A Review on Well Integrity Issues

for Underground Hydrogen

Storage
Renewable energy production is limited by the fluctuations limiting their application.
Esteban R. Ugarte1 Underground hydrogen storage (UHS) is one possible alternative to reduce the gap
Mewbourne School of Petroleum and Geological

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

between supply and demand by storing the energy converted to hydrogen as a carrier
Engineering, and store it during surplus to produce it during high demand periods. The hydrogen is
The University of Oklahoma, stored in the subsurface in geological formations containing the gas and is injected/
Norman, OK 73019 produced via wells. There is a lack of experience associated with this technology and
e-mail: [email protected] only a small number of projects worldwide. There are several mechanisms that can compro-
mise the integrity of the well and generate leakage of the stored gas. This paper aims to
Saeed Salehi introduce the challenges associated with well integrity of UHS. Mechanisms that can com-
Mewbourne School of Petroleum and Geological promise well integrity and generate leaks include microbial corrosion, hydrogen blistering
Engineering, hydrogen-induced cracking and hydrogen embrittlement, cement degradation, elastomer
The University of Oklahoma, failure, and caprock sealing failure. Propose well completion criteria, recommendation,
Norman, OK 73019 and materials selection for newly constructed wells or existing wells. A comparison with
e-mail: [email protected] more developed storage technologies aims to provide a better understanding of the limita-
tions of hydrogen storage by comparing it to carbon dioxide (carbon capture and storage)
and methane (underground gas storage). Finally, evaluation and monitoring techniques are
required to see the influence of hydrogen on well integrity. Future research and develop-
ment will reduce the uncertainties and limitations associated with UHS increasing its
feasibility and implementation. [DOI: 10.1115/1.4052626]

Keywords: alternative energy sources, hydrogen energy, oil/gas reservoirs, petroleum

wells-drilling/production/construction, renewable energy, wells-injection/oil/gas/
geothermal

1 Introduction implemented in storage applications. Hydrogen is generated by dif-

ferent thermochemical, biological, electrolysis, or water splitting
Energy production from renewable sources is gaining attraction
processes [7,8]; it is produced by different sources such as oil,
throughout the world as an alternative to replace fossil fuel energies
natural gas, coal, and water. The production of hydrogen from
such as coal, oil, and natural gas, which are considered adverse for
oil, natural gas, and coal generates pollutants, and hydrogen produc-
the environment. The penetration of renewable energy sources has
tion from water only accounts for a small percentage; as technolo-
increased considerably in the last two decades and at the same time,
gies develop, this can become a tipping point for broader
our energy demand has increased year to year. For example, in
implementation. A comparison and description of the different
2000, energy consumption from renewable sources was 6.2% of
methods for hydrogen production from water can be found in
the total energy consumption share in the US, and in 2019, it
Ref. [9]. Hydrogen can be stored by several methods, such as gas
reached an all-time high of 11.45% [1]. Based on projections, by
cylinders, cryogenic tanks, ammonia (NH3), absorbed on metals,
the year 2300, approximately 1400 quads will be supplied by
chemically bounded to covalent and ionic compounds, or through
renewable energies worldwide, which is a 3780% increase from
oxidation of reactive metals [10,11]. These methods are expensive
462 quads reported in 2005 [2]. A limitation associated with renew-
and require limited space; therefore, to meet the huge demand, it is
able energy sources such as solar or wind among the most salient is
possible to store the hydrogen in porous media of different under-
these are weather dependent. The intermittency of these energies is
ground geological formations such as depleted oil and gas reser-
a disadvantage that creates a gap between supply and demand,
voirs, salt caverns, and saline aquifers. Assessment of the storage
making these clean energies unreliable due to the lack of flexibility
capacity in geological formations without prior evaluation of the
to match the fluctuations, making them unable to keep a steady
associated uncertainty can lead to uninformed or even no invest-
supply [3–6]. Energy storage is set to be indispensable to overcome
ments; Câmara et al. [4] provide a resource management system sui-
the gap by storing energy generated during surplus and produce it
table for energy storage in geological formations. According to
during peak periods of consumption. It is a practical response to
Taylor et al. [12], underground storage is the cheapest method to
the intermittency and baseload issues to avoid wasting generated
store hydrogen. Underground hydrogen storage (UHS) has gained
energy daily and seasonal [4]. Storage in the subsurface has multi-
attention worldwide in recent years as project and research publica-
ple advantages: reliability, safety, available space, wide availability
tion number have been increasing. It is still in an early stage of
of geological formations, and low economic costs.
development compared to more mature analogs subsurface
Hydrogen is an attractive alternative as it is a clean energy source,
storage options such as underground gas storage (UGS) or carbon
and it is an economically feasible energy carrier that can be
capture and storage (CCS).
UHS lacks implementation experience compared to other types
of storage. There is limited experience from projects that have suc-
1
Corresponding author. cessfully used subsurface geological structures to store hydrogen.
Contributed by the Petroleum Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF Teeside, Clemens, and Moss Bluff are the only known successful
ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received August 17, 2021; final
manuscript received September 27, 2021; published online October 25, 2021. pure hydrogen (95%) projects in the US and UK; all implemented
Editor: Hameed Metghalchi. to salt formations [13]. Ketzin, Beynes, and Lobodice are successful

Journal of Energy Resources Technology Copyright © 2021 by ASME APRIL 2022, Vol. 144 / 042001-1
UHS storing amounts between 50% and 62% of hydrogen in conditions generated by the storage of hydrogen in the subsurface
Europe. Numerous research projects have started in the last inhibits microorganism’s growth; this can act as catalysts for multi-
decade, such as ANGUS+ (2013) [14], H2STORE (2012) [15], ple reactions that can compromise well integrity to occur in the sub-
HyINTEGER (2016) [16], HyUnder (2012) [17], and Underground surface. Several biotic reactions known to consume hydrogen can
Sun Storage (2016) [18]. These studies aim to investigate the feasi- generate reactions that can lead directly or indirectly to loss of
bility of the production, storage, and utilization of hydrogen. well integrity; these processes are caused by methanogens, aceto-
Wells involved in this process have to meet certain criteria for gens, sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB), and iron-reducing bacteria
successful long-term containment during phases of injection/with- (IRB).
drawal and storage. Well integrity is defined by the ISO 16530-1
[19] as the capacity of the drilled open hole to maintain its shape
and remain intact after having been drilled. NORSOK D-010 [20] 2.1 Microbial Casing Corrosion. Microbial corrosion is gen-
standard defines it as the application of technical, operational, and erated by the activity of microorganisms inhabiting the subsurface.
It is also known as microbial-induced corrosion, microbiological

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

organizational solutions to reduce the risk of uncontrolled release
of formation fluids to surface throughout the life cycle of the corrosion, bacterial corrosion, bio-corrosion, or microbiologically
well. The objective is to have a wellbore with the least potential influenced corrosion or microbial-induced corrosion. In hydrogen
for exposure to fluid migration, longevity, and reliable hydraulic storage in the subsurface, the processes responsible for microbial
and mechanical barriers [21]. UHS is associated with multiple corrosion are sulfate reduction, methanogenesis, and iron (III)
potential risks that can affect downhole components such as reduction. Corrosion caused by these living organisms is the main
casing, tubing, and connections fabricated of steel, and elastomer problem in UHS as it can compromise multiple metallic downhole
sealants like packers typically made of rubber or polymers. It can components affecting the containment integrity.
also permeate elements of wellbore completion, such as cement SRB are single-celled organisms that can grow in aquatic condi-
which is a silica-based material. Failure of any component can tions under temperatures between 40 °C and 60 °C and adapt and
lead to a loss of wellbore integrity, generating a negative environ- survive on 80 °C or more [22]. These microorganisms are known
mental impact, accidents, and costs associated with damage to consume hydrogen and produce hydrogen sulfide as a product
repair. Well design for UHS possesses some differences to UGS when sulfur is available. SRB can corrode the metallic casing
or CCS due to the physical properties of hydrogen. This paper surface in two different ways: chemically by producing hydrogen
aims to review issues on well integrity, including mechanisms sulfide and electrically by the withdrawal [23]. It manifests as local-
that can lead to loss of well integrity, comparing UHS with more ized corrosion since most organisms do not form a continuous film.
studied analogous gas storages such as UHS and CCS, propose Figure 2 shows the reaction taking place on the surface of the
well integrity criteria, material selection, and methods to evaluate casing. SRB can act via cathodic depolarization as the mechanism
well integrity. for sulfide production [22].
Other microorganisms living in the subsurface can also generate
or contribute to corrosion. Methanogenic bacteria are the more
likely bacteria to thrive under subsurface conditions due to hydro-
2 Mechanisms Responsible for Loss of Well Integrity gen availability as an electron donator. These anaerobic organics
During hydrogen storage in the subsurface, multiple mechanisms can survive at high depths and temperatures. Methanogenesis is
can lead to loss of wellbore integrity; these include fluid migration the process caused by these microorganisms that convert hydrogen
through existing leakage pathways, casing microbial corrosion, and carbon dioxide into methane and through Sabatier reaction.
hydrogen blistering and hydrogen embrittlement, cement degrada- Methanogenic bacteria are not directly responsible for microbial
tion, elastomer failure, and caprock sealing failure, as shown in corrosion. Although when found near, these bacteria can work
Fig. 1. Hydrogen is an electron donor that is more active in chem- with SRB to accelerate the corrosion rate [24]. IRB is another bac-
ical, biological, or microbial reactions. Microorganisms’ survival terial group that can generate corrosion to the casing but to a smaller
under subsurface conditions depends on the characteristics and
chemical composition of the environment. The effect of the

