Geologic Assessment of the Burger Power Plant and Surrounding Vicinity for Potential Injection of Carbon Dioxide
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Geologic Assessment of the
Burger Power Plant and
Surrounding Vicinity for Potential
Injection of Carbon Dioxide
By
Lawrence H. Wickstrom, Ernie R. Slucher,
Mark T. Baranoski, and Douglas J. Mullett
Ohio Department of Natural Resources
Division of Geological Survey
2045 Morse Road, Building C-1
Columbus, Ohio 43229-6693
Columbus 2008
Open-File Report 2008-1
ABOUT THE MRCSP
This report was produced by the Ohio Division of Geological Survey with funding supplied, in part, through
the Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP). The MRCSP is a public/private consor-
tium that is assessing the technical potential, economic viability, and public acceptability of carbon sequestra-
tion within its region. The MRCSP region consists of eight contiguous states: Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland,
Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. A group of leading universities, state geological
surveys, non-governmental organizations and private companies makes up the MRCSP, which is led by Bat-
telle Memorial Institute. It is one of seven such partnerships across the United States that make up the U.S.
Department of Energy’s (DOE) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Program. The U.S. DOE, through
the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), contributes the majority of funds for the MRCSP’s re-
search under agreement no. DE-FC26-05NT42589. The MRCSP also receives funding from all of the member
organizations. For more information on the partnership please visit .
DISCLAIMER
The information contained herein has not been technically reviewed for accuracy and conformity with pres-
ent Ohio Division of Geological Survey standards for published materials. The Ohio Division of Geological
Survey does not guarantee this information to be free from errors, omissions, or inaccuracies and disclaims any
responsibility or liability for interpretations or decisions based thereon.
CONTENTS
Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................1
Geographic site location ......................................................................................................................1
Previous work ......................................................................................................................................1
Potential geologic sequestration reservoir ...........................................................................................1
Deep saline formations ..................................................................................................................1
Oil and gas fields ...........................................................................................................................3
Unmineable coal beds ....................................................................................................................3
Carbonaceous shales ......................................................................................................................3
Methods................................................................................................................................................3
Surface and near-surface site characterization .....................................................................................9
Lowest underground source of drinking water ..............................................................................9
General geologic site characterization .................................................................................................9
Regional geologic setting ..............................................................................................................9
Paleozoic stratigraphy and geologic history ................................................................................13
Discussion of potential saline injection zones ...................................................................................15
Cambrian Conasauga Group (Maryville Formation) ...................................................................17
Cambrian-Ordovician Knox Group .............................................................................................17
Cambrian Copper Ridge dolomite ...............................................................................................17
Cambrian-Ordovician Rose Run sandstone .................................................................................17
Ordovician Beekmantown dolomite ............................................................................................18
Silurian Cataract Group (“Clinton” sandstone) ...........................................................................18
Silurian Lockport Dolomite .........................................................................................................20
Silurian Salina Group ..................................................................................................................20
Silurian Bass Islands Dolomite....................................................................................................20
Devonian Oriskany Sandstone.....................................................................................................26
Devonian Hamilton Group and West Falls Formation ................................................................26
Significant oil and gas horizons .........................................................................................................26
Lower Silurian “Clinton-Medina”/Tuscarora Sandstone.............................................................32
Lower Silurian Lockport Dolomite .............................................................................................32
Lower Devonian Oriskany Sandstone .........................................................................................32
Upper Devonian siltstones and sandstones ..................................................................................37
Lower Devonian Berea Sandstone...............................................................................................37
Upper and Lower Mississippian limestones and sandstones .......................................................37
Lower and Middle Pennsylvanian sandstones and coal beds ......................................................37
Unmineable coals ...............................................................................................................................37
Carbonaceous shales ..........................................................................................................................42
Confining units for potential injection intervals ................................................................................43
Structural geology near the Burger site..............................................................................................43
Seismic reflection data .......................................................................................................................44
Artificial penetrations.........................................................................................................................44
Class I and II injection wells .......................................................................................................44
Class III injection wells ...............................................................................................................44
Seismicity...........................................................................................................................................46
Summary ............................................................................................................................................46
Selected references.............................................................................................................................50
FIGURES
Figure 1.—Location of Burger Power Plant ........................................................................................2
Figure 2.—Map of the Burger site with 20-mile radius area of review ...............................................4
Figure 3.—Stratigraphic correlation and CO2 sequestration characterization chart ............................5
Figure 4.—Map of oil, gas, and solution mining wells .......................................................................6
Figure 5.—Stratigraphic cross section showing stratigraphic correlations and geophysical log
signatures of shallow geologic units ........................................................................7
Figure 6.—Stratigraphic cross section showing stratigraphic correlations and geophysical log
signatures of deep geologic units .............................................................................8
Figure 7.—Structure contour map on the top of the Berea Sandstone ..............................................10
Figure 8.—Structure contour map on the top of the Oriskany Sandstone .........................................11
Figure 9.—Locations of abandoned underground mines ...................................................................12
i
GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
Figure 10.—Locations of major geologic elements during early Cambrian time .............................13
Figure 11.—Structure contour map on the top of the Precambrian unconformity ............................14
Figure 12.—Stratigraphic correlation chart showing details of the Cambrian and lower part of
the Ordovician........................................................................................................16
Figure 13.—Stratigraphic cross section showing Cambrian and Ordovician sequences ..................16
Figure 14.—Diagram illustrating the various units found at the Knox unconformity subcrop .........18
Figure 15.—Structure contour map on the top of the Rose Run sandstone. ......................................19
Figure 16.—Structure contour map on the top of the Tuscarora Sandstone. .....................................21
Figure 17.—Isopach map of the Tuscarora Sandstone and equivalents ............................................22
Figure 18.—Geophysical log response of the “Clinton” sandstones .................................................23
Figure 19.—Geophysical log response of the Lockport interval .......................................................24
Figure 20.—Geophysical log response of the Salina interval............................................................25
Figure 21.—Geophysical log response of the Bass Islands Dolomite ...............................................27
Figure 22.—Isopach map of the Oriskany Sandstone .......................................................................28
Figure 23.—Structure contour map on the top of the Oriskany Sandstone .......................................29
Figure 24.—Geophysical log response of the Oriskany Sandstone ...................................................30
Figure 25.—Geophysical log response of the Hamilton Group and lower West Falls Formation ....31
Figure 26.—Locations of oil and gas fields producing from depths >2,000 ft ...................................33
Figure 27.—Locations of all oil and gas fields ..................................................................................34
Figure 28.—Locations of natural gas storage fields ..........................................................................35
Figure 29.—Stratigraphic cross-section showing the Lower Silurian “Clinton-Medina”
sandstone geophysical well log correlations ..........................................................36
Figure 30.—Locations of oil and gas fields producing from the Devonian Shales and upper
Devonian siltstones and sandstones .......................................................................38
Figure 31.—Locations of oil and gas fields producing from the lower Devonian Berea Sandstone ..39
Figure 32.—Locations of oil and gas fields producing from the Mississippian limestones and
sandstones. .............................................................................................................40
Figure 33.—Locations of oil and gas fields producing from the Pennsylvanian sandstones ............41
Figure 34.—Schematic cross section of coal-bearing strata ..............................................................42
Figure 35.—Locations of class II (brine) and class III (solution mining) injection wells .................45
Figure 36.—Map of Ohio and surrounding areas showing known earthquake locations ..................47
Figure 37.—Burger Well summary ....................................................................................................49
APPENDICES
(SEE EXCEL DOCUMENTS ON CD)
Appendix A. General list of wells within 20 miles of the Burger Power Plant site.
