Risk management in a large-scale CO2 geosequestration pilot project, Illinois, USA

Energy Procedia

Volumn 4, Issue , 2011, Pages 4044-4051

  Hnottavange Telleen, Ken ^a   Chabora, Ethan ^a   Finley, Robert J ^b   Greenberg, Sallie E ^b   Marsteller, Scott ^a  

^a SCHLUMBERGER   (United States)

^b ILLINOIS STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

Author keywords

Elicitation; FEP; Risk evaluation; Scenario

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENT PREVENTION; CALIBRATION; CARBON; CARBON DIOXIDE; CONCRETES; DATA ACQUISITION; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; DIGITAL STORAGE; GEOLOGY; GREENHOUSE GASES; HEALTH RISKS; INJECTION (OIL WELLS); LAWS AND LEGISLATION; MANAGEMENT SCIENCE; PETROLEUM RESERVOIR EVALUATION; PETROLEUM RESERVOIRS; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK PERCEPTION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ELICITATION; LARGE SCALE INFRASTRUCTURES; NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY; RESERVOIR CHARACTERIZATION; RISK EVALUATION; RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK; SCENARIO; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY;

RISK MANAGEMENT;

EID: 79955384069     PISSN: 18766102     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.346     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Climate Change Science Program. Best practice approaches for characterizing, communicating, and incorporating scientific uncertainty in decisionmaking. Morgan MG, Dowlatabadi H, Henrion M, Keith D, Lempert R, McBride S, et al (editors). Washington, DC; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; 2009.
2. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (editors). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 1982.
3. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science (AAAS) 1987, 236: 4799, 280-285. (Pubitemid 17061043) (Pubitemid 17061043)
4. Surowiecki J. The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations. New York: Little, Brown; 2004.
5. Taleb NN. The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House; 2007.
6. Hnottavange-Telleen K, Krapac I, Vivalda C. Illinois Basin-Decatur Project: Initial risk-assessment results and framework for evaluating site performance. Energy Procedia 2009, 1(1): 2431-2438.
7. Vivalda C, Saunier S, Liu Q, Jing B. A formal method for ranking and selecting suitable sites for carbon dioxide geological sequestration [abstract]. 2009. Presented at AAPG Hedberg Conference, Vancouver, Canada.
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Vulnerability Evaluation Framework for geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide, EPA430-R-08-009; 2008.
9. Oldenburg CM, et al. Model components of the Certification Framework for geologic carbon sequestration risk assessment. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBNL paper 2038E; 2009.
10. Quintessa Ltd. Generic CO2 FEP Database, Version 1.1.0. Open access on-line database. http://www.quintessa.org/co2fepdb/[Accessed 13 July 2010].
11. Hnottavange-Telleen K. From Decatur to Denver: Progress with information capture for CCS risk assessment. Presented at IEA GHG Risk Assessment 5th Network Meeting, May 2010. Available at: http://www.ieaghg.org [Accessed 2 July 2010].
12. National Energy Technology Laboratory. Best practices for public outreach and education for carbon storage projects. DOE/NETL-2009/1391. Available at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon-seq/refshelf/BPM-PublicOutreach.pdf [Accessed 16 August 2010].