eLibrary
  • Home
  • Sources
  • Search
  • About

Geological CO2 Storage Safety: A Comprehensive Review of Leakage Risks, Assessment Methods, and Mitigation Strategies

Hao Xue
World Scientific Research Journal, (2026), Vol.12, No.9, pp.190-197
Published: October 15, 2026
DOI: 10.6911/WSRJ.202609_12(9).0021
PDF: Download Full Text PDF
Abstract

Anthropogenic CO₂ emissions elevate atmospheric carbon levels and induce severe global climate risks, as documented in IPCC assessment reports. Carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) is critical for climate mitigation, yet large‑scale geological CO₂ storage deployment is hindered by incomplete understanding of time‑dependent trapping behaviours and non‑standardized risk‑assessment protocols. This review aims to synthesize recent advances in geological carbon storage and deliver practical technical references for site‑related engineering practice. Four typical geological storage formations are reviewed, and the temporal evolution of multiple CO₂ trapping mechanisms is analysed to interpret long‑term sequestration stability. Representative risk‑assessment workflows, including the SPR framework, probabilistic leakage evaluation, numerical simulation and uncertainty analysis are systematically compiled. Results reveal that structural, residual, solubility and mineral trapping exhibit time‑varying relative contributions governing reservoir‑specific storage security; coupled deterministic‑probabilistic risk workflows mitigate decision biases during site screening. This review provides actionable guidance for site screening, monitoring deployment and regulatory compliance, supporting safe large‑scale implementation of geological CO₂ storage within CCUS systems.

Keywords: Geological CO₂ storage; trapping mechanisms; risk assessment; Source–Pathway–Receptor framework.
APA Citation: Hao Xue (2026). Geological CO2 Storage Safety: A Comprehensive Review of Leakage Risks, Assessment Methods, and Mitigation Strategies. World Scientific Research Journal, 12(9), 190-197. https://doi.org/10.6911/WSRJ.202609_12(9).0021