Fig. 1 Mechanisms causing well integrity failure in UHS in the Fig. 2 Reactions in the metal surface by SRB causing microbial
subsurface corrosion (modified from Ref. [22])

042001-2 / Vol. 144, APRIL 2022 Transactions of the ASME

degree compared to SRB. IRB uses the electron donator hydrogen
to support metal oxidation processes and reduce iron (III) phases;
they rely on the availability of iron oxides, organic carbon, and min-
erals such as smectite and chlorite. IRB and SRB can both survive
in the same environment and work together in the corrosion process
as IRB uses acetate, which is a common product of SRB [25]. In
environments rich in iron oxides and organic carbon, IRB can
thrive over SRB due to their high affinity for hydrogen [26].

2.2 Hydrogen Blistering, Hydrogen-Induced Cracking, and

Hydrogen Embrittlement. Hydrogen blistering, hydrogen-
induced cracking (HIC), and hydrogen embrittlement occur due

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

to the abundance of hydrogen combined with its physical proper-
ties. These phenomena can reduce the mechanical properties of
steel and is dependent on the amount of hydrogen available and
the nature of the environment. Hydrogen blistering occurs when
atomic hydrogen is formed on the metal surface by dissociative
chemical sorption. In this atomic form, hydrogen can accumulate
beneath the metal surface in trap locations. The accumulation gen-
erates pressure to rise, producing plastic deformation; some hydro-
gen is lost by dissolution; if the rate of supply of atomic hydrogen
exceeds the dissolution rate, then a rupture will occur [27]. HIC is
referred to as the crack that results from the entry of hydrogen into
the steel surface. Hydrogen blistering can initiate cracks leading to Fig. 3 Cement degradation by sulfate attack in aqueous
sudden failure at lower stresses due to hydrogen concentration and environments
high pressure [28]. Hydrogen embrittlement occurs due to hydrogen
molecules entering the steel microstructure. This can lead to an
increase in the susceptibility to cracking at lower stresses, reduction carbonation process will be dependent on the amount of carbon
of material ductility, and resistance. Diffusion of hydrogen in steel dioxide found in the rock mineral and the formation fluids. The pH
is affected by microstructure phases present (grain boundaries, grain of the environment can maximize the release of carbon dioxide
shapes, vacancies and dislocations, interfaces with nonmetallic from carbonates. The temperature has more influence on the degrada-
inclusions, precipitates, and microvoids), which affect the mobility tion than pH, and pH of 2.4 and temperature of 50 °C represent con-
of hydrogen [29]. These traps can be classified into reversible and ditions for the most severe degradation [35].
irreversible depending on the hydrogen’s binding energy. Nor- Cement can also experience chemical degradation by the
mally, a small amount of hydrogen can enter the metal; the rest attack of hydrogen sulfide (Fig. 3). It is a major problem during
move on the surface and become part of other reactions. Neverthe- hydrogen storage as it is a common by-product of sulfate reduction
less, due to microorganisms on the metal surface, the entry of due to microorganism reactions. SRB can generate a reduction of
hydrogen can be enhanced by SRB. This can be done by producing sulfate and generate hydrogen sulfide, which can cause cement
sulfides, which increase hydrogen’s entry into the steel by disrupt- degradation. These microorganisms can be present in the cement
ing the surface film [30]. sheath surface or within the interstitial space. Sulphidation can
lead to secondary (calcium tri-sulfoaluminate hydrate) [Ca6
[Al(OH)6]2·(SO4)3·26H2O] when calcium, aluminum, sulfate, and
2.3 Cement Degradation. Well cementing is an essential
water are present in the cement sheath. Primary ettringite is formed
component to ensure well integrity. Cement in the subsurface expe-
before the hardening of the cement, but it is not related to problems
riences mechanical and/or chemical degradation. Mechanical degra-
associated with expansion and internal stresses in the cement sheath.
dation occurs due to exposure to extreme loading conditions due to
However, secondary ettringite can expand within the cement struc-
pressure, thermal expansion, and volume change during hydration.
ture generating internal stress leading to crack [36,37]. Secondary
Several chemical reactions can lead to various processes such as
ettringite is formed when calcium found in lime or CSH, aluminum
corrosion, leaching, and strength reduction. The basic compounds
found in hydrated ferrite, sulfate from H2S, and H2O are present in
in cement consist of combinations of lime, silica-alumina, and iron
the hardened cement [37]. When there is no more aluminate supply
oxide. During hydration, tobermorite (CSH) (3CaO·2SiO2·3H2O),
from the cement sheath, gypsum will be formed instead of secondary
also known as CH phase, and portlandite (CH), known as CSH
ettringite, which also tends to expand within the cement structure
(Ca(OH)2), which are the two main binding elements responsible
[36]. Low pH values can generate instability in pyrite and can
for the cement strength, are formed. Hydrogen permeation
become part of hydrogen sulfide-producing reactions [38].
through the cement sheath is a risk as it may leak due to its physical
properties. Besides, microorganisms inhabiting hydrogen environ-
ments can also promote chemical reactions affecting the cement 2.4 Elastomer Failure. Packers are sealing assemblies whose
properties. primary function is to isolate fluids within the casing, tubing, and/or
Chemical degradation of cement due to CO2 presence in an annuli. This is considered a secondary barrier to maintain well
aqueous environment is referred to as carbonation [31]. When pH control. Packer failure can affect well integrity, generate potential
lowers due to the acidic environment, CH and CSH start dissolving, leakage, increase costs, compromise safety, and potential environ-
followed by calcium aluminate and ferrite hydrates until only silica is mental consequences. Packers commonly consist of elastomer
left at a pH of 2 [32]. This process depends on the depth of penetration materials made of rubber or polymers, and the body consists of
which depends on the permeability of the cement sheath and the steel materials, making them susceptible to chemical degradation.
amount of calcium oxide found in the pores. These factors promote Mainly, the steel body of the packer will be prone to corrosion.
the formation of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), which precipitates The elastomer material can be compromised during hydrogen
and reduces porosity and permeability, increasing the cement storage operations due to rapid gas decompression (RGD). At
strength. However, if carbonation continues, calcium carbonate is high pressure, hydrogen can permeate inside the elastomers’ mate-
converted to bicarbonate (Ca(HCO3)2) [33], which is water-soluble rial. After RGD, the rubber material can become oversaturated with
and lead to a reduction of the cement strength [34]. For UHS, the hydrogen; this can exceed the material’s yield tensile strength and