Appendix B. Listing of core or core analyses of interest.
Appendix C. Oil and gas pools found within 20 miles of the Burger Power Plant site.
Appendix D. Listing of deep wells within 20 miles of the Burger Power Plant site.
Appendix E. Listing of Salina solution mining (Class III) wells and brine injection (Class II) wells
within 20 miles of the Burger Power Plant site.
ii
1
GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER
PLANT AND SURROUNDING VICINITY FOR
POTENTIAL INJECTION OF CARBON DIOXIDE
INTRODUCTION PREVIOUS WORK
This report, compiled for the Midwest Regional Carbon Seques- No previous detailed deep-subsurface investigations of prospec-
tration Partnership (MRCSP), is a preliminary feasibility study of tive geologic reservoir and sealing units viable for carbon storage
the geological sequestration potential for a proposed carbon-cap- have been conducted for the Burger Power Plant AOR. Several sub-
ture-and-storage demonstration project at the Burger Power Plant surface regional studies of shallow strata (Devonian or shallower)
located in Belmont County, Ohio. The MRCSP is one of seven re- using oil and gas well control have been published (Haught, 1955;
gional partnerships funded by the U.S. Department of Energy to in- Roen and others, 1978; Cardwell, 1979, Schweitering, 1979; Gray
vestigate the potential for carbon capture and storage in the United and others, 1982; Gas Research Institute, 1989).
States. This partnership, led by Battelle Memorial Institute, includes Member agencies of the MRCSP team have conducted several
research institutes and government agencies from the states of Indi- geologic investigations over the past 25 years that are of note for
ana, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, the Burger area. The MRCSP Phase I Task Report (Wickstrom and
and West Virginia plus several industry partners. In Phase I of the others, 2005) was the source for most stratigraphic data and maps
partnership, a regional geologic assessment summarized the subsur- used in this analysis. The phase I report contains an assemblage
face geology of the MRCSP region in terms of potential reservoirs of databases and maps depicting the general distribution of the
and seals for carbon sequestration (Wickstrom and others, 2005). For geologic reservoirs and seals in the subsurface of the seven-state
Phase II, three sites within the MRCSP region, including the Burger MRCSP region.
Power Plant site, are under investigation to be used as field tests to The Rome Trough Consortium (Harris and others, 2002) inves-
evaluate carbon-sequestration methodologies in geologic reservoirs. tigated the subsurface stratigraphy of sub-Knox Group units within
The objective of this report is to summarize the geology and and adjacent to the Rome Trough in eastern Kentucky, southeastern
available geologic data of the Burger site and its immediate vicin- Ohio, and northern West Virginia. Included in the final report of the
ity, and to provide a preliminary characterization of known geologic consortium is a database listing the identified tops of geologic units,
reservoirs and sealing units for use in further assessment work. Fur- deep-core descriptions, regional maps of sub-Knox sandstone reser-
ther assessment work would be used for developing the test well de- voirs, and information on known hydrocarbon geochemistry in the
sign and implementing various requirements for carbon capture and Rome Trough.
storage, as well as acquiring an underground-injection permit and The Atlas of Major Appalachian Gas Plays (Roen and Walker,
developing a subsequent monitoring plan. This report was revised 1996), a comprehensive study of known and speculative gas plays
to include information collected during the drilling and geophysical in most portions of the Appalachian Basin, facilitated the analyses
well logging of the deep stratigraphic test well drilled at the Burger of some geologic horizons in the eastern part of the AOR. Items
site, the FEGENCO #1 Well. Further well testing and injection of included in the atlas that may be useful for additional research at
CO2 are planned for this well. At the conclusion of such tests, a final the Burger Power Plant are databases on the average geologic and
report on this project will be published by the Ohio Department of engineering characteristics of each play.
Natural Resources, Division of Geological Survey (DGS). The Eastern Gas Shales Project was a U.S. Department of Energy
The principal investigators for this feasibility study were Mark (U.S. DOE)-funded study of the organic-rich Devonian shales in the
Baranoski, Ernie Slucher, and Larry Wickstrom of the DGS. This Appalachian Basin (Gray and others, 1982). In addition, this report
report was revised by Doug Mullett of the DGS. Additional con- contains numerous maps on other geologic units, such as the Onon-
tributions were made by Kristen Carter of the Pennsylvania Geo- daga Limestone and Berea Sandstone, that may have relevance to
logical Survey and Lee Avary of the West Virginia Geological and the Burger site investigation.
Economic Survey.
POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC
GEOGRAPHIC SITE LOCATION SEQUESTRATION RESERVOIRS
The Burger Power Plant is located at the southeastern edge of a The U.S. DOE has identified several categories of geologic res-
large flood plain on the west side of the Ohio River at Dilles Bot- ervoirs for potential CO2 sequestration (U.S. Department of Energy,
tom, Belmont County, Ohio, which is located on the Businessburg 1999, 2004, 2005). Of these categories, four are considered to have
7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle (fig. 1). The potential application at the Burger site: (1) deep saline formations,
Burger Power Plant is approximately four miles south of Shadyside, (2) oil-and-gas fields, (3) unmineable coal beds, and (4) carbona-
Ohio and directly across the Ohio River and southwest of Mounds- ceous shales.
ville, West Virginia. In this report, use of the term “site” refers to
the area in the immediate vicinity of the Burger Power Plant and DEEP SALINE FORMATIONS
the term “Burger Well” refers to the FEGENCO #1 Well (American
Petroleum Institute number 3401320586). “AOR” as used in this Saline formations are natural salt-water-bearing intervals of po-
report stands for area of review and includes well and other geologic rous and permeable rocks that occur beneath the level of potable
data within approximately 20 miles of the site. The Burger Well was ground water. Currently, a number of saline formations are used for
drilled 3,994 ft from the north line and 374 ft from the east line of waste-fluid disposal in Ohio. Thus, a long history of technological
Section 35, Mead Township, Belmont County. and regulatory factors exists that could be applied to CO2 injection/
1
2 GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
Moundsville
Businessburg
Burger Powerplant
^
PENNSYLVANIA
OHIO
Glen Easton
Powhatan Point
^
MARYLAND
WEST VIRGINIA
KENTUCKY
Figure 1.—Location of Burger Power Plant. Figure captured from four USGS digital raster graphic (DRG) files of the 7.5-minute quadrangles surrounding the
site. A separate file containing this map, for detailed use and printing, is included on the CD submitted with this report.
POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC SEQUESTRATION RESERVOIRS 3
disposal. In order to maintain injected CO2 in its supercritical state production. Additionally, it is believed that carbonaceous shales
(i.e., liquid), the injection horizon depth must be at or greater than could adsorb CO2 into the shale matrix, similar to coal adsorption,
2,500 ft. Maintaining CO2 in its liquid phase is desirable because, as permitting long-term CO2 storage even at relatively shallow depths
a liquid, it takes up less volume than when it is in the gaseous phase. (Nuttall and others, 2005). Sequestration of CO2 in carbonaceous
One ton of CO2 at surface temperature and pressure (when it is in shales has not been demonstrated and is still in the developmental
its gaseous phase) occupies approximately 18,000 cubic feet. The research stage.
