Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure Criteria
Abstract The large‐scale implementation of geological carbon sequestration has raised concerns about potential fault activation and induced seismicity, which could compromise storage integrity and pose seismic risks. We theoretically compared two failure criteria, Mohr‐Coulomb (MC) and Modified Cam‐...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Geophysical Research Letters |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1029/2025GL115250 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850137008365633536 |
|---|---|
| author | M. Cao Y. Guglielmi J. Rutqvist A. Cihan S. Glubokovskikh P. Jordan M. Reagan J. Birkholzer |
| author_facet | M. Cao Y. Guglielmi J. Rutqvist A. Cihan S. Glubokovskikh P. Jordan M. Reagan J. Birkholzer |
| author_sort | M. Cao |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract The large‐scale implementation of geological carbon sequestration has raised concerns about potential fault activation and induced seismicity, which could compromise storage integrity and pose seismic risks. We theoretically compared two failure criteria, Mohr‐Coulomb (MC) and Modified Cam‐Clay criteria (MCC), to assess fault rupture during CO2 storage. Both criteria characterize fault behavior in a specific stress regime but differ in reducing the complexity of fault rupture to a few key mechanisms. Using a coupled hydromechanical model, we demonstrate that the choice of a failure criterion and the physics of fault weakening associated with these criteria strongly condition fault response to a given fluid injection. MC mainly relates rupture to friction, while MCC relates rupture to fault poro‐plasticity. Our findings highlight that the selection of a failure criterion, being inherently subjective, can significantly alter the predicted fault behavior during CO2 storage, thereby impacting the reliability of geomechanical risk assessments. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-9243b6bb879e4b768e3d6fa0c26d0bbb |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 0094-8276 1944-8007 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Geophysical Research Letters |
| spelling | doaj-art-9243b6bb879e4b768e3d6fa0c26d0bbb2025-08-20T02:30:59ZengWileyGeophysical Research Letters0094-82761944-80072025-05-015210n/an/a10.1029/2025GL115250Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure CriteriaM. Cao0Y. Guglielmi1J. Rutqvist2A. Cihan3S. Glubokovskikh4P. Jordan5M. Reagan6J. Birkholzer7Energy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAEnergy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAEnergy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAEnergy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAEnergy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAEnergy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAEnergy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAEnergy Geosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA USAAbstract The large‐scale implementation of geological carbon sequestration has raised concerns about potential fault activation and induced seismicity, which could compromise storage integrity and pose seismic risks. We theoretically compared two failure criteria, Mohr‐Coulomb (MC) and Modified Cam‐Clay criteria (MCC), to assess fault rupture during CO2 storage. Both criteria characterize fault behavior in a specific stress regime but differ in reducing the complexity of fault rupture to a few key mechanisms. Using a coupled hydromechanical model, we demonstrate that the choice of a failure criterion and the physics of fault weakening associated with these criteria strongly condition fault response to a given fluid injection. MC mainly relates rupture to friction, while MCC relates rupture to fault poro‐plasticity. Our findings highlight that the selection of a failure criterion, being inherently subjective, can significantly alter the predicted fault behavior during CO2 storage, thereby impacting the reliability of geomechanical risk assessments.https://doi.org/10.1029/2025GL115250geologic CO2 sequestrationfault ruptureCam‐Clay failure criteriaMohr‐Coulomb failure criteria |
| spellingShingle | M. Cao Y. Guglielmi J. Rutqvist A. Cihan S. Glubokovskikh P. Jordan M. Reagan J. Birkholzer Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure Criteria Geophysical Research Letters geologic CO2 sequestration fault rupture Cam‐Clay failure criteria Mohr‐Coulomb failure criteria |
| title | Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure Criteria |
| title_full | Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure Criteria |
| title_fullStr | Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure Criteria |
| title_full_unstemmed | Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure Criteria |
| title_short | Hydromechanical Modeling of Fault Rupture in Geologic CO2 Sequestration: A Comparison of Two Failure Criteria |
| title_sort | hydromechanical modeling of fault rupture in geologic co2 sequestration a comparison of two failure criteria |
| topic | geologic CO2 sequestration fault rupture Cam‐Clay failure criteria Mohr‐Coulomb failure criteria |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1029/2025GL115250 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mcao hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria AT yguglielmi hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria AT jrutqvist hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria AT acihan hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria AT sglubokovskikh hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria AT pjordan hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria AT mreagan hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria AT jbirkholzer hydromechanicalmodelingoffaultruptureingeologicco2sequestrationacomparisonoftwofailurecriteria |