Journal of Energy Resources Technology APRIL 2022, Vol. 144 / 042001-3

generate the internal blister fractures within the sealing rubber mate- 3 Well Integrity Criteria, Recommendations,
rial (Fig. 4). At high initial pressures, failure can occur within and Selection
minutes; at moderate pressure, it can take longer; this problem’s
severity is proportional to the temperature, pressure, and decom- Criteria to select wells for UHS depend on the geological forma-
pression times [28]. tion containing the hydrogen in the subsurface. Wells selected for
Chemical degradation can occur when the elastomer material storage applications can be newly drilled and constructed or
comes in contact with drilling fluids, completion fluid, fracturing already existing wells; both have to provide well integrity and
fluid, formation brine, or production fluid containing various sol- safe long-term storage. Common causes of these incidents were
vents, caustics, acids, or corrosive chemicals [39]. Leaching of casing leaks caused by corrosion, casing damages, rusted steel,
chemicals into the elastomer can weaken its molecular structure casing shoe leaks, gas channeling in the annular, deteriorated
[40]. The presence of gas like hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon annular seals, and poor cement bonding [43]. For new wells, well
dioxide (CO2), and methane (CH4) can contribute to elastomer components, including casing, tubing, cement, and packer, need
to be carefully selected for UHS application. Existing wells need

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

chemical degradation. When the elastomer is exposed to H2S
present in the subsurface, its high reaction activity can lead to hemo- to meet certain criteria to be converted for storage applications.
lysis and heterolysis, causing a reduction of tensile strength, ulti-
mate elongation, and hardness [39,41]. Studies performed by
Fernández and Castaño [42] observed the development of brittle 3.1 Geological Formation. Currently, there are three major
fracture surfaces on the elastomer with an increase in H2S concen- types of underground storage options, which include depleted oil
tration. CO2 is stable, inert, and not toxic, but when carbonic acid is and gas reservoirs, aquifers, and salt caverns. Also, other storage
made in the presence of water and large quantities, it can become options such as coal mines, lined hard rock caverns, and refrigerated
corrosive and cause a chemical reaction with the elastomer mined caverns can be implemented in the near future if costs asso-
[39,41]. Fernández and Castaño [42] observed an increase in volu- ciated with them reduce and demand storage increases [50]. Each
metric swelling and permanent deformation with an increase in CO2 option has certain characteristics and requirements.
concentration. Dajiang et al. [43] studied the effect mechanical load Salt caverns are artificially created by a process called solution
has on elastomer in the presence of liquid and gaseous CO2. Results mining that consists of leaching out large cavities by injecting
showed that an increase in compression load increases swelling and water in a controlled manner. Salt domes are structurally stable
damage, making CO2 degradation worse. Also, the damage is more thick homogenous bodies that can operate up to a depth of
severe when CO2 is in the liquid phase compared to the gaseous 6000 ft. Above this depth, salt deformation occurs, affecting stabi-
phase. CH4 is a very weak acid, but it does not react chemically lity due to the high temperature and pressure [51]. Salt caverns
with the elastomer, although it can permeate the material and are the only formation that has proven capable of storing pure
cause other physical alterations affecting its properties [39]. hydrogen. The salt surrounding the cavern is impermeable and
leak-proof, creating a sealed containment with good mechanical
stability. Additionally, high saline conditions of the storage envi-
2.5 Caprock Sealing Failure. Caprock is essential for con- ronment affect the microorganism that can live under these condi-
tainment, as it prevents them from migrating upwards; sealing tions [52]. Aquifers are geological structures that contain a trap
integrity failure can lead to potential gas leakage to the surface. capped with an impermeable layer called caprock. The porous
Hydrogen may leak from the storage as a result of diffusion and dis- rock in the formation is filled with water that would need to be dis-
solution due to its small molecules. Only small amounts, around placed to store the hydrogen. A major advantage of aquifers is that
2%, can be lost by dissolution and diffusion [44,45]. Caprock this type of formation is commonly available worldwide and can
sealing strength needs to be evaluated to avoid the possibility of be set close to major energy-consuming locations. In this case,
any losses, which are dependent on the porosity, permeability, aquifer and salt caverns wells would have to be drilled and con-
and capillary pressure. Salts and clay layers are the most common structed. The main concern in drilling in salt caverns would be a
type of caprock; they provide tightness and hydraulic integrity salt intrusion. Depleted oil and gas reservoirs are similar to aqui-
against hydrogen. Capillary pressure is the pressure at which hydro- fers; these have proven to contain hydrocarbons overtime effec-
gen can enter the larger pores of the caprock. Interfacial tension and tively. There are multiple UGS projects developed in depleted
contact angle are the two parameters that control capillary pressure. oil and gas reservoirs but non-UHS projects. Further research in
The low interfacial tension in a hydrogen water system results in the matter is needed to ensure depleted oil and gas reservoirs
low capillary pressure and a higher risk of hydrogen leakage could trap hydrogen gas. This type has certain advantages such
through the caprock [46]. Water-saturated caprock provides an as costs, information of the geological setting, and existing
impermeable barrier for hydrogen because of high capillary pres- surface and subsurface components. Additionally, some natural
sure. If the threshold pressure of the caprock is exceeded, gas will gas residuals in the reservoir could act as a cushion gas to maintain
push water out of the caprock generating a leak [45]. The storage the storage pressure, further reducing the cost. A complete well
system needs to operate below the threshold pressure of the integrity evaluation of the condition of these old wells is required
caprock to avoid losing caprock integrity. to ensure its components are suitable for conversion to storage
Minerals precipitation and/or dissolution can also compromise applications.
the caprock integrity. When the precipitation rate is greater than
the dissolution rate, the caprock integrity will remain intact,
though the porosity and permeability can be reduced, affecting 3.2 New Wells. Wells constructed for UHS need to withstand
injection and withdrawal operations’ efficiency. When the dissolu- periods of injection and production of hydrogen gas that might be
tion rates are greater than precipitation rates, injection and produc- accompanied by contaminants such as CO2, H2S, and water
tion efficiency may increase due to porosity and permeability depending on the designed purity percentage of hydrogen in the
enhancement, leading to potential leaks due to sealing failure project. Drilling operations will not vary from conventional oil
[46]. Rock mineralogy and pore size distribution can change due and gas for aquifer formation. In salt caverns, salt intrusion may
to rock and fluid interaction [47]. Kaolinite, Illite, and Feldspar include wellbore erosion when drilling through the salt and exces-
are common minerals found in clay caprocks that can react, sive torque and pack-off caused by salt creeps. It is important to
causing porosity and permeability reduction [48]. Results obtained monitor fluid loss and minimize formation damage to avoid possible
in experiments performed by Shi et al. [49] showed that the perme- leakage pathways. Leaching is required after drilling to generate the
ability of the caprock decreased after injecting hydrogen and natural space that will be used for storage. Material selection for well com-
gas into the core samples. This can be favorable for the storage as it ponents will vary depending on the storage type and reservoir
would reduce the risk of sealing failure. conditions.

042001-4 / Vol. 144, APRIL 2022 Transactions of the ASME

 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024
Fig. 4 Mechanism of internal blister fracture damage to elastomer material caused by high-
pressure hydrogen loading and fast decompression [21]