same amount of CO2 will occupy only 50 cubic feet when injected
into a formation at a depth of approximately 2,600 ft. Sequestration METHODS
depths of at least 2,500 ft also insure there is an adequate interval
of rocks (confining layers) above the potential injection zones to act A geologic characterization was conducted for the 20-mile radius
as geologic seals. AOR that includes portions of Belmont, Harrison, Jefferson, and
Monroe Counties, Ohio, Greene and Washington Counties, Penn-
OIL-AND-GAS FIELDS sylvania, and Brooke, Marshall, Ohio, and Wetzel Counties, West
Virginia (fig. 2). Additionally, because of a paucity of data on deep
Oil-and-gas fields represent known geologic traps (structural or geologic units, some well data were used from as far as 30 miles
stratigraphic) that contain hydrocarbons within a confined reser- from the site.
voir with a known cap or seal. In depleted or abandoned petroleum Data used for the preliminary site assessment were acquired from
fields, CO2 can be injected into the reservoir to fill the pore volume public records at the West Virginia Geological and Economic Sur-
left by the extraction of the oil or natural gas resources (Westrich vey (WVGES), the Pennsylvania Geological Survey (PGS), and the
and others, 2002). Ohio Division of Geological Survey (DGS). Available geologic lit-
In active oil fields, it has been demonstrated that CO2 can be used erature, basic geologic maps, and data on coal and coal mines, oil
for enhanced oil recovery (EOR). In this process, some of the oil and gas wells, petroleum storage fields, brine solution wells, and
that remains in reservoirs after primary production is recovered by core hole records were compiled and analyzed.
using CO2 to (1) repressurize the reservoir and drive the remain- Wells in the text and figures are referred to by both lease name
ing oil to a recovery well (immiscible flooding at shallow depths), and the American Petroleum Institute’s well-identification number
or (2) reduce the viscosity (via mixing/chemical interaction) of the (API number). The API number is a national standardized method
remaining oil and push it to a recovery well (miscible flooding of for assigning unique identifiers to oil and gas wells. It is expressed as
deep reservoirs). Approximately 70 oil fields worldwide currently a 10-digit number with the first 2 digits representing the state code,
inject CO2 for EOR (U.S. DOE, 2004), thereby demonstrating the the next 3 numbers representing the county code, and (in Ohio) the
effectiveness of this value-added sequestration option. Most exist- next 5 numbers representing the permit number within the county.
ing CO2-assisted EOR operations are in the western United States, Stratigraphic terminology used in this report is that currently ac-
especially the Permian Basin of west Texas. These fields mainly cepted by the DGS and can be found in Larsen (1998), Riley and
use naturally occurring sources of CO2, but recently, anthropogenic others (1993), and Baranoski (in prep.). A stratigraphic chart for
sources have been added to their extensive pipeline network. There strata underlying the Burger AOR, adapted from the MRCSP phase
are no known large natural-CO2 sources in the eastern United States. I report (Wickstrom and others, 2005), is shown in figure 3.
Having CO2 available for EOR operations may enable the local oil As of June 2006, 6,257 drill holes were on file at the WVGES,
industry to produce hundreds of millions of barrels of additional PGS, and DGS in the 20-mile radius AOR. The majority of these
oil. Enhanced oil recovery, while sequestering CO2, could provide wells were drilled for oil and gas (including coalbed methane). The
further economic incentive to develop a long-term sequestration op- results of analyses using the well records were constrained because
eration at a site such as the Burger Power Plant. many of the records pre-dated modern regulations that require rela-
tively more information than the records contain. For example, only
UNMINEABLE COAL BEDS 3,056 of the 6,257 wells in the AOR have a total depth (TD) listed as
part of the well record (fig. 4); thus, additional data on deeper geo-
Unmineable coal beds offer a unique option for geologic seques- logic units within the AOR may exist in the records of current and
tration because, unlike the previously described reservoir types, historic operators of the Appalachian Basin. A listing of all wells
CO2 injected into a coal bed would not only occupy pore space, but within the AOR, as of June 2006, is attached (Appendix A). Other
it would also bond, or adsorb, onto the carbon in the coal itself. The subsurface records of the AOR are from coal stratigraphic test holes
adsorption rate for CO2 in bituminous coal is approximately twice and wells drilled for brine solution operations. Very little core or
that of methane; thus, in theory, the injected CO2 would displace analyses of the AOR are available for rocks below the coal measures
methane, allowing for potential enhanced gas recovery (Reznik and (Appendix B).
others, 1982; Gale and Freund, 2001; Schroeder and others, 2002) A dip cross-section was constructed across the AOR (fig. 4) to
while at the same time sequestering twice the volume of CO2. Be- illustrate the regional stratigraphy, including the potential injec-
cause of the adsorption mechanism, concerns of miscibility that oc- tion zones and confining units. For visual clarity, the cross section
cur in oil-and-gas reservoirs are not an issue. Thus, the injection of is split into a shallow section and a deep section (figs. 5, 6). Data
CO2 and resulting enhanced recovery of coal bed methane could used for the shallow and deep sections were derived from the top of
occur at shallower depths than for depleted oil reservoirs and deep the Onondaga Limestone and the Dayton Formation\“Packer Shell,”
saline formations. respectively.
Time budgeted for this assessment precluded using a large num-
CARBONACEOUS SHALES ber of geophysical logs to interpret formation boundaries and prop-
erties and map unit depth and thickness. In addition, geophysical
Analogous to sequestration in coal beds, CO2 injection into car- logs were not run or reported when many wells in the region were
bonaceous shale reservoirs could be used to enhance existing gas drilled. Therefore, drillers’ reported formation depths (depth below
4 GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
US
HW
Y
25 Brooke
22
Y7
Y Harrison 0 Jefferson
HW
HW
US
E
AT
ST
WASHINGTON
Wheeling Ohio 40
Y
HW
40 I 70 US I 70
US HW Y
I 70 Saint Clairsville I 470 I 470
US HWY 250
Belmont
Moundsville
^
Marshall
GREENE
7
Y
HW
E
AT
ST
Monroe
Monongalia
New Martinsville
EXPLANATION
^ Burger Coal Power Plant
Wetzel Rivers
State Roads
Cities
³
20-mile radius area of review
Marion
2
Y
County boundary
W
5 2.5 0 5 10 Miles
H
Washington Tyler
E
AT
Deep cross section
ST
5 2.5 0 5 10 15 Kilometers
Shallow cross section
Figure 2.—Map of the Burger site with the 20-mile radius area of review (AOR) shown. Line of cross section (figs. 5, 6). The shallow portion of the cross
section contains one control point not used on the deep section.