References

  1. Benson, S. M., & Surles, T. (2006). Carbon dioxide capture and storage: Status and pathways. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(46), 17293–17300. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0607185103
  2. IPCC. (2005). Carbon dioxide capture and storage. Cambridge University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/srccs_wholereport-1.pdf
  3. CGS Europe. (2012). Knowledge report: Site selection and characterization for CO₂ storage. http://repository.cgseurope.net/eng/cgseurope/knowledge-repository/key-reports/evaluation/6/2/3.aspx
  4. CSLF Risk Assessment Task Force. (2009). Phase I final report: Risk assessment for geological storage of CO₂. https://fossil.energy.gov/archives/cslf/sites/default/files/documents/tg_PhaseIFinalReportRiskAssessmentTaskForce1009.pdf
  5. Al-Khdheeawi, E. A., & Mahdi, H. S. (2023). Deep saline aquifers for CO₂ geological storage: A review of capacity estimation and site selection. Energy Reports, 9, 2056–2072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.08.072
  6. Ringrose, P. S., & Meckel, T. A. (2023). Depleted oil and gas fields as CO₂ storage sites: Leveraging legacy infrastructure. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 128, 103920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2023.103920
  7. Hassanpouryouzband, A., Joonaki, E., & Haszeldine, R. S. (2020). CO₂ storage in unmineable coal seams: Adsorption mechanisms and site screening criteria. Fuel, 279, 118478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118478
  8. Snæbjörnsdóttir, S. Ó., Sigfússon, B., & Oelkers, E. H. (2024). Rapid mineral carbonation in basalt formations: Field evidence and reaction kinetics. Nature Geoscience, 17(2), 128–136. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-023-01121-9
  9. Quintessa Limited. (2004). Online database for CO₂ storage features, events & processes. https://www.quintessa.org/latest-news/online-database-for-co2-storage-features-events-and-processes
  10. Gurwicz, A., Chen, J., Gutman, D. H., & Gildin, E. (2025). Assessing risk in long-term CO₂ storage under uncertainty via survival analysis-based surrogates. SPE Journal, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.2118/222449-PA
  11. SHARP Project. (2024). SHARP project – an integrated approach for assessing CO₂ storage containment risks. AMiner. https://www.aminer.cn/pub/65ebd79c13fb2c6cf635c18a
  12. Jing, M., Li, Q., Liu, G., & Xue, Q. (2024). Quantitative assessment of CO₂ leakage risk in geologic carbon storage management. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, 14(6), 1068–1091. https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.2309
  13. Vasylkivska, V., Lackey, G., & Dilmore, R. (2021). NRAP-Open-IAM: A flexible open-source integrated-assessment-model for geologic carbon storage risk assessment. Environmental Modelling & Software, 143, 105114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2021.105114
  14. Moopen, M., Vasylkivska, V., Dilmore, R., & Oldenburg, C. (2024). Probabilistic wellbore leakage assessment for California's geologic CO₂ storage Certificate of Permanence using NRAP-Open-IAM. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 139, 104172. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583624000825
  15. Brown, C. F., Lackey, G., Mitchell, N., et al. (2023). Integrating risk assessment methods for carbon storage: A case study for the Quest Carbon Capture and Storage Facility. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control (Revised manuscript). https://www.osti.gov/pages/servlets/purl/2274889
  16. Soltanian, M. R., et al. (2019). Multicomponent reactive transport of carbon dioxide in fluvial heterogeneous aquifers. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 65, 212–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2019.03.017
  17. Mukhopadhyay, S., Doughty, C., Bacon, D. H., et al. (2013). Preliminary model-comparison results from the Sim-SEQ project using TOUGH2, STOMP, Eclipse, and VESA approach. OSTI.GOV, PNNL-SA-89092. https://osti.gov/biblio/1110468
  18. Soltanian, M. R., et al. (2016). Simulating in-zone chemistry changes from injection time to longer periods of CO₂ storage. Environmental Earth Sciences, 75(20), 1389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-6153-9
  19. Hosseinzadeh, S., Abdollahi, R., Salimzadeh, S., & Haghighi, M. (2024). Three-dimensional coupled temporal geomechanical model for fault-reactivation and surface-deformation evaluation during reservoir depletion and CO₂ sequestration. Sustainability, 16(19), 8482. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198482
  20. Hawez, H. K., & Asim, T. (2024). Impact of regional pressure dissipation on carbon capture and storage projects: A comprehensive review. Energies, 17(8), 1889. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17081889
  21. Oladyshkin, S., & Nowak, W. (2012). Data-driven uncertainty quantification using arbitrary polynomial chaos. Water Resources Research, 48(11), W11509. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011473
  22. Köppel, M., Franzelin, F., Kröker, I., et al. (2018). Comparison of data-driven uncertainty quantification methods for a carbon dioxide storage benchmark. CoRR, abs/1802.03064. https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.03064
  23. Oladyshkin, S., Class, H., Helmig, R., & Nowak, W. (2011). Polynomial response surfaces for probabilistic risk assessment and risk control via robust design. https://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/35515.pdf
  24. SPE. (2022). CO₂ storage capacity prediction in deep saline aquifers: Uncertainty and global sensitivity analysis. SPE Journal. https://search.spe.org/i2kweb/SPE/doc/onepetro:B2796CE4
  25. Ashraf, M., Oladyshkin, S., Class, H., & Nowak, W. (2013). Geological storage of CO₂: Global sensitivity analysis and risk assessment using arbitrary polynomial chaos expansion. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 19, 704–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.07.014
  26. Chen, B., et al. (2012). Modeling the performance of large scale CO₂ storage systems: A comparison of different sensitivity analysis methods. National Risk Assessment Partnership, NETL Technical Report NRAP TRS III 002 2012. https://www.netl.doe.gov/projects/files/ModelingthePerformanceof%20LargeScaleCO2StorageSystemsAComparisonofDifferentSensitivity_102412.pdf
  27. Wang, H., et al. (2025). Failure analysis–informed risk assessment framework for geological carbon storage using numerical simulation and machine learning. SPE Journal. https://doi.org/10.2118/231438-PA
  28. Zhang, Y. J., Yang, Y., Gong, X. L., et al. (2025). Numerical simulation and parameter global sensitivity analysis of CO₂ geological storage and utilization in oil-water mixed layers. China Environmental Science, (8). https://cnki.net
  29. Moopen, M., Vasylkivska, V., Dilmore, R., & Oldenburg, C. (2024). Probabilistic wellbore leakage assessment for California's geologic CO₂ storage Certificate of Permanence using NRAP-Open-IAM. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 139, 104172. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583624000825
© 2026 eLibrary · Stand on the shoulders of giants