3.2.1 Steel Casing and Tubing. Casing selection needs to be of calcium carbonate, which forms water-soluble calcium bicarbo-
carefully addressed to minimize the risk associated with the multi- nate [33]. Pozzolanic material cement, micro-fine cement, and
ple mechanisms that can generate potential leaks. The part of the latex cement are resistant to corrosive environments, where
casing and tubing below the packer is an area that is prone to cor- Ca(OH)2 and CSH are partly replaced by other components such
rosive fluids such as carbonic acid, corrosion reactions caused by as calcium phosphate, alumina, or other components [59].
microorganisms, and in the case of UHS exposure to hydrogen.
Therefore, when selecting the type of casing, it requires a corrosion- 3.2.3 Packer/Elastomer Assembly. The area below the parker
resistant material that can minimize failure risk caused by hydrogen is exposed to severe corrosive conditions. The elastomer assembly
blistering, HIC, and hydrogen embrittlement. Susceptibility to steel body must therefore be made of corrosive resistant alloys to
hydrogen-related phenomena is related to steel composition, deox- ensure a longer duration. Various aspects of the elastomer seal
idation practice, and processing history, as these parameters affect assembly such as energization method, seal dimensions, housing
nonmetallic inclusions (type, size, and morphology) and ability to dimensions, supporting components, and contact characteristics
accommodate hydrogen [29]. High-strength steel is severely can influence the performance of the elastomer [39,60]. The elasto-
affected by hydrogen embrittlement, limiting its application to mer element has to be chemically inert and withstand corrosive
UHS. Low to intermediate steels can be a more suitable selection. environments. For UHS, application is critical to consider RGD
If higher strength steels are required, the low strength steels when selecting a suitable material for this application. Elastomers
should be used in quenched and tempered conditions as they have with less hardness and elastic modulus are more prone to decom-
better toughness [28]. Corrosion-resistant alloy (CRA), commonly pression issues [61]. The risk of decompression increases with
used in oil & gas applications, has a martensitic structure (Cr) high temperatures or very low temperatures when the elastomer
that can withstand moderate acid environments but is susceptible becomes brittle. Common elastomer materials used in the oil and
to hydrogen as it will exhibit rapid diffusion. The diffusivity of gas industry include nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR), ethylene pro-
hydrogen can depend on the type of crystal lattice [53]. Austenitic pylene diene monomer, hydrogenated nitrile butadiene rubber
steels show a low diffusivity that results in higher resistance to a (HNBR), fluoroelastomers (FKMs), perfluoroelastomers (FEPMs),
fatigue crack in hydrogen environments. Studies by San Marchi and perfluorocarbon elastomer (FFKM). NBR has better mechani-
et al. [54] reported positive results in austenitic samples that con- cal properties than FKMs (FKM, FEPM, and FFKM) but are
tained nickel content higher than 12%. limited to low resistance to chemicals, HNBR has improved tem-
perature and chemical resistance compared to NBR, but it is more
3.2.2 Cement Barrier. Class G and class H types of cement are expensive. HNBR exhibits resistance to corrosive environments
the most common types used for oil and gas wells, both having with the presence of H2S and CO2, can operate under high-pressure
similar composition but different particle size and water-cement conditions, and has a lower risk of failure under decompression;
ratio. Class H has a coarser grind than class G, which gives it therefore, it is the best elastomer material to be used in hydrogen
better retarding properties. Water requirement for class H is lower storage applications.
(38%) compared to class G (44%). The difference between these
two properties gives a varied performance of the cement. Strong dif-
fusion of hydrogen can lead to potential leaks generated by hydro- 3.3 Old Wells. Existing wells conversion to storage applica-
gen permeation through the cement sheath. To avoid this, properties tions needs to be evaluated to ensure proper well integrity condi-
such as permeability, porosity, and hydration have to be considered. tions. These wells are subjected to more constraints compared to
To control leakage of hydrogen, improving completion operations new wells as they have already been constructed for other applica-
and barrier systems are prerequisites for UHS implementation tions. Depleted oil and gas wells are commonly the types considered
[55,56]. In the published literature, there are no studies that show to conversion to storage applications. Advantages of selecting an
class G cement would be sufficiently tight for hydrogen storage existing well would be the availability of well components and
[28]. Finest cement with low-concentrations SiO2 in the cement existing surface facilities reducing the cost of the project. The prob-
binders can be used to reduce the risk of leakages through the ability of using an existing well for storage applications is limited
cement [28]. The maximum leakage rate that can be tolerated is due to its design and age. There are multiple aspects of sealing capa-
150 kg/day, whereas 50 kg/day is defined as the lowest measurable bilities, such as casing/tubing condition corrosion and connections,
limit [57]. Latex cement additives are gas migration preventers that that can constrain the possibility of using the existing well for
improve the bonding strength, elasticity, and fluid loss; synthetic storage applications.
resins and rubber pounders can also help counteract the shrinkage
and expansion effect [58]. To maintain chemical and thermal integ- 3.3.1 Characteristics for Appropriate Selection. There exist
rity, it is required to lower the water-to-cement ratio to decrease the multiple factors that need to be considered before selecting a suita-
permeability, avoid voids and fissures, and reduce the number of ble well for storage applications. The geological formation has to be
products that can react with the produced and injected fluids [56]. able to safely contain the hydrogen gas without any possible leaks.
Filler materials such as silica fumes and fly ash can reduce the The wells selected for UHS need to be able to withstand injection
amount of Ca(OH)2 and CSH in cement, reducing the formation and/or production phases. A great advantage of using a depleted

Journal of Energy Resources Technology APRIL 2022, Vol. 144 / 042001-5

oil and gas well for this application because of the low cost associ- 4.1 Physical Properties. Hydrogen is the smallest chemical
ated with the project and components such as casing, cement particle in existence; it has the highest energy content per unit
barrier, tubing, packer, etc. are already in place. The integrity of ele- mass. Compared to methane, its energy content is three times
ments is crucial to maintain the overall integrity of the system higher by weight. Table 1 shows a comparison between the proper-
[21,62]. Therefore, depleted oil and gas wells have a probability ties of hydrogen, methane, and carbon dioxide. It can be observed
of being suitable for conversion, although this will be dependent that compared to methane, hydrogen is eight times less dense,
on the design, age, and condition of the well. Cost would be a and storing the same mass amounts requires more space and pres-
major advantage making the selection of an existing well an alter- sure. It is less viscous than methane and has higher mobility,
native to consider. Casing and tubing size can limit completion leading to lower residual in porous media during withdrawal. Solu-
options and additional workover that might be needed. The bility is lower than methane, but diffusivity is higher; this can gen-
history of the well, including what type of application it was erate losses through diffusion and dispersion. Due to its low
used, can provide useful information for selection. Characteristics molecular weight and high diffusivity, it can leak through the over-

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

of the subsurface environment, presence of corrosive gases, water burden layers [44,46,47]. CO2 has higher physical properties than
injection applications, and geomechanical stresses can provide an methane and hydrogen, molecular weight 22 times higher compared
insight into the well condition. Furthermore, evaluation of well to hydrogen, and density three times greater than methane. CO2 can
integrity using different methods would be required. The perfor- be stored in its supercritical state due to its critical pressure and tem-
mance will be in function of the number of wells and the volumetric perature adapting properties between gas and liquid. Solubility and
capacity of the field [63]. The size and pressure of the selected for- diffusion are considerably higher than methane and hydrogen; when
mation can minimize the cost of injecting a cushion gas [63]. Resi- dissolved in water, it forms carbonic acid, which is highly corrosive.
dual gas left in the depleted oil and gas formation can be used as Figure 5 shows a comparison of the density and viscosity of
cushion gas; if not available, inert nitrogen is a suitable option hydrogen, methane, and carbon dioxide. Hydrogen and methane
[64]. The storage capacities have to be determined to operate densities and viscosities are considerably lower compared to CO2.
within the desired limits based on the demand. This allows them to have a wider variety of potential storage sites
as they are not restricted by depth. CO2 storage requires a
minimum depth of 800 m due to its physical behavior to ensure it
3.3.2 Plug and Abandoned Wells. Plugging and abandonment remains in a supercritical state [47,71]. Hydrogen and methane do
operations are performed to wells that are no longer needed to not exhibit any drastic change in properties with depth. The selected
secure the integrity of the formation at the end of its service life. geological formation will determine the depth; it requires proper
These procedures have to be done according to local regulations containment features to trap and seal the fluid. At subsurface condi-
and guidelines. The cement plugs have become mandatory to tions, hydrogen density is ten times lower than methane and 100
avoid the risk of contamination and crossflow of oil and gas; these times lower than carbon dioxide, which means that it requires
are placed in potential trouble zones. Storage operations involving more space to store the same amount of energy.
old, isolated wells show potential for a leak in case of
re-pressurization [65]. Excessive pressure applied to the plug and
abandoned wells (P&A) well can lead to fractures in cement and cre- 4.2 Risk Associated With Each Mechanism. The cyclic
ating leaks [21]. Changes in reservoir pressure can generate casing storage of hydrogen gas in the subsurface is similar to conventional
leaks, differential elongation, and seal failure over time [66]. Mud natural gas and carbon sequestration storage. Well construction and
not properly removed can create channels for fluids to migrate material selection for each storage type are dependent on the sever-
through [67]. Geomechanical stress and loading can weaken the ity of the mechanisms that can compromise well integrity men-
cement barrier and increase the risk of well integrity failure tioned in the previous section. Table 2 shows a risk comparison
[68,69]. The well integrity criteria for P&A wells are different between the different types of storage and the multiple mechanisms
from existing wells because the abandoned wells that have been that can compromise integrity.
out of service are not subjected to any type of monitoring activities Microbial corrosion is the main concern in UHS due to the pres-
[70]. Therefore, it requires an evaluation prior to be considered for ence of hydrogen acting as an electron donor for organisms living in
conversion, and the possibility of using P&A wells for storage is low. the subsurface. This type of corrosion will be dependent on the
archaea inhabiting the formation, and it can vary from one location
to another. SRB is known to consume hydrogen to produce corro-
4 Comparison Between Carbon Capture and Storage, sive H2S and can inhabit any gas storage. These bacteria can be
Underground Gas Storage, and Underground Hydrogen found in natural gas storages, but methane and carbohydrates
(guar gum and xanthate) are not directly utilized by SRB [72].
Storage Salt concentration, temperature, and pH of the environment will
Storage of hydrogen can be similar in many aspects to other gas determine if microorganisms causing corrosion are able to survive
storage systems like methane or carbon dioxide that have been under the subsurface conditions. Methane by itself is not highly cor-
widely implemented and studied, but it faces new challenges due rosive for metals; the presence of CO2 and H2S found with the
to its properties and lack of implementation. natural gas is responsible for the related corrosion. In CCS, CO2