METHODS 5
SYSTEM)
SYSTEM
SERIES
(SUB-
ERA
OHIO WEST VIRGINIA PENNSYLVANIA
Monongahela Gp Monongahela Gp Monongahela Gp
UPPER
Conemaugh Gp Conemaugh Gp Conemaugh Gp
(PENNSYLVANIAN)
Allegheny Gp Allegheny Fm Allegheny Gp
MIDDLE
Pottsville Gp Kanawha
Pottsville Fm Pottsville Gp
Gp
New
LOWER
River
CARBONIFEROUS
Fm
Poca-
hontas
Fm
Mauch Bluefield
UPPER
Chunk Fm
Fm
Maxville Ls
Mauch Chunk
(MISSISSIPPIAN)
Greenbrier Ls Green-
Fm
Maxville Ls
brier
MIDDLE
Ls Lo
yalhan
na Ls
Maccrady
Coldwater Sh
Fm
LOWER
Logan Fm Burgoon Fm
Pocono Fm
Cuyahoga Fm Price Fm Shenango
Rockwell
Fm
Fm
Cuyahoga
Sunbury Sh Sunbury Sh Gp Riddlesburg
Berea Ss Mbr
Berea Ss Berea Ss
Bedford Sh Murryville
Bedford Sh Bedford Sh Hampshire
Gp Cussewago Fm Ss
Riceville Fm Oswayo Fm
Catskill
Chagrin Venango Gp Fm
UPPER
Antrim Sh
Ohio
Ohio Sh Sh Greenland Gap Fm Chadakoin
Fm
Gp Bradford
Huron Gp
Sh
Java Elk
Java Fm Fm Java Fm Gp
Olentangy Sh
West Falls Fm West Falls Fm Brallier West Falls Fm
Brallier Fm
Sonyea Fm Fm Sonyea Fm
Genesee Fm Harrell Fm Genesee Fm Harrell Fm
DEVONIAN
Local sequestration target
Traverse Gp
Olentangy Tully Ls
Tully Ls
Mahan-
MIDDLE
Hamilton Mahan-
tango Millboro Gp tango Fm
Hamilton
Fm Sh undivided
Gp
Dun- Hamilton Marcellus Fm
dee Delaware Ls Gp
Marcellus Fm
Ls
Detroit Columbus
Huntersville
River Ls
Sequestration target Gp Onondaga
Ls Onon- Need- Onondaga Fm
Chert
daga more
Ls Sh
LOWER
Bois Blanc Fm Bois Blanc Hunters- Need-
Fm ville more
Chert Sh
PALEOZOIC
Oriskany Ridgeley
Oriskany Ss Oriskany Ss Ss Ss
Confining unit Helderberg Gp Helderberg Gp
Helderberg Ls
Bass Clifton
Bass Islands Islands Forge Ss
Bass
Islands Dol Keyser
Keyser Fm
Ludlow-Pridoli
Fm
Tonoloway Tonoloway
Organic shale Salina Gp Fm
Salina Ls Salina
Fm Gp
Wills Wills
SILURIAN
Creek Creek
Fm Fm
Newburg Ss
Bloomsburg
Coal-bearing interval Lockport Dol Lockport McKenzie Lockport Fm
Dol Fm Fm Mifflintown Fm
Llandovery-
Rochester
Wenlock
Clinton Rochester Sh Sh Keefer Ss Keefer Ss
Clinton Gp
Gp Dayton Fm
Rose Hill Fm Clinton
Gp Rose Hill
Cacapon Ss Sh
Cabot Head Fm Cataract Gp Brassfield Cabot
Brassfield Fm Head Fm
Tuscarora Ss Medina Gp Tuscarora Fm
Basal confining units Queenston Sh Juniata Fm Queenston Fm Juniata Fm
Oswego
Fm Bald Eagle
Fm
Martinsburg
Cincinnati gp Reedsville Martins- Reedsville Sh
Sh
UPPER
Fm
burg
Fm Utica Sh Antes Fm
Sedimentary rocks Point Pleasant Fm
Trenton Ls Lexington Ls Trenton Gp Trenton Gp
Chambers-
burg Gp
Black River Gp Black River Gp Black River Gp
ORDOVICIAN
St. Peter Ss Wells Creek Fm Wells St.Paul
Loysburg Fm
St. Peter Ss
Creek Fm Gp
Wells
Beekman-
town Fm
Creek
MIDDLE
Fm
Igneous and Belle-
metamorphic rocks fonte
Fm
Beekmantown Gp
Axe-
mann
Pinesburg Fm
Stat.
LOWER
Rockdale Nittany
Beekman-
Fm
Beekman-
town Gp
town Fm
Run Fm
unnamed
Knox Dol
Beek-
dol
mantown Stonehenge Stone-
Ls Larke henge
dol Fm Fm
upper Stouffers- Mines Mbr
Rose Run Ss
Knox Gp
town Mbr
cheague Gp
Ss mbr Upper Sandy Mbr
Unconformity
Furongian
Conoco-
Gatesburg
Copper Ridge Copper Conoco- Middle Ore Hill
Dolomite
Fm
dol Ridge Dol cheague Gp Mbr Mbr
Lower Sandy Mbr
Eau Stacy Mbr
Claire Conasauga
Fm Warrior Fm
gp Po
Mt. tsd
am
Elbrook Fm
Simon
Cona- Elbrook Ss
CAMBRIAN
Ss
Basal Ss
sauga Gp Fm
MIDDLE
Pleasant
Hill
Fm
?
Rome Waynes- Waynesboro
Fm boro Fm ? Fm
LOWER
Shady/Tomstown Tomstown Dol ? Tomstown Fm
Basal Ss Antietam ? Antietam Fm
Chilhowee
Harpers
Wever-
ton
Catoctin Fm
TEROZOIC
NEOPRO-
Swift Run Fm
?
Grenville Grenville Grenville
Middle complex complex complex
PALEOPRO- MESOPRO-
TEROZOIC TEROZOIC
Run Fm
Granite-
Rhyolite
complex
Figure 3.—Stratigraphic correlation and CO2
sequestration characterization chart of geologic
units in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia
(modified from Wickstrom and others, 2005).
6 GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
Harrison Jefferson Brooke
WASHINGTON
Ohio
Guernsey
Belmont
Burger
Well
Noble ^
Marshall GREENE
Monroe
EXPLANATION
Monongalia
^ Burger Coal Power Plant
Deep cross section
Shallow cross section
Closest "Clinton" wells
Wetzel
Closest Knox wells
Closest Precambrian wells
Marion
Class III Wells
Wells with logs
³
Washington Well Records with TD
5 2.5 0 5
Tyler 10 Miles Well Records without TD
20-mile radius area of review
5 2.5 0 5 10 15 Kilometers
Pleasants Harrison
County boundary
Doddridge
Figure 4.—Map of oil, gas, and solution mining wells located within the Burger AOR. Line of cross section (figs. 5, 6). The shallow portion of the cross section
contains one control point not used on the deep section.METHODS 7
3406720737 11.7 miles 3401320485 12.0 miles 3401320108 9.2 miles 4705100229 2.3 miles 3401320586 16.0 miles 4705100539
RED HILL DEVELOPMENT KST OIL & GAS CO. IN R.S. RAGADALE III Allied Chem-SPD BURGER PLANT OCCIDENTAL PTLM
ZECHMAN SHIPPEY MOBLEY & BOBICK McCORMICK/OCCIDENTAL 1 BURLEY, J
COMPLETION RECORD ONLY
Correlation Depth Porosity
GR TVD RHOB
0 GAPI 200 2.000 G/CC 3.000
NPHI
0.003 V/V -0.001
2900
3000
Berea Ss/
4500 4500
3100 Upper Devonian shales
& siltstones undiv.
3200
3300
3400
Correlation Depth Porosity 3500
Correlation Depth GR TVD PHIN(NPHI)
GR TVD 0 250 0.30 CFCF -0.1
4000 0 GAPI
GR
200 CALI(HCAL) RHOB(RHOZ)
4000
6 IN 16 2.0 G/C3 3.0 3600
200 GAPI 400 PEF(PEFZ)
0 10
1800
3700
1700
1900
3800
1800
2000
3900
1900
2100
Correlation Depth Porosity 4000
GR TVD RHOB 2000
0 GAPI 200 2 G/C3 3
2200
3500 3500
GR NEUT
200 GAPI 400 400 NAPI 4000
4100
1600
2000 2100
2300
4200
1700
2200
2400
4300
1800
2300
2500
4400
1900
2400
2600
4500
2000
2500
2700
3000 3000
4600
2100
2500 2600
2800
4700
2200
Berea Ss/
2700
Upper Devonian shales 2900
& siltstones undiv.
