Discussion on flow assurance issues in supercritical CO2 pipeline transmission
Author of the article:CHEN Junwen1, GUAN Peifeng2, TANG Xiaoyong1, SHI Bohui3, ZAN Linfeng1, ZHANG Zepeng4, GONG Jing3,GUO Yanlin1, PENG Wei5
Author's Workplace:1. CPECC Southwest Company, Chengdu, Sichuan, 610041, China; 2. Sichuan Shale Gas Project Department, CNPC, Great Wall Drilling Engineering Co., Ltd., Weiyuan, Sichuan, 642450, China; 3. College of Mechanical and Transportation Engineering, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing, 102249, China; 4. CPECC New Energy Department, Beijing, 100120, China; 5. Shunan Gas Mine, PetroChina Southwest Oil & Gasfield Company, Luzhou, Sichuan, 646000, China
Key Words: Supercritical CO2; Pipeline; Flow assurance; Planned blowdown
Abstract:
In recent years, with the growing demand for carbon
capture and storage, CO2 transmission pipelines have emerged as a key
infrastructure, with a clear trend towards large-scale
development. CO2 can be transported in pipelines through gaseous state,
supercritical state or dense phase state. For long-distance CO2 transmission pipelines, the
supercritical transportation mode is more economical compared with gaseous
transmission. Compared with conventional oil transmission pipelines,
supercritical CO2 transmission faces issues such as phase change, water hammer
effect, and overpressure during the transmission process. Affected by its
physical properties and transmission technology, its flow assurance deserves
systematic discussion. Based on the supercritical CO2 transmission process and
its operating characteristics, this study identifies key aspects of flow
assurance analysis for supercritical CO2 pipelines. It explores the
overpressure issues due to water hammer and thermal expansion between
supercritical CO2 and conventional oil products. Additionally, it specifically
conducts a study on the phase change and temperature distribution in the
planned blowdown of supercritical CO2 in the pipelines. Research shows that the
impact of water hammer overpressure on supercritical CO2 pipelines is
relatively minor, but risk of decompression phase change downstream of the
water hammer point do exist; moreover, stopping the flow in the supercritical
CO2 pipeline can lead to thermal expansion and overpressure issues; and terrain
influence can cause uneven phase change and temperature distribution during
blowdown. Therefore, the planning for the blowdown of supercritical CO2
pipelines should incorporate numerical simulation analysis, and the temperature
monitoring procedure during this process requires additional research. The
research results can provide relevant reference for the design and operation of
supercritical CO2 pipelines.