4.5 Article

Experimental Study of CO2-ECBM by Injection Liquid CO2

期刊

MINERALS
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/min12030297

关键词

liquid CO2; displacement; drainage effect; sweep efficiency

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51974240, 52104221]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the gas drainage under different injection pressures through displacement and in situ experiments. The results show that increasing pressure can enhance methane production but decrease displacement ratio. Medium-pressure injection has better sweep efficiency and higher gas drainage purity compared to low-pressure injection.
Coal mine gas disasters have severely restricted production safety. Improving gas extraction efficiency can effectively reduce disasters. Scholars have confirmed that CO2 successfully displaces coal seam CH4. This study conducted displacement and in situ experiments and compared gas drainage under different injection pressures. The displacement experiments indicated that CH4 production rates increased under increased pressures while the displacement ratios decreased. The pressure had a positive effect on sweep efficiency. The in situ experiment showed that CH4 and CO2 concentration trends in the inspection hole remained consistent. Through observing the data of the original and inspection holes, the average gas drainage concentration during low- and medium-pressure injections increased by 0.61 times and 1.17 times, respectively. The low-pressure average gas drainage scalar was increased by 1.08 times. During the medium-pressure injection, the average gas drainage purity increased by 1.94 times. The diffusion ranges of CO2 under low- and medium-pressure injections were 20-25 m and 25-30 m, respectively. The sweep efficiency of medium-pressure injection was 26% better than that of the low-pressure injection, with average pressures of 2.8 MPa and 1.4 MPa, respectively, for sweep efficiency. This study proposes an effective method for improving coal mine gas drainage efficiency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据