4800
2300
2800
3000
4900
2400
2900
3100
5000
2500
3000
3200
2500 2500
5100
2600
3000 3100
3300
5200
2700
3200
3400
5300
2800
3300
3500
5400
2900
3400
3600
5500
3000
3500
3700
2000 2000
5600
3100
3500 3600
3800
5700
3200
3700
3900
5800
3300
3800
4000
5900
3400
3900
4100
6000
3500
4000
4200
1500 1500
6100
3600
4000 4100
4300
6200
3700
4200
4400
6300
3800
4300
4500
6400
3900
4400
4600
6500
4000
4500
4700
1000 1000
6600
4100
4500 4600
4800
6700
4200
4700
4900
6800
4300
4800
5000
6900
4400
4900
5100
7000
4500
5000
5200
500 500
7100
4600
5000 5100
5300
7200
4700
5200
5400
7300
4800
5300
5500
7400
4900
5400
5600
Hamilton Gp
7500
5000
5500
Hamilton Gp
0 Datum 5700
7600
Datum 0
Onondaga Ls 5100
5500 5600 Onondaga Ls
5800
7700
5200
5700
Oriskany Ss 5900
7800
Helderburg Fm
5300
5800
6000
Oriskany Ss
7900
5400
5900
6100
Helderburg Fm
Bass Islands Dol
8000
5500
6000
Salina Gp
6200
-500 -500
8100
5600
6000 6100
6300
8200
5700
6200
6400
Bass Islands Dol
8300
5800
6300
6500
Salina Gp
8400
5900
6400
6600
8500
6000
6500
6700
-1000 -1000
6100
6500
TD=6556 8600
6800
8700
6200
6900
8800
6300
7000
8900
6400
Lockport Dol
7100
9000
6500
7200
-1500 -1500
9100
6600
7000
7300
9200
6700
Rochester Fm/
Clinton Gp 7400
9300
6800
7500
9400
6900
ÒClintonÓ Ss 7600
Lockport Dol
9500
7000
7700
-2000 -2000
9600
Queenston Sh 7100
7500
7800
9700
7200
7900
Rose Hill Fm
9800
7300
TD=10625 8000
9900
7400
TD=7410 8100
10000
TD=7887
8200
-2500 -2500
Tuscarora Ss
10100
8300
10200
TD=8384 10300
10400
Queenston Shale
TD=16512
Figure 5.—Stratigraphic cross section oriented northwest-southeast across the AOR showing stratigraphic correlations and geophysical log signatures of shal-
low geologic units (Queenston Shale through the Berea Sandstone). Datum is the top of the Onondaga Limestone. See figure 2 for location of line. A separate
file containing this cross section, for detailed use and printing, is included on the CD submitted with this report.8 GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
3406720737 3401320485 3401320108 3401320586 4705100539
11.7 miles 12.0 miles 11.2 miles 16.0 miles
RED HILL DEVELOPMENT KST OIL & GAS CO. IN R.S. RAGADALE III BURGER PLANT OCCIDENTAL PTLM
ZECHMAN SHIPPEY MOBLEY & BOBICK McCORMICK/OCCIDENTAL 1 BURLEY, J
NW SE
Correlation Depth Porosity
Correlation Depth Porosity
GR TVD PHIN(NPHI)
0
GR
API 200
TVD
0.003
NPHI
V/V 0.000
No 0 250 0.30 CFCF -0.1
Correlation Depth Porosity
See enlarged electric
CALI(HCAL) RHOB(RHOZ)
GR RHOB GR TVD RHOB
6 IN 16 2.0 G/C3 3.0
200 API 400 2.000 gm/cc
PEF
3.000
version below logs PEF(PEFZ)
0 GAPI 200 2.000 G/CC
NPHI
3.000
0 10
0.000 barns/elec 10.000 7900 0.003 V/V -0.001
7500
Rose Hill Fm
9900
5900 8000
7600 10000
0
6000 8100
Datum base 0
7700 Dayton Fm (Packer Shell)
ÒClinton/MedinaÓ/
10100
Cabot Head 6100
Tuscarora Ss
8200
7800 10200
6200 8300
Queenston Sh/
Cincinnatian undiv. TD=7887 10300
TD=7410
TD=8384
6300
10400
6400 Queenston Sh/
10500
Reedsville Sh undiv.
6500
-500 -500
10600
6600
10700
6700
10800
6800
10900
6900
11000
7000
-1000 -1000
11100
7100
11200
7200
11300
Gamma ray Neutron
7300
Bulk density
(no units) (no units)
11400
7400
6Ó caliper 16Ó 2.0 g/cc 3.0 g/cc 11500
7500
-1500 -1500
Utica Sh
11600
7600
ÒPacker ShellÓ
11700
7700
11800
7200
ÒClintonÓ Ss
7800
Trenton Ls 11900
7900
12000
8000
-2000 Black River Gp 12100
-2000
SILURIAN
8100
12200
Òcross-overÓ
Neutron
8200
12300
8300
12400
8400
7300 12500
8500 Utica Sh
-2500 -2500
Cabot Head Sh 12600
8600
ÒGull RiverÓ 12700
8700
Wells Creek Fm 12800
8800 Trenton Ls
Beekmantown Dol 12900
ORDOVICIAN
8900
Queenston Sh 13000
9000 Black River Gp
-3000 -3000
13100
9100
13200
Rose Run Ss 9200
TD = 7410
Knox Dol
13300
9300
Copper Ridge Dol 13400
9400
13500
ÒB-zoneÓ 9500
-3500 -3500
13600
9600
13700
9700
13800
Conasauga Gp 9800
ÒGull RiverÓ
13900
9900
Wells Creek Fm
14000
10000
-4000 -4000
14100
10100
14200
10200
14300
10300
14400
10400
14500
Knox Gp
Precambrian 10500
-4500 -4500
14600
10600
TD=10625 14700
14800
14900
15000
-5000 -5000
15100
15200
15300
Rose Run Ss
15400
15500
-5500 -5500
15600
15700
ÒB-zoneÓ
15800
15900
16000
-6000 -6000
16100
16200
16300
16400
16500
TD=16512
Figure 6.—Stratigraphic cross section oriented northwest-southeast across the AOR showing stratigraphic correlations and geophysical log signatures of deep
geologic units (Precambrian through the Rose Hill Formation). Datum is the base of the Dayton Formation (“Packer Shell”). See figure 2 for location of line.
Inset shows geophysical log from a Belmont County, Ohio well (API number 3401320485) illustrating gamma ray, density, and neutron curves for the lower
Silurian “Clinton-Medina” sandstone and “gas effect” at neutron/density “cross over.” A separate file containing this cross section, for detailed use and printing,
is included on the CD submitted with this report.METHODS 9 sea level) were used to create two structure contour maps on the top LOWEST UNDERGROUND SOURCE of the Berea and Oriskany Sandstones (figs. 7, 8). It should be noted OF DRINKING WATER that maps created solely from reported tops (and not maps created from geophysical log data) are less accurate because methods used The lowest potential underground source of drinking water to ascertain the information reported varied within and among drill- (USDW), as defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ing operations. (
10 GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
BEAVER
CARROLL
HANCOCK
ALLEGHENY
TUSCARAWAS
! JEFFERSON ! !
!
!
-6 0
!
!
0
!! !!
00
!! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! !
!!!
!!
! !! !
-3
!!! !!
!
! -6
HARRISON 00
! !
!
! !
! ! !!
!! !!!!!
! !!!!
!!!!
! !! !!
-500
!
!! ! !
BROOKE
!! !!!!
! !!
!!!
! ! !! ! !
! !
! !! !
! !
!! !
!! !
! ! !
! !
! !!!!! ! !
! !! !!!! ! !
! ! !!
! !!! !!!!!
! !
