玄武岩CO2矿化封存潜力评估方法研究现状及展望

二氧化碳地质封存是实现减排增汇的重要技术选择，能够将CO₂长期、安全地封存在地下岩层中。常规的CO₂封存地质体包括地下深部咸水层和枯竭油气藏，玄武岩是近年来逐渐受关注的新一类CO₂封存地质体，进一步丰富和拓展了CO₂地质封存的技术手段和碳汇潜力。封存潜力评估是CO₂地质封存技术发展的重要基础工作之一，文章系统梳理国内外玄武岩矿化封存潜力的评价方法，对比分析各类方法的原理机制和应用情景，并以冰岛活动裂谷带玄武岩为例应用、对比各类方法。研究认为目前玄武岩矿化封存潜力评估方法一般包括三类：(1)单位矿化法：基于玄武岩单位体积或单位反应面积的固碳量开展潜力评估；(2)矿物置换法：基于玄武岩中可固碳矿物的总量开展封存潜力评估；(3)孔隙充填法：基于CO₂矿化后产生次生矿物所占岩石孔隙体积比例的上限值开展封存潜力评估。单位矿化法的评估数据需进行系统的实验分析，增加了潜力评估的难度。当玄武岩储层孔隙度较大、可固碳矿物含量相对较小时，矿物置换法较为合适；反之，孔隙充填法更...

Progress of Methods for Assessing CO2 Mineralization StoragePotential in Basalt

CO₂ geological storage is an important technology to reduce CO₂ emissions, which can safely store CO₂ in geological formations for millions of years. Conventional CO₂ storage reservoirs include deep saline aquifers and depleted oil and gas reservoirs. Basalt is a new type of CO₂ storage reservoir that has been attracting attention in recent years. CO₂ storage in basalt would increase the technical method and potential of CO₂ geological storage. Storage potential assessment is one of the fundamental works of CO₂ geological storage study. This paper systematically examines the current methods for assessing the storage potential of CO₂ in basaltic rocks, and analyzes the principles and application scenarios of various methods. Then, the study takes the basalt of Icelandic Active Rift zone as an example to compare each of the methods. The study suggests that the current CO₂ mineralization storage potential assessment methods generally include three categories: ① Unit rock storage potential assessment method, which evaluates carbon sequestration potential based on the reaction volume or area of rocks; ② Mineral replacement storage potential assessment method: based on the volume of minerals that can react with CO₂ in basalts. ③Pore filling storage potential assessment method, which evaluates the proportion of secondary minerals that can fill reservoirs’ pore space after CO₂ mineralization. The authors note that the first method requires special experimental analysis, making it more challenging, the second method is more appropriat for basalts with high porosity and low reactive mineral content, while the third method is more suitable for basqlts with low porosity and high reactive mineral content.