Table 1 Physical properties of hydrogen, methane, and carbon dioxide

Properties H2 CH4 CO2

Molecular weight 2.016 16.043 44.009

Density at standard conditions (SC) 0.082 kg/m3 0.657 kg/m3 1.98 kg/m3
Viscosity at SC 0.89 × 10−5 Pa·s 1.1 × 10−5 Pa·s 1.49 × 10−5 Pa·s
Solubility in pure water at SC 16 × 10−4 g/L 22.7 × 10−3 g/L 1.45 g/L
Normal boiling point neg 253 °C neg 165 °C neg 78.44 °C
Critical pressure 12.8 atm 45.79 atm 72.8 atm
Critical temperature neg 239.95 °C neg 82.3 °C 31 °C
Heating value 120–142 kJ/g 205–55.5 kJ/g −
Diffusion in pure water at SC 5.13 × 10−9 m2/s 1.85 × 10−9 m2/s 1.6 × 10−3 m2/s

042001-6 / Vol. 144, APRIL 2022 Transactions of the ASME

 Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024
Fig. 5 Density and viscosity of hydrogen, methane, and carbon dioxide calculated from data
of the Midland Valley region [41]

can lead to galvanic, pitting, and crevice corrosion. Chlorides pres- but will be susceptible to H2 [28]. For CCS, corrosion rates are
ence tends to accelerate crevice corrosion. CO2 dissolved in water high (5–15 mm/year); under severe corrosive conditions, duplex
produces carbonic acid-generating electrochemical reaction with steel and super austenitic steel can achieve smaller corrosion
steel to form a scale of iron carbonate as a product. All these corro- rates [56].
sion types cause material removal making the metal thinner leading Carbonation of the cement sheath is the biggest challenge associ-
to fatigue of metals. ated with CCS, as the attack of CO2 reduces compressive strength
Hydrogen blistering, HIC, and hydrogen embrittlement are and increases porosity and permeability. The alteration process is
dependent on the amount of hydrogen found. Steel selection more efficient in the wet supercritical phase than in CO2 dissolved
requires CRAs, but the severity of corrosion will depend on the in water [73]. For UHS and UGS, carbonation can be considered a
type of project. High-strength steels are severely affected by hydro- problem depending on the percentage of CO2 that can be found in
gen embrittlement, limiting their application to UHS. Common the stored gas or the formation. Cement class H and class G, com-
severe corrosion alloys used in the oil and gas industry exhibit mar- monly used in oil and gas applications, are suitable for UGS. For
tensitic structure and provide better resistance against H2S or CO2 CCS, Portland cement can be modified to slow the reactions with

Table 2 Comparison between UGS, UHS, and CCS with respect to the different mechanisms that can affect well integrity

UGS CCS UHS

Corrosion Depends on the selected geological Galvanic, pitting, and cervice corrosion. High risk due to microbial organisms and
formation, rock minerals, gas Carbonic acid from scale of iron hydrogen availability as an electron donor.
composition, pH, temperature, and salt carbonate as a corrosion product Microorganisms’ survival depends on pH,
concentration temperature, and salt concentration
Hydrogen blistering, Medium risk depending on the Low due to lack of hydrogen presence Due to abundance of hydrogen can increase
HIC, and hydrogen availability of hydrogen near the metal the susceptibility to cracking at lower
embrittlement surfaces stresses, reduction of material ductility, and
resistance
Cement carbonation Reaction will depend on the amount of High risk due to abundance of CO2 Reaction will depend on the amount of CO2
CO2 found in the rock mineral and forming carbonic acid. Temperature and found in the rock mineral and formation
formation fluids pH can aggravate degradation fluids
Sulphidation Depend on the amount of H2S that can Low risk due to less probability of Higher risk as H2S is a by-product of
be found in the environment. Low pH finding high amount of H2S microbial reactions caused by SRB
can make pyrite become part of H2S
producing reactions
RGD Methane can permeate and cause High risk as CO2 in gas phase can cause Due to hydrogen physical properties, it can
physical properties alteration degradation and permeate the elastomer easily permeate the elastomer. Severity is
element proportional to temperature, pressure, and
time
Elastomer Natural gas will not react chemically High risk when elastomer material is in Moderate to high as H2S by-product of SRB
degradation with the elastomer contact with carbonic acid can cause a reduction of tensile strength,
ultimate elongation, and hardness
Caprock integrity Higher interfacial tension in a If dissolution rates are greater than Low interfacial tension in a hydrogen-water
methane-water system results in high precipitation rates in the caprock, system results in low capillary pression and
capillary pression and less risk of efficiency may increase due to porosity high risk of diffusion
leakage and permeability enhancement leading to
potential leaks

Journal of Energy Resources Technology APRIL 2022, Vol. 144 / 042001-7

 Table 3 Uses and limitations of different well logs for determining well integrity [14]

Methods Uses Limitations

CBL/VDL Predicts well-bonded cement, debonding at wet casing, and formation No prediction of mud channels, vertical cracks, gas chimney,
and radial variation in cement
Ultrasonic Shows well-bonded cement, mud channel in good cement gas Unable to figure out mud channels in weak cement, vertical
imaging lag chimney, and debonding at wet casing cracks, debonding at dry casing and formation, and radial
variation in cement
Isolation Capable of showing good cement, mud channels gas chimney, thick No prediction on thin vertical cracks and debonding at dry
scanner vertical cracks, debonding at wet casing and formation, and cement casing
radial variation
RATS Used to detect leaks Incapable of predicting the quality of cement or casing
TL/acoustic log Detects anomalies due to leak No insight on cement

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

Corrosion log Can predict the corrosion in the casing, tubular, and even casing after No insight on cement
the cemented zone such as surface casing
SAPT/VIT Assessment of the hydraulic properties of the cemented annulus zone No evaluation of cement and casing quality
under study