! !
! !
! ! !
!! ! ! !
! ! !
WASHINGTON
!
! !
!
! ! !! !
! !
! ! !
!! !
! !
! !
!
! !
! !
!
!
0
! ! !
!
-4 0
! !!
!! !
! !
! ! !
PENNSYLVANIA
!
!!!
! ! !! !!!! !
!! !! !
! ! !! !!
!!! !! !
!! !
! !! !
! !!!! !
!! ! !
! ! !
OHIO
! !
0
80
! ! ! ! !
! !
! !
-
! ! ! !
!!! ! !
OHIO
!
! ! !
! ! !
! ! ! !
! !! ! !
!
!
!
!! !
!
!
0
! ! !
! ! !
90
!
GUERNSEY
!
-
! ! ! !
! !
! ! !
! !! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
00
! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! !
! !! !
!
-6
! !!! ! ! !
! !!!
! ! ! !
!
! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! !!
! ! !
! ! ! !
!! ! ! !
!
! !
!
! ! !!! ! ! !
BELMONT
! !
00
! ! !
!
-1 0
! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! !!
! ! !! ! ! ! !
!! ! ! !!
!
!
! ! !! !
! !
!!!! !
!! !! ! ! ! !! !
! !
!
! !
! !
!
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !!
! !! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
00
! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!
!
! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! !
!
! ! ! ! !
-7
! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
0
! ! ! ! !
!
-110
! !! ! ! ! ! !!
! ! ! ! !! ! !
! !! ! ! !
!! ! ! !
! ! !! !
! ! !
! !! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! !
! ! !
!! ! !!!!!!
!! !
! ! !!!
!
!! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! !!!
!! !
! !
^
!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! !
!!! !!! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !
!
! ! !!! ! ! !! !!!!! !
! ! !!!! !!!!
!! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !
!! !! !
! !
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !
!! !! ! ! !
! ! ! !
!! !
! !
! !
! ! !! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! !
! ! !!! ! !! !! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! !
! ! !
!! ! !!!! ! !
!
! ! ! !! ! !!! !
! ! !! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !!! !!! !!
!! ! ! ! ! !
!! ! !! ! !
! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! !! !! !
! ! ! ! !! !
! ! !
!
!
GREENE
! ! !! ! ! !!
MARSHALL
! ! !! !
! !
! ! !
! !! ! ! !
! ! !!
! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !! !! ! !! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !
! ! !
! !!
!
! ! ! !!
! ! !!
! !! ! !! !
!!
!
!! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !
! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !
!! ! ! ! !! !! ! !
!! ! ! ! ! !
!!
!
!!!
!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !! !!
!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !!! !!!! ! ! !! ! !
!
! !
!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!
! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !
! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !
! !
!
!
! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! !
! !! ! !! !! !
! ! !
! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! !
!
! !
! !
!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !
! ! !
!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!! ! !!
! !! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !! ! ! ! !
! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !
!!
! !
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !
!! !! ! !
! ! ! ! !
!! !! !!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !! ! ! !!
! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !
! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! !! !
!! ! ! ! !! ! !!! !! !
! ! !
!! ! !! ! !!
NOBLE
! !
! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !!! ! !!
! !!
! !
!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!! !!!!!!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! !
!!
!
! ! !! ! !
! ! !! ! ! ! !!! !!!!!! ! !!!!
! ! !
! !
! !! !!
! !! !! !! !!! !!! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !! !!!
!
! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! !
! ! !! ! !
!!! ! !! !
! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!
!! ! ! !! !
!! ! ! ! ! !! !
0
! ! !
!!
! !! ! ! ! !! ! !
!
50
! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! !!
! ! ! ! ! !
!! ! !! !!
! ! !! ! ! ! ! !
!
!!
! !!! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!!
-1
! ! ! !! !
!!!! !
! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
! ! ! ! !! ! !
! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!
!! ! ! ! ! !
MONROE
! !
! !!! ! ! ! ! !
!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! !
! !! ! !
! ! ! !! !
! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! !
! !! !
!! ! ! !!! ! ! !!
! ! ! ! !
! !!! ! !!! ! !! ! !!
! !
!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! !
!! ! !! ! ! ! !
! !
! ! !! !
! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !
!! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !
!! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !!! !! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !!!! ! !
! !!!
!! !!! ! !! !
! ! !! !
!
!! ! !!
!! !
! !
!!
!! ! !
!
! !!
! ! ! !
! ! !! ! !
MONONGALIA
! !
0
! ! !! !! !
!!!!!!!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !
! !! ! ! !!
! !! ! ! ! !
40
! !! ! !!! ! ! !!
! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!
! !! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! ! !!
!! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !
! !!!! !! !
-1
! !!! ! !!!! ! !
!! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !
! !! !!! ! ! !
! !!!! ! !! !!! ! !!!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! !! !
!
!! ! !! !!
!!! ! ! !
!!! ! !! !! ! ! !
!
! !!!!! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !! !!
! !! ! ! ! ! !
0
! ! !! ! ! ! !
00
0
!
130
!
! !!! ! ! !! ! ! !
60
!! !! ! ! ! ! !
2 -
!! !
! ! ! ! ! !
!
-1
! ! !! !
-1
!! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !
! ! ! !
! ! !! !
! ! ! !
0
! !! ! !
-150 Explanation
!! !
!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!! ! !
WETZEL
! !
! ! !!! ! ! ! !
!! ! !! ! !
!
! !!! ! !
!! ! ! !
! !! ! ! ! !
!
! !
! !! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! !! !
^
!
! !
!!! ! ! !!!! !
!!
Burger Coal Power Plant
! ! ! !
!
! !! ! ! ! !
! ! !
! ! !!
! !
! !! !!! ! !! !
! !
!! !! ! !! !!! !
WEST
! !!! !!
!
!!! ! !
!! !
!
MARION
!
!
Wells
VIRGINIA 500 ft. Index contour
WASHINGTON TYLER 100 ft Contour
-250
PLEASANTS -1700
TAYLOR
³
HARRISON
DODDRIDGE
10 5 0 10 20 30 Miles
WOOD
RITCHIE
10 5 0 10 20 30 40 Kilometers BARBOUR
Figure 7.—Structure contour map on the top of the Berea Sandstone within the Burger AOR. Map computer contoured from formation tops taken from driller’s
records.GENERAL GEOLOGIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION 11
!
! !
! !! HANCOCK
! ! ! ! !
!
!
!
!
!
! !
! ALLEGHENY
! ! !
!
! !
! !
!
TUSCARAWAS
! !
!
!
! ! ! !
! ! ! !
HARRISON
!
JEFFERSON
00
! ! !
BROOKE
!
-3 0
! !
! ! ! !
!
! !
2 00
!
! ! !!
!
-5
!
!
!
! !
00
!
-3 4
! !
! ! !
-3200
!
!
! !
WASHINGTON
!
! !
! !
! !
!
! !
! ! !
! ! !
!
!
!
OHIO
00
!
!
!
-6 0
!
! ! ! !
!
GUERNSEY
! !
! !
!
00
!
PENNSYLVANIA
-5 0
! !
!
BELMONT OHIO
! !
0
-6 4 0
! !
!
!
00
!
00
-3 6
-3 8
^
!
!!
!
!
!!
!
! !
!
00
!
-4 0
!
!
MARSHALL GREENE
! !
0
20
!
! -6
!
!
00
-4 6
NOBLE !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
00
!
!!!
-6 8
!!!
!
!
!
! !
!!!!
MONROE ! !
!
!
00
!
! !
-4 4
00
!
MONONGALIA
-4 2
!
