the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Modeling the long-term fate of injected CO2 in saline aquifers: An integrated framework coupling multiphase flow, dissolution, reaction, and ripening
Abstract. Geological carbon sequestration (GCS) mitigates climate change by storing anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) in geological formations. CO2 undergoes complex physical and chemical transformations in the deep geological formations, governed by various interacting trapping mechanisms. Because the trapping mechanisms operate at wide range of different timescales, their long-term interplay remains unclear. We develop an integrated numerical modeling framework to analyze and track the footprint and phase transition processes that occur throughout the entire cycle of the injected CO2 in saline aquifers. The key novelty of the modeling framework lies in its capability to accurately describe multiple hydrodynamic processes and their interactions, including injection, dissolution-driven convection, reactive transport, and gravity-induced Ostwald ripening. The results suggest that dissolution reduces the lateral migration of physically trapped CO2, while mineral reaction provides a preferential channel for CO2-rich flow. For the scenarios we analyze, after several hundred years of mass transfer, dissolved CO2 accounts for approximately 40 % of total trapping amount, while mineral trapping contributes less than 1 %. The results also illustrate that low vertical permeability is unfavorable for the long-term transition of CO2 from the physical state to the dissolution state. When the heterogeneity index γ increases from 0.5 to 10, the total dissolution storage amount within the domain is reduced to one-third over the 500-year simulation period. This integrated modeling framework provides critical insights into the long-term evolution of CO2 plume migration and phase transition behavior, thereby offering a practical tool to quantitatively assess the long-term fate of the injected CO2 in saline aquifers.
Competing interests: At least one of the (co-)authors is a member of the editorial board of Hydrology and Earth System Sciences.
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.- Preprint
(1926 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 14 May 2026)
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-715', Giacomo Medici, 04 Mar 2026
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Tianyuan Zheng, 30 Mar 2026
reply
We sincerely thank the reviewer for the careful reading of our preprint and for the constructive and insightful comments. We greatly appreciate the positive evaluation of our research. Following the reviewer’s suggestions, we have revised the manuscript to improve its clarity, rigor, and presentation. The responses to the reviewers' comments are provided in the supplement.
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Tianyuan Zheng, 30 Mar 2026
reply
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-715', Anonymous Referee #1, 23 Mar 2026
reply
This manuscript presents a potentially valuable integrated modeling framework that couples multiphase flow, dissolution-driven convection, geochemical reaction, and gravity-driven ripening. The attempt to connect trapping mechanisms operating across very different timescales is a clear strength of the study. However, several issues related to model assumptions, clarity, and presentation should be addressed before publication.
Specific comments
- In the assumptions section the authors state that the reservoir is homogeneous and isotropic, whereas a later section explicitly investigates heterogeneity through permeability anisotropy. Indeed, heterogeneity plays an important role in CO2 migration and trapping (see for example, Gas migration and residual trapping in bimodal heterogeneous media during geological storage of CO2, Advances in Water Resources 142, 103608). The effects of heterogeneity should be investigated. But the manuscript should clearly distinguish the base-case assumptions from the sensitivity-analysis settings. In addition, setting an anisotropy ratio alone cannot fully represent the effects of heterogeneity.
- More explicit discussions are needed for several assumptions limiting the model applicability, including the isothermal condition, neglect of precipitation process and the simplified treatment of reactive mineralogy.
- Some wording choices are misleading or overly strong relative to the presented evidence. For example, “for the first time” in line 64 is a strong priority claim particularly for a manuscript that does not yet demonstrate sufficient rigor in validation or presentation.
- There are some minor grammatical errors. For example, in line 78, “represents” should be “represent…, respectively”. The authors are requested to carefully check the manuscript to avoid similar issues.
- The wording of some figure titles is inappropriate, such as Figure 4, “The distribution characteristics of the CO2 saturations”.
- The treatment of Ostwald ripening as a post-processing 1D vertical simulation with no horizontal mass transfer needs to clarified. The consequences of this simplification and the reason for it should be discussed.
- The authors have treated the ripening mass transfer process as a post-processing step in the coupled simulation. The readers might be interested in knowing why a fully coupled approach could not be implemented.
- Line 317, the case referred to = 1 does not correspond with that in the figure.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-715-RC1
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 150 | 95 | 26 | 271 | 13 | 23 |
- HTML: 150
- PDF: 95
- XML: 26
- Total: 271
- BibTeX: 13
- EndNote: 23
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1
General comments
Good research on CO2 storage. Please, follow my specific comments to improve the manuscript.
Specific comments
Lins 30-31. “Structural trapping is when CO2 moves upwards below a low-permeability caprock because of buoyancy”. Sentence not backed up by references. Please, insert literature on low-permeability sedimentary layers that affect the vertical movement of fluids:
- Medici, G., Munn, J. D., Parker, B.L. 2024. Delineating aquitard characteristics within a Silurian dolostone aquifer using high-density hydraulic head and fracture datasets. Hydrogeology Journal, 32(6), 1663-1691.
-Rutqvist, J. 2012. The geomechanics of CO2 storage in deep sedimentary formations. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 30(3), 525-551.
Line 70. Summarize the overall goal of your research on geological carbon storage.
Line 70. Describe the three to four objectives of your research by using numbers (e.g., i, ii, and iii).
Line 130. Specify the type of porosity, total or effective/kinematic?
Line 130. You mention “pore structure connectivity” just five lines above. I assume you’re dealing with effective porosity.
Line 132. Two different equations. Is it ok using “a and b”?
Line 148. Lots of equations in the manuscript. Are all of them necessary?
Figures and tables
Table 1. Specify the type of porosity.
Figure 1. Do you need an approximate spatial scale for this conceptual model?
Figure 2. Same here, do you need a spatial scale for this conceptual model?
Figure 10. Increase the graphic resolution. Contours are not clear.
Figure 12. Same here, increase the graphic resolution. Contours are not clear.
Figure 13. Make this graph much larger.