CO2. Pozzolanic materials blended with Portland can minimize the logs and X-ray tools. Continuous monitoring can be achieved
chemical attack of CO2. No field test proves class G and class H using wireline logging tools to evaluate the well periodically.
cements will be suitable for UHS; hydrogen physical properties Cement bond log (CBL), variable density log (VDL), temperature
make it able to permeate to cement sheath. Therefore, low log (TL), standard annulus pressure test (SAPT), vacuum insulated
water-to-cement ratios are required. Cement deterioration by sulphi- tubing (VIT), radioactive tracer survey (RATS), ultrasonic imager
dation can occur in UHS due to H2S producing reactions caused by (USI), and ultrasonic casing imager (UCI) are some of the methods
microorganisms. Ettringite formation leads to expansion crack that can be run based on downhole conditions [21,70,75].
within the cement sheath and can be minimized by using latex addi- Calipers are one of the most basic and useful tools to evaluate
tives. Sulphidation risk in CCS and UGS will be dependent on the well integrity. It measures the borehole diameter using mechanical
amounts of H2S present in the formation. arms open against the wall. These are widely available, and infor-
For the packer elastomer element, hydrogen can permeate the mation is easy to interpret; plus, it can provide insight to any well
cement body more easily than methane. Chemical degradation of integrity issue related to the casing/steel. X-ray tools are an innova-
the elastomer can happen in the presence of CO2, H2S, and CH4. tive technology that can provide casing/cement integrity informa-
In UGS, CH4 is a very weak acid, but it does not react chemically tion, but these are still not widely used in our industry. CBL and
with the elastomer, although it can still permeate the material and VDL are commonly used together to evaluate the cement quality
cause other physical alterations [39]. For UHS due to H2S, NBR is behind the casing using the compressive strength of the cement
the best alternative for corrosive entrainment and reduces the risk and bond index. CBL can measure the loss of acoustic energy
of decompression. For CCS, CO2 in the gas phase is inert and not that is proportional to the fraction of the casing covered by
toxic, but if carbonic acid is formed, it can corrode the material. cement; the reading can be affected by casing characteristics. Com-
The sealing performance of elastomers can be compromised after bined with VDL, sonic logs can provide an assessment of the
CO2 chemical degradation, resulting in a decline of its sealing capa- casing–cement bond, microannuli information, and casing quality
bilities [41,74]. Fluorocarbon elastomers exhibit more resistance to [76]. TL is a record of the temperature gradient of a well, where
CO2 degradation. Also, NBR are a great alternative to consider. interpretation is made by looking at the reference gradient
Caprock integrity failure is dependent on interfacial tension, cap- changes, which is the geothermal gradient taken before production
illary pressure, porosity, and permeability. Leakage risk is greater in started or during well shut-in. The changes are elated to the entry
UHS due to hydrogen physical properties; low interfacial tension and exit of fluid between the wellbore and the formation. TL can
generates low capillary pressure and increases the risk of hydrogen therefore be used to locate lost circulation zones, identify potential
gas diffusion through the sealing caprock. The opposite happens leakage points, and evaluate cement integrity. SAPT consists of
with methane-water systems in UGS; high interfacial tension will applying pressure on a closed system such as the annulus
generate high capillary pressure minimizing the risk of leakage between casing and cement. It is used to detect potential leaks in
through the caprock. For CCS, dissolution of minerals due to the the system after the maintained pressure is removed. Pressurizing
corrosive environment can lead to an increase in porosity and per- agents can include water, nitrogen, or any compressed gas. VIT is
meability of the caprock, enhancing the risk of leakage through the a similar pressure-based test based on perforating two separated
caprock. intervals isolated with packers. RATS involves adding radioactive
tracers to the injecting fluid. A radioactive detector is run with wire-
line to detect the radioactive tracer. Leaks will produce anomalies
that will be detected in the sensor. This method is expensive and
5 Evaluation of Well Integrity requires precision as it is difficult to handle the radioactive material.
Determination of wellbore integrity should be performed to avoid USI and UCI are ultrasonic logs which provide high-resolution
unacceptable leakage over time. To minimize the risk of integrity information about the casing-to-cement bond quality and casing
failure, there are a variety of techniques with their won range of appli- condition in real-time. It uses a transducer that is both transmitter
cations. Laboratory experiments can be conducted to quantify the and receiver that emits wavefronts that are reflected back by the
behavior of casing, tubing, cement barrier, and packer. Analytical wellbore walls. Transient times can be converted to information.
and numerical models can be conducted to quantify the effect of dif- The rate of decay of the waveforms indicates the quality of the
ferent parameters; commonly used quantitative and qualitative mod- cement bond at the interface, and the frequencies of the casing
eling methods include fault tree, bow-tie, failure mode, effect provide the casing wall thickness. Ultrasonic logs do not offer a
analysis, event tree, if-else, Monte Carlo simulation, and Bayesian contrast to distinguish between contaminated cement from gas or
network analysis [21]. These probabilistic methods can help estimate fluid acoustic impedance [77]. Each well evaluation method has
potential leakage points, although they are subjected to multiple its range of application and limitations. Table 3 shows the uses
assumptions. Casing/steel integrity can be evaluated using caliper and major limitations of the different methods presented.

042001-8 / Vol. 144, APRIL 2022 Transactions of the ASME

6 Summary [9] Shahid, M., Bidin, N., Mat, Y., and Ullah, M. I., 2012, “Production and
Enhancement of Hydrogen From Water: A Review,” ASME J. Energy Resour.
The study of UHS is a promising alternative that has gained inter- Technol., 134(3), p. 034002.
est in the last decade. To safely contain the gases in the subsurface, [10] McPherson, M., Johnson, N., and Strubegger, M., 2018, “The Role of Electricity
Storage and Hydrogen Technologies in Enabling Global Low-Carbon Energy
well integrity has to be assessed, maintained, and evaluated Transitions,” Appl. Energy, 216, pp. 649–661.
throughout the life of the well. This paper goes over multiple mech- [11] Reuß, M., Grube, T., Robinius, M., Preuster, P., Wasserscheid, P., and Stolten, D.,
anisms that can lead to loss of well integrity during UHS. It has been 2017, “Seasonal Storage and Alternative Carriers: A Flexible Hydrogen Supply
found that microorganisms living in the subsurface can use hydro- Chain Model,” Appl. Energy, 200, pp. 290–302.
gen as an electron donor for multiple reactions that can lead to [12] Taylor, J. B., Alderson, J. E. A., Kalyanam, K. M., Lyle, A. B., and Phillips, L. A.,
1986, “Technical and Economic Assessment of Methods for the Storage of Large
microbial corrosion and cement degradation. Besides, hydrogen’s Quantities of Hydrogen,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 11(1), pp. 5–22.
physical properties can generate failure of well components such [13] Tarkowski, R., 2019, “Underground Hydrogen Storage: Characteristics and
as steel, cement, elastomer, and caprock. Completion design Prospects,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 105, pp. 86–94.
requires consideration of all possible elements that can lead to [14] Kabuth, A., Dahmke, A., Beyer, C., Bilke, L., Dethlefsen, F., Dietrich, P.,