!
!
0
!
-5 4 0
!
!
WETZEL !
-6 6
!
-5800
00
!
0
!
-4 8 0
00
!
WEST !
-5 6
!
! !
MARION
!
!
VIRGINIA
!
WASHINGTON
!
!
!
!
TYLER
!!!!
!
!
!
! !
Explanation
PLEASANTS
^ Burger Coal Power Plant
!
Wells TAYLOR
200 ft Contour
HARRISON
DODDRIDGE 1000 ft Index contour
³
WOOD
10 5 0 10 20 30 Miles -2900
RITCHIE
BARBOUR
10 5 0 10 20 30 40 Kilometers -7000
WIRT LEWIS
Figure 8.—Structure contour map on the top of the Oriskany Sandstone within the Burger AOR. Map computer contoured from formation tops taken from
driller’s records.12 GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
2 Harrison Jefferson Brooke
Y2
7
Y
HW
HW
US
E
AT
ST
U
S
H
W
Y
25
0
WASHINGTON
Ohio 40
Y
HW
US
US HW Y 4 0
I 70 I 470 I 470
US HWY 250
Belmont
^
Marshall
GREENE
7
Y
HW
E
AT
ST
Monroe
Monongalia
EXPLANATION
Wetzel ^ Burger Coal Power Plant
2
Rivers
Y
HW State Roads
³
E
AT
ST 20-mile radius area of review
Marion
5 2.5 0 5 10 Miles County boundary
Washington Tyler OH Underground Mines
5 2.5 0 5 10 15 Kilometers
WV Underground Mines
Figure 9.—Map showing the locations of abandoned underground mines within the Burger AOR.GENERAL GEOLOGIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION 13
M
Explanation of generalized lithologies
Ri id C EGR
ft on
Sy ti
ste nen
Igneous m t
EGR o n s
t ain
Igneous and siliciclastics
ra m
nC o
Igneous and metamorphic
D elin
e
tia lle -shor
en i
Siliciclastics and carbonates eo
Pal
r v
EGR u en
La Gr
Hypothetical river system
Paleo-shoreline
gh
East Continent
ou
Normal fault Rift Basin
Tr
LCM me M
Ro LC
Laurentian Continental Margin
EGR Eastern Granite Rhyolite Province
Figure 10.—Map showing the locations of major geologic elements (paleogeography) during early Cambrian time (from Baranoski, in prep.).
tinent Rift System in central and western Ohio; however, few deep- PALEOZOIC STRATIGRAPHY
seated faults are known within the Precambrian in eastern Ohio (fig. AND GEOLOGIC HISTORY
11). Some Precambrian faulting is noted on the COCORP seismic
profile in northern Belmont County, but how far these faults might Regional and localized areas of recurrent crustal movement of the
extend southward is unknown. Precambrian basement and later regional uplifts, subsidence, and
Two regional structural features developed on the eastern Lau- compressional forces affected the distribution, character and thick-
rentian craton, which was the deeply eroded Grenville Province: the ness of Paleozoic rock units (Beardsley and Cable, 1983; Riley and
Rome Trough (McGuire and Howell, 1963) and the Appalachian others, 1993). Thus, knowledge of deep-rooted faulting is important
Basin (fig. 10). The Rome Trough, which was first described by when developing deep injection operations. Thickness of Paleozoic
Woodward (1961) as a “Cambrian coastal declivity,” is considered Appalachian Basin rock units ranges from approximately 3,000 ft in
an Early to Middle Cambrian-age failed interior rift (Harris, 1978). central Ohio to approximately 14,000 ft in southeastern Ohio, and
The Rome Trough is a regional northeast-trending structure extend- may reach as much as 45,000 ft in parts of central Pennsylvania.
ing from southwestern Pennsylvania, where it is termed the Olin Ba- The Paleozoic stratigraphic column of rocks present within the AOR
sin (Wagner, 1976), to northern Tennessee; it is very prominent on range in age from Middle Cambrian to Late Pennsylvanian (fig. 3)
magnetic intensity maps (King and Zietz, 1978). Sparse deep-well and represent a variety of sedimentary lithologies (carbonates, evap-
data and seismic reflection data correlate to this magnetic trend and orites, shale, sandstone, siltstone, k-bentonite, chert, coal, etc).
indicate the Rome Trough is an asymmetric failed-rift zone with the Analyzing the stratigraphy of the Lower and Middle Cambrian
deepest portion on the northwest side (Ryder and others, 1998; Gao in the tri-state area (Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia) is par-
and others, 2000). It is thought that the western boundary faults of ticularly problematic because of sparse deep-well data and a lack of
the trough are located approximately 8 miles southeast of the Burger continuous cores from the region. Another difficulty in analyzing the
site (fig. 11). However, there is a possibility that smaller normal stratigraphy has been a lack of Cambrian paleontological studies to
faults (down to the southeast) parallel to and associated with this adequately assign age placements of lithostratigraphic correlations
system will be found closer to the site, stepping-down to the major (Babcock, 1994). However, a recent investigation of all available
border faults. continuous core and geophysical logs from deep wells in Ohio and
The Appalachian Basin did not begin to take on its present con- adjacent areas has resulted in an updated Cambrian nomenclature
figuration until after Middle Cambrian time following the major and stratigraphy (Baranoski, in prep.). The Cambrian stratigraphy
movement of the Rome Trough. The Rome Trough is thought to and nomenclature used in this report is from this ongoing project at
have controlled, in part, the formation and orientation of the north- the DGS and has not been formally published. This recent investiga-
ern Appalachian Basin. The subsidence of the Appalachian Basin tion shows that the Mount Simon Sandstone pinches out in central
culminated with the Alleghenian Orogeny and development of the Ohio, the Rome Formation is not present in southeastern Ohio, and
Appalachian structural front. the Conasauga Formation (Janssens, 1973) has been redefined to the14 GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT OF THE BURGER POWER PLANT AND VICINITY
FOREST
GEAUGA FOREST
00
CUYAHOGA
0
-3
ERIE VENANGO
LORAIN TRUMBULL MERCER
CLARION
00
-40
HURON PORTAGE JEFFERSON
MEDINA SUMMIT
MAHONING LAWRENCE
BUTLER
ASHLAND WAYNE ARMSTRONG
STARK
COLUMBIANA
BEAVER
RICHLAND INDIANA
PENNSYLVANIA
HOLMES 00
-90
OHIO CARROLL HANCOCK
ALLEGHENY
-5000
TUSCARAWAS JEFFERSON
KNOX
0
-800
00
WESTMORELAND
0
COSHOCTON
-10
HARRISON BROOKE
0
00
-16
WASHINGTON
00
OHIO
0
-12
LICKING
GUERNSEY BELMONT
BURGER POWER PLANT FAYETTE
MUSKINGUM
SOMERSET
0
-2600
00
00
GREENE
-140
0
-11
MARSHALL
NOBLE
PERRY MONROE
000
MONONGALIA
-15
MORGAN WETZEL
-6000
0
00
GARRETT
0
4
0
00
-2
00
HOCKING
3
MARION PRESTON
-17
-1
00
WASHINGTON TYLER
0
000
-25
-22
MINERAL
0
00
PLEASANTS
00
TAYLOR
-23
0
ATHENS
0
-21
00
HARRISON
-19
DODDRIDGE
0
00
VINTON WOOD Explanation
-18
RITCHIE WEST
0
00
BARBOUR TUCKER GRANT
-20
MEIGS faults_pcmb selection
VIRGINIA
WIRT Faults
0
-700
LEWIS
other CO2 sources
GILMER
UPSHUR Burger Power Plant
JACKSON CALHOUN
GALLIA RANDOLPHIndex Contours
MASON
Contours
ROANE BRAXTON PENDLETON
20 10 0 20 40 Miles High : -2000
LAWRENCE PUTNAM WEBSTER
CLAY60 Kilometers Low : -49000
CABELL 20 10 0 KANAWHA
20 40
NICHOLAS POCAHONTAS
Figure 11.—Structure contour map on the top of the Precambrian unconformity within the Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia region. Also shown is the
