.89	19.13	0.003 3
BC	0.21	1	0.21	2.14	0.186 8
残差	0.69	7	0.099	—	—
失拟项	0.14	3	0.046	0.34	0.801 1
纯误差	0.55	4	0.14	—	—

序号	θ/℃	P/MPa	W/%	CH₄产出率/%		误差率/%	CO₂储存率/%		误差率/%
序号	θ/℃	P/MPa	W/%	试验值	预测值	误差率/%	试验值	预测值	误差率/%
1	30	0.6	2.12	78.94	77.30	2.12	87.80	86.62	1.36
2	30	0.8	2.12	88.49	84.02	5.32	89.07	84.33	5.62
3	30	1.0	2.12	90.93	87.78	3.59	85.23	82.76	2.98
4	30	1.2	2.12	91.70	88.57	3.53	82.29	81.91	0.46

[1]	YU Xirui, HE Xu, KONG Depeng. Apriori algorithm-based statistical analysis of hydrogen accidents [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(4): 128-134.
[2]	XU Xiaomin, LI Wei, HUANG Shengzhong. Temporal and spatial dynamics and influencing factors analysis of environmental risk factors in Yellow River basin [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(3): 206-215.
[3]	LI Quansheng, YAN Jie, WANG Bin, ZHANG Yu. Wettability of dust from blast piles in Ha'erwusu open-pit coal mine and its influencing factors [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(S2): 7-12.
[4]	WANG Guilin, ZHAO Changhai, SONG Delin. Research on influencing factors of air pollution in open-pit mines based on environmental safety improvement [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(S2): 77-84.
[5]	ZHANG Mingfang, MA Yanhua, MA Yong. Influencing factors on severity of vehicle-pedestrian conflict at unsignalized intersections [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(8): 190-197.
[6]	LIU Qiyuan, LIU Jincheng. Regional resilience evaluation methods and influencing factors from perspective of natural disasters [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(5): 174-181.
[7]	CHENG Lianhua, ZHAO Xudong, HAO Jie. Research on influencing factors of construction workers' safety competency integrating ISM and G1 method [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(4): 61-68.
[8]	HE Shubo, XIANG Wei, SHI Zhongmiao. Risk early warning of electric vehicle battery system based on machine learning [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(2): 159-165.
[9]	LIU Lanjian, DONG Yongqiang. Research on resilience of transportation infrastructure: origin development, and future [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(11): 45-51.
[10]	ZHANG Boxu. Grey correlation analysis of railway accidents [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(S2): 60-63.
[11]	ZHAO Changxiao, LI Hao, ZHANG Wei, DONG Lei. Human-computer interaction safety analysis of airborne system from perspective of emergence [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(11): 113-120.
[12]	ZHANG Tongrong, SHI Tongyu, WEI Zhiqiang. Self-adaptive adjustment method of automation level for SPO [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(8): 155-164.
[13]	WU Haitao, LI Shuangxi. High-speed railway emergency dispatching safety analysis based on STAMP/STPA [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(6): 113-120.
[14]	LIU Haijuan, CHEN Ju, HE Ziming. Study on mental health status and influencing factors of university students during COVID-19 [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(5): 168-173.
[15]	WANG Haiyang, ZHAO Shulei, CHEN Xiang, WANG Jie, ZHOU Yanmin. Statistics and influencing factors analysis of tunnel gas accidents in China [J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(4): 34-40.