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

Duttmann, R., et al., 2017, “Energy Storage in the Geological Subsurface:
loss of well integrity. Dimensioning, Risk Analysis and Spatial Planning: The ANGUS+ Project,”
Wells selected for storage applications can be newly constructed Environ. Earth Sci., 76(1), p. 23.
or existing wells. This study suggests the appropriate material selec- [15] Pudlo, D., Ganzer, L., Henkel, S., Kühn, M., Liebscher, A., De Lucia, M.,
tion to minimize the risk of component failure. For newly con- Panfilov, M., et al.et al., 2013, “The H2STORE Project: Hydrogen
Underground Storage—A Feasible Way in Storing Electrical Power in
structed wells, casing, tubing, cement, and packer need to be Geological Media?” Proceedings of the Clean Energy Systems in the
carefully selected for UHS application. Austenitic steels with Subsurface: Production, Storage and Conversion, Berlin, Germany, May 21–23,
nickel content higher than 21% have low diffusivity and higher Springer Series in Geomechanics and Geoengineering, Berlin, pp. 395–412.
resistance to a fatigue crack in the presence of hydrogen. Micro-fine [16] Pudlo, D., and Henkel, S., 2016, “H2STORE and HyINTEGER—Studies on the
cement with low-concentrations SiO2 in the cement binders and Effect of Hydrogen Storage in (PORE) Underground Gas Reservoirs—An
Overview,” Proceedings of the 3rd HIPS-NET Workshop, Brussels, Belgium,
latex cement are the best alternative for cement selection. HNBR June 23–24, p. 13.
can resist corrosive environments for the elastomer element and [17] Simon, J., Ferriz, A. M., and Correas, L. C., 2015, “HyUnder—Hydrogen
has a lower risk of failure under decompression. For old existing Underground Storage at Large Scale: Case Study Spain,” Energy Procedia, 73,
wells, evaluation of well conditions is required to meet certain cri- pp. 136–144.
[18] RAG Austria, 2020, “Underground Sun Storage Final Report,” 2017.
teria prior to conversion into storage applications. [19] ISO 16530-1, 2017, “Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries—Well Integrity—
This paper presents a modern comparison between the different Part 1: Life Cycle Governance.”
types of storage that include hydrogen (UHS), methane (UGS), [20] NORSOK D-010, 2013, “Well Integrity in Drilling and Well Operations,”
and carbon dioxide (CCS). Other types of storage like UGS and October 2010.
CCS have been widely studied and have several projects operating [21] Kiran, R., Teodoriu, C., Dadmohammadi, Y., Nygaard, R., Wood, D., Mokhtari,
M., and Salehi, S., 2017, “Identification and Evaluation of Well Integrity and
worldwide. This comparison gives a better understanding of UHS Causes of Failure of Well Integrity Barriers (A Review),” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng.,
limitations by comparing how hydrogen physical properties differ 45, pp. 511–526.
from CO2 and CH4. Moreover, a risk comparison between UHS, [22] Loto, C. A., 2017, “Microbiological Corrosion: Mechanism, Control and Impact—A
UGS, and CCS with respect to mechanisms that can compromise Review,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 92(9–12), pp. 4241–4252.
[23] Iverson, W. P., 1987, “Microbial Corrosion of Metals,” Adv. Appl. Microbiol.,
well integrity shows the likeliness of the mechanism. 32, pp. 1–36.
Well integrity evaluation and monitoring techniques are required [24] Boopathy, R., and Daniels, L., 1991, “Effect of pH on Anaerobic Mild Steel
to ensure appropriate conditions and locate possible leakage. These Corrosion by Methanogenic Bacteria,” Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 57(7),
techniques include laboratory experiments, analytical and numeri- pp. 2104–2108.
cal modeling, and well logging. Each evaluation method has a [25] Rickard, D., 2012, “Sedimentary Iron Biogeochemistry,” Dev. Sedimentol., 65,
pp. 85–119.
range of application and limitations associated with it. This [26] Lovley, D. R., and Phillips, E. J. P., 1986, “Organic-Matter Mineralization With
review delivers an overview of mechanisms causing well integrity Reduction of Ferric Iron in Anaerobic Sediments,” Appl. Environ. Microbiol.,
failure, well criteria and material selection, comparison between dif- 51(4), pp. 683–689.
ferent storage types, and evaluation techniques. More scientific [27] Condon, J. B., and Schober, T., 1993, “Hydrogen Bubbles in Metals,” J. Nucl.
Mater., 207, pp. 1–24.
studies of UHS technology can help reduce the uncertainty associ- [28] Reitenbach, V., Ganzer, L., Albrecht, D., and Hagemann, B., 2015, “Influence of
ated with this type of storage and increase its feasibility. Added Hydrogen on Underground Gas Storage: A Review of Key Issues,”
Environ. Earth Sci., 73(11), pp. 6927–6693.
[29] Ghosh, G., Rostron, P., Garg, R., and Panday, A., 2018, “Hydrogen Induced
Cracking of Pipeline and Pressure Vessel Steels: A Review,” Eng. Fract.
References Mech., 199, pp. 609–618.
[1] EIA, 2020, Monthly Energy Review, U.S. Energy Information Administration, [30] Edyvean, R. G. J., Benson, J., Thomas, C. J., Beech, I. B., and Videla, H. A.,
Washington, DC. 1997, “Biological Influences on Hydrogen Effects in Steel in Seawater,”
[2] Fronk, B. M., Neal, R., and Garimella, S., 2010, “Evolution of the Transition to a Corrosion97, New Orleans, LA, Mar. 9, p. 206.
World Driven by Renewable Energy,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 132(2), [31] Strazisar, B., Kutchko, B., and Huerta, N., 2009, “Chemical Reactions of
p. 021009. Wellbore Cement Under CO2 Storage Conditions: Effects of Cement
[3] Benato, A., and Stoppato, A., 2017, “Energy and Cost Analysis of a New Packed Additives,” Energy Procedia, 1(1), pp. 3603–3607.
Bed Pumped Thermal Electricity Storage Unit,” ASME J. Energy Resour. [32] Lécolier, E., Rivereau, A., Ferrer, N., Audibert, A., and Longaygue, X., 2010,
Technol., 140(2), p. 020904. “Durability of Oilwell Cement Formulations Aged in H2S-Containing Fluids,”
[4] Câmara, R. J. B., Carneiro, J. F., Câmara, G. A. B., de Araújo, P. S. R., Rocha, SPE Drill. Completion, 25(1), pp. 90–95.
P. S. D. M. V., and Andrade, J. C. S., 2019, “Methodology for Sub-commercial [33] Santra, A., Reddy, B. R., Liang, F., and Fitzgerald, R., 2009, “Reaction of CO2
Calculation of the Potential Energy Storage Capacity of Hydrogen, Natural Gas, With Portland Cement at Down-Hole Conditions and the Role of Pozzolanic
and Compressed Air in Salt Caves,” ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 142(4), Supplements,” Proceedings of the SPE International Symposium on Oilfield
p. 042007. Chemistry, Woodlands, TX,, Apr. 20–22, p. 121103.
[5] Shang, D., Pei, P., and Zuo, Y., 2020, “Techno-Economic Feasibility Analysis of [34] Teodoriu, C., Reinicke, K. M., Fichter, C., Wehling, P., and Clausthal, T. U.,
Pumped Storage Hydroelectricity in Abandoned Underground Coal Mines,” 2010, “Investigations on Casing-Cement Interaction With Application to Gas
ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol., 142(12), p. 122001. and CO2 Storage Wells,” Proceedings of the SPE EUROPEC/EAGE Annual
[6] Sharan, P., Kitz, K., Wendt, D., McTigue, J., and Zhu, G., 2020, “Using Conference and Exhibition, Barcelona, Spain, June 14.
Concentrating Solar Power to Create a Geological Thermal Energy Reservoir [35] Kutchko Duguid, A., and Scherer, G., 2010, “Degradation of Oilwell Cement Due
for Seasonal Storage and Flexible Power Plant Operation,” ASME J. Energy to Exposure to Carbonated Brine,” Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control, 4(3), pp. 546–
Resour. Technol., 143(1), p. 010906. 560.
[7] Das, D., and Veziroǧ lu, T. N., 2001, “Hydrogen Production by Biological [36] Kutchko, B. G., Strazisar, B. R., Hawthorne, S. B., Lopano, C. L., Miller, D. J.,
Processes: A Survey of Literature,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 26(1), pp. 13–28. Hakala, A., and Guthrie, G. D., 2011, “H2S–CO2 Reaction With Hydrated Class
[8] Wang, Z., Roberts, R. R., Naterer, G. F., and Gabriel, K. S., 2012, “Comparison H Well Cement: Acid-Gas Injection and CO2 Co-sequestration,” Int. J.
of Thermochemical, Electrolytic, Photoelectrolytic and Photochemical Greenhouse Gas Control, 5(4), pp. 880–888.
Solar-to-Hydrogen Production Technologies,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 37(21), [37] Collepardi, M., 2003, “A State-of-the-Art Review on Delayed Ettringite Attack on
pp. 16287–16301. Concrete,” Cem. Concr. Compos., 25(1–5), pp. 401–407.

Journal of Energy Resources Technology APRIL 2022, Vol. 144 / 042001-9

[38] Truche, L., Jodin-Caumon, M. C., Lerouge, C., Berger, G., Mosser-Ruck, R., [58] Jones, R. R., and Carpenter, R. B., 1991, “New Latex, Expanding Thixotropic
Giffaut, E., and Michau, N., 2013, “Sulphide Mineral Reactions in Clay-Rich Cement Systems Improve Job Performance and Reduce Costs,” Proceedings of
Rock Induced by High Hydrogen Pressure. Application to Disturbed or Natural the International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Anaheim, CA, Feb. 20–22.
Settings up to 250 °C and 30 bar,” Chem. Geol., 351, pp. 217–228. [59] Nygaard, R., and Lavoie, R., 2010, “Well Integrity and Workover Candidates for
[39] Patel, H., Salehi, S., Ahmed, R., and Teodoriu, C., 2019, “Review of Elastomer Existing Wells in the Wabamun Area CO2 Sequestration Project (WASP),”
Seal Assemblies in Oil & Gas Wells: Performance T Evaluation, Failure Proceedings of the Canadian Unconventional Resources and International
Mechanisms, and Gaps in Industry Standards,” J. Pet. Sci. Eng., 179, Petroleum Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Oct. 19–21.
pp. 1046–1062. [60] Zhong, A., Johnson, M., Kohn, G., and Saleh, M., 2015, “Performance Evaluation
[40] Campion, R. P., Thomson, B., and Harris, J. A., 2005, “Elastomers for Fluid of a Large Bore Expandable Liner Hanger for Field Operations in the Gulf of
Containment in Offshore Oil and Gas Production: Guidelines and Review,” Mexico,” Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX,
Technical Report No. RR-320, MERL Ltd for the Health and Safety Executive, May 4–7.
UK. [61] Ahmed, S., Patel, H., and Salehi, S., 2020, “Numerical Modeling and
[41] Salehi, S., Ezeakacha, C. P., Kwatia, G., and Ahmed, R., 2019, “Performance Experimental Study of Elastomer Seal Assembly in Downhole Wellbore
Verification of Elastomer Materials in Corrosive Gas and Liquid Condition,” Equipment: Effect of Material and Chemical Swelling,” Polym. Test., 89,
Polym. Test., 75, pp. 48–63. p. 106608.
[62] Ottesen, S., and Kwakwa, K. A., 1991, “A Multidisciplinary Approach to In-Situ