location of major (>100,000 tons per year) point sources of CO2. (Map elements taken from Wickstrom and others, 2005.)GENERAL GEOLOGIC SITE CHARACTERIZATION 15 Conasauga Group (Ryder, 1992; Ryder and others, 1996). The Cona- the Wells Creek provides a good seal unit above the Knox uncon- sauga Group includes the Maryville Formation (including the “lower formity as evidenced by numerous oil and gas pools found within unit”), Nolichucky Shale, and Maynardville Limestone (fig. 12). Knox erosional remnants throughout the region. Shallow-marine The earliest record of sedimentation within the region is found sedimentation continued through the Middle and Upper Ordovi- within the Rome Trough sequence of rocks in West Virginia and cian with deposition of the Black River Group, Trenton Limestone, Kentucky. Deposition of this sequence began with the lowermost and the Cincinnatian group of shales and limestones. The clastic Paleozoic basal sandstone (arkose) in the Late Precambrian-Early sediments of the Cincinnati group were associated with the Taconic Cambrian time. Rifting of the eastern Laurentian continent result- Orogeny of eastern North America; its compressional forces caused ed in the opening of the Iapetus Ocean (Harris, 1978; Scotese and a deepening of the seas covering the region. McKerrow, 1991). Subsidence of the Rome Trough continued with Marine sedimentation in the region temporarily ceased during deposition of the Shady Dolomite and Rome Formation during the Late Ordovician-Early Silurian time as another major regression Lower Cambrian and continued through Middle Cambrian with began and a regional unconformity developed on top of the Cin- deposition of the Conasauga Group. The pre-Knox section of the cinnati group. By the end of the Ordovician, the western margin Rome Trough is older and greatly thickened when compared to the of the Appalachian Basin was delineated by the Indiana-Ohio Plat- same intervals of the stable cratonic sequence (fig. 13). As much as form and the Cincinnati and Findlay Arches. As Silurian time pro- 10,000 ft of pre-Knox sediments accumulated in the Rome Trough gressed, repeated fluctuations in sea level flooded and retreated from (Ryder, 1992; Ryder and others, 1996). the coastal lowlands on the western flank of the Appalachian Ba- From the latest Precambrian through most of Middle Cambrian sin. Silurian-age Tuscarora Sandstone and other clastic equivalents time, eastern Ohio and northwestern Pennsylvania remained an (“Clinton” and Medina sandstones) were deposited in near-shore to emergent area as a stable cratonic platform (fig. 10). During this marginal marine deposition above this unconformity surface at the time, the erosion of the exposed Grenville basement complex in onset of another marine transgression. A mixture of clastics and car- Ohio and northwestern Pennsylvania and West Virginia supplied bonates followed with deposition of the Rose Hill Formation and clastic sediment to the Rome Trough while carbonates dominated its equivalents and the overlying Lockport Dolomite, Salina Group, east of the trough. Scattered seismic reflection data made available Bass Islands Dolomite and Helderburg Formation. Another period for viewing in Ohio indicates local areas where Cambrian sediments of regression is marked by an unconformity within Lower Devonian older than the Maryville Formation “lower unit” may be present in strata and is followed by a period of transgression and subsequent structurally low areas. Near the end of the Middle Cambrian, seas deposition of the Oriskany Sandstone, overlying Onondaga Lime- had completely transgressed the exposed Precambrian basement stone, and shales of the Hamilton Group (marking the onset of the complex in Ohio, resulting in near-shore to marginal marine deposi- Acadian Orogeny). tion of Mount Simon Sandstone in western Ohio while marginal ma- During the Late Devonian Acadian Orogeny, tropical seas again rine and marine deposition of the Maryville Formation (Conasauga inundated the region with deposition of the West Falls and Java Group) occurred in eastern Ohio. The Mount Simon Sandstone, Formations, and the Ohio Shale in a partially restricted marine ba- which is a 200 to 300 ft thick, highly permeable, porous quartz sand- sin. The overlying Bedford Shale and Berea Sandstone represent stone in western Ohio, pinches out and/or is in facies transition with the progradation of gray shales and sandstones over this restricted the lowermost part of the Maryville Formation, mainly comprised basin. An Early Mississippian marine transgression resulted in the of dolomite, in the eastern portion of Ohio. It is unknown if there is deposition of the Sunbury Shale. Renewed mountain building in significant sandstone within this lower interval in the tri-state area. eastern North America with the Alleghenian Orogeny during the Deposition of the Conasauga Group continued into the Upper Cam- Early Mississippian resulted in delta progradation and the deposi- brian with a minor marine regression represented by Nolichucky tion of the Cuyahoga and Logan Formations, followed by a minor Shale clastics and carbonates, followed by a transgression with de- marine transgression with deposition of the Greenbrier Limestone position of the Maynardville Limestone. and equivalents. Continued mountain building to the east resulted Open-marine conditions continued with deposition of the Knox in extensive fluvial clastic deposition, including coals with minor Dolomite. As used in this report, the Knox Dolomite is subdivided limestone accumulations throughout the Pennsylvanian. in ascending order into the Copper Ridge dolomite, the Rose Run sandstone, and the Beekmantown dolomite (figs. 3, 12). Minor re- DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL gressions took place with input of clastics in the “B-zone,” and to a SALINE INJECTION ZONES greater degree, the Rose Run sandstone. A major regression took place during the Middle Ordovician with Stratigraphic analysis of geologic units deeper than 2,500 ft at the the onset of the regional Knox unconformity. An extensive erosional Burger site indicates up to ten deep-saline formations have some surface developed on the emergent Knox carbonate platform (Riley level of potential as injection zones (fig. 3). In ascending order, and others, 1993). Paleotopography reached a maximum of approxi- these include the “lower unit” of the Maryville Formation of the mately 150 ft on the karstic terrain of the Knox Dolomite (Janssens, Conasauga Group, Copper Ridge Dolomite (both vugular porosity 1973). Tropical seas returned to the Ohio region and inundated the zones and the “B” zone sand within this unit), Rose Run sandstone, subsiding Knox platform in the Middle Ordovician. The St. Peter Beekmantown dolomite, “Clinton” sandstone, Lockport Dolomite, sandstone and Wells Creek Formation represent the next major ma- porous carbonate zones within the Salina Group, Bass Islands Dolo- rine transgression; these units were deposited on the regional Knox mite, Oriskany Sandstone, and black shales of the Hamilton Group unconformity surface. The St. Peter is a very fine grained, well-sort- and West Falls Formation. ed quartz arenite that forms the basal part (where the unit is present) Unfortunately, although many oil and gas wells have been drilled of the Wells Creek Formation. The St. Peter increases in thickness in the AOR, very few wells have been drilled deeper than the On- from the stable craton into the Rome Trough (Humphreys and Wat- ondaga Limestone (shallower than the Oriskany). Thus, little to no son, 1996). The Wells Creek Formation is a dolomitic shale that near-field data are available for most of the potential saline aquifers locally contains beds of limestone and sandy dolomite. In general, at the site. Further, aside from standard geophysical logs, relatively
You can also read
