4.7 Article

Cavern integrity for underground hydrogen storage in the Brazilian pre-salt fields

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 48, 期 69, 页码 26853-26869

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.03.292

关键词

Hydrogen storage; Creep; Salt cavern; Thermo-mechanical analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Over the years, reliance on petroleum-based fuels for energy has been challenged by global warming and an energy crisis. This has led to a growing interest in investing in renewable energy resources like hydrogen. This study focuses on the process of storing hydrogen in salt caverns, which offer relevant properties such as low permeability, creep, and self-healing. The research proposes a workflow for analyzing cavity integrity and explores the thermomechanical effects of hydrogen storage through different case studies.
Over the years, energy has depended on petroleum-based fuels. However, global warming and the energy crisis have drastically impacted the markets. It urges investing in renew-able energy resources, such as hydrogen. Therefore, this work focuses on the hydrogen storage process in salt caverns, as these rocks have relevant properties, such as low permeability, relevant creep, and self-healing. A workflow for cavity integrity analysis is proposed. Hydrogen storage provokes variations in temperature and pressure inside the cavern. The gas thermodynamics is represented through a diabatic solution, which up-dates the gas pressure and temperature at each time step. The thermomechanical formulation is implemented into an in-house framework GeMA, which couples different physics. Four case studies are analyzed, and the discussions compared mechanical and thermomechanical models. Results demonstrate the importance of thermal effects, as temperature amplitudes may compromise rock integrity, for instance, inducing tensile stresses and affecting permeability. & COPY; 2023 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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