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/energyresources/article-pdf/144/4/042001/6777752/jert_144_4_042001.pdf by Curtin University Library user on 12 April 2024

[42] Fernández, C., and Castaño, P., 2016, “Compatibility Behavior of Elastomers for
PCP Applications,” CORROSION 2016, NACE International, Vancouver, British Stress Determination and Its Application to Wellbore Stability Analysis,”
Columbia, NACE-2016-7106. Proceedings of the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, Mar. 11–14.
[43] Dajiang, Z., Yuanhua, L., Huali, Z., Yufei, L., Lin, Z., and Kuanhai, D., 2017,
[63] Hollis, A. P., 1984, “Some Petroleum Engineering Considerations in the
“Experimental Studies on CO2 Corrosion of Rubber Materials for Packer Under
Changeover of the Rough Gas Field to the Storage Mode,” J. Pet. Technol.,
Compressive Stress in Gas Wells,” Eng. Failure Anal., 80, pp. 11–23.
36(5), pp. 797–804.
[44] Amid, A., Mignard, D., and Wilkinson, M., 2016, “Seasonal Storage of Hydrogen [64] Pfeiffer, W. T., and Bauer, S., 2015, “Subsurface Porous Media Hydrogen
in a Depleted Natural Gas Reservoir,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 41(12), pp. 5549– Storage—Scenario Development and Simulation,” Energy Procedia, 76,
5558. pp. 565–572.
[45] Carden, P. O., and Paterson, L., 1979, “Physical, Chemical and Energy Aspects of [65] King, G. E., and Valencia, R. T., 2014, “Environmental Risk and Well Integrity of
Underground Hydrogen Storage,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 4(6), pp. 559–569. Plugged and Abandoned Wells,” Proceedings of the SPE Annual Technical
[46] Zivar, D., Kumar, S., and Foroozesh, J., 2020, “Underground Hydrogen Storage: Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Oct. 27–29.
A Comprehensive Review,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy., 46(45), 23436–23462. [66] Loizzo, M., and Sharma, S., 2008, “Assessing Long-Term CO2 Containment
[47] Heinemann, N., Booth, M. G., Haszeldine, R. S., Wilkinson, M., Scafidi, J., and Performance: Cement Evaluation in Otway CRC-1,” Proceedings of the SPE
Edlmann, K., 2018, “Hydrogen Storage in Porous Geological Formations— Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Perth, Australia, Oct. 20–22.
Onshore Play Opportunities in the Midland Valley (Scotland, UK),” [67] Lockyear, C. F., Ryan, D. F., and Gunningham, M. M., 1990, “Cement
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 43(45), pp. 20861–20874. Channeling: How to Predict and Prevent,” SPE Drill. Eng., 5(3), pp. 201–208.
[48] Hemme, C., and Van Berk, W., 2018, “Hydrogeochemical Modeling to Identify [68] Thiercelin, M. J., Dargaud, B., Baret, J. F., and Rodriquez, W. J., 1998, “Cement
Potential Risks of Underground Hydrogen Storage in Depleted Gas Fields,” Appl. Design Based on Cement Mechanical Response,” SPE Drill. Completion, 13(4),
Sci., 8(11), p. 2282. pp. 266–273.
[49] Shi, Z., Jessen, K., and Tsotsis, T. T., 2020, “Impacts of the Subsurface Storage of [69] Mainguy, M., Longuemare, P., Audibert, A., and Lecolier, E., 2007, “Analyzing
Natural Gas and Hydrogen Mixtures,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 45(15), pp. 8757– the Risk or Well Plug Failure After Abandonment,” Oil Gas Sci. Technol., 62(3),
8773. pp. 311–324.
[50] Lord, A. S., Kobos, P. H., and Borns, D. J., 2014, “Geologic Storage of [70] Bai, M., Zhang, Z., and Fu, X., 2016, “A Review on Well Integrity Issues for CO2
Hydrogen: Scaling Up To Meet City Transportation Demands,” Geological Storage and Enhanced Gas Recovery,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.,
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 39(28), pp. 15570–15582. 59, pp. 920–926.
[51] Michalski, J., Bünger, U., Crotogino, F., Donadei, S., Schneider, G. S., Pregger, [71] Edlmann, K., Bensabat, J., Niemi, A., Haszeldine, R. S., and McDermott, C. I.,
T., Cao, K. K., and Heide, D., 2017, “Hydrogen Generation by Electrolysis and 2016, “Lessons Learned From Using Expert Elicitation to Identify, Assess and
Storage in Salt Caverns: Potentials, Economics and Systems Aspects With Rank the Potential Leakage Scenarios at the Heletz Pilot CO2 Injection Site,”
Regard to the German Energy Transition,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 42(19), Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control, 49, pp. 473–487.
pp. 13427–13443. [72] Kleinitz, W., and Boehling, E., 2005, “Underground Gas Storage in Porous Media
—Operating Experience With Bacteria on Gas Quality,” Proceedings of the SPE
[52] Sainz-Garcia, A., Abarca, E., Rubi, V., and Grandia, F., 2017, “Assessment of
Europec/EAGE Annual Conference, Madrid, Spain, June 13–16.
Feasible Strategies for Seasonal Underground Hydrogen Storage in a Saline
[73] Barlet-Gouedard, V., Rimmele, G., Goffe, B., and Porcherie, O., 2006,
Aquifer,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 42(26), pp. 16657–16666.
“Mitigation Strategies for the Risk of CO2 Migration Through Wellbores,”
[53] Hirata, K., Iikubo, S., Koyama, M., Tsuzaki, K., and Ohtani, H., 2018, Proceedings of the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, Miami, FL, Feb. 21–23.
“First-Principles Study on Hydrogen Diffusivity in BCC, FCC, and HCP Iron,” [74] Ahmed, S., Salehi, S., Ezeakacha, C., and Teodoriu, C., 2019, “Experimental
Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 49(10), pp. 5015–5022. Investigation of Elastomers in Downhole Seal Elements: Implications for
[54] San Marchi, C., Somerday, B. P., Tang, X., and Schiroky, G. H., 2008, “Effects of Safety,” Polym. Test., 76, pp. 350–364.
Alloy Composition and Strain Hardening on Tensile Fracture of [75] Alaref, O., Rourke, M., Khabibullin, M., and Yakupov, A., 2016,
Hydrogen-Precharged Type 316 Stainless Steels,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, “Comprehensive Well Integrity Solutions in Challenging Environments Using
33(2), pp. 889–904. Latest Technology Innovations,” Proceedings of the Offshore Technology
[55] Bai, M., Song, K., Sun, Y., He, M., Li, Y., and Sun, J., 2014, “An Overview of Conference Asia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Mar. 22–25.
Hydrogen Underground Storage Technology and Prospects in China,” J. Pet. Sci. [76] van Kuijk, R., Zeroug, S., Froelich, B., Allouche, M., Bose, S., Miller, D., Le
Eng., 124, pp. 132–136. Calvez, J. L., Schoepf, V., and Pagnin, A., 2005, “A Novel Ultrasonic
[56] Bai, M., Sun, J., Song, K., Li, L., and Qiao, Z., 2015, “Well Completion and Cased-Hole Imager for Enhanced Cement Evaluation,” Proceedings of the
Integrity Evaluation for CO2 Injection Wells,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, Nov. 21–23.
45, pp. 556–564. [77] de Souza, P. C., Solon, T., and da Silva Araujo, R. G., 1997, “New Approach on
[57] Crotogino, F., 1995, “SMRI Reference for External Well Mechanical Integrity Cement Evaluation for Oil and Gas Reservoirs Using Ultrasonic Images,”
Testing/Performance, Data Evaluation and Assessment,” Proceedings of the Proceedings of the Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering
SMRI Spring Meeting Houston, Houston, TX. Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Aug. 30–Sept. 3.

042001-10 / Vol. 144, APRIL 2022 Transactions of the ASME