The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Assessing sensitivity to well leakage from three years of continuous reservoir pressure monitoring during CO2 injection at Cranfield, MS, USA
Open accessOverview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“pressure changes in aquifers above the reservoir indicate leakage in the overlying aquifer”
From An Overview of the Status and Challenges of CO2 Storage in Minerals and Geological Formations (2019) · cites this paper as Meckel et al., 2013
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- Avci, 1994, Evaluation of flow leakage through abandoned wells and boreholes, Water Resources Research, 30, 2565, 10.1029/94WR00952 · DOI
- Birkholzer, 2009, Large-scale impact of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers: a sensitivity study on pressure response in stratified systems, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 3, 181, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2008.08.002 · DOI · Paper page
- Bourdet, 1989, Use of pressure derivative in well test interpretation, Society of Petroleum Engineers Formation Evaluation, 4, 293, 10.2118/12777-PA · DOI
- Celia, 2011, Field-scale application of semi-analytical model for estimation of CO2 and brine leakage along old wells, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 5, 257, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.10.005 · DOI
- Chapuis, 1998, Detecting a hydraulic short circuit along an observation well with the recovery curve of a pumping test in a confined aquifer: method and example, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 35, 790, 10.1139/t98-046 · DOI
- Chiaramonte, 2008, Seal integrity and feasibility of CO2 sequestration in the teapot dome EOR pilot: geomechanical site characterization, Environmental Geology, 54, 1667, 10.1007/s00254-007-0948-7 · DOI
- Gasda, 2008, Determining effective wellbore permeability from a field pressure test: a numerical analysis of detection limits, Environmental Geology, 54, 1207, 10.1007/s00254-007-0903-7 · DOI
- Gringarten, 2008, From straight lines to deconvolution: the evolution of the state of the art in well test analysis, SPE Reservoir Evaluation and Engineering, 11, 41, 10.2118/102079-PA · DOI
- Hosseini, 2013, Far-field numerical modeling of a multiphase water–oil–CO2 system with a water–CO2 system: accepted, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control., 10, 88, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.06.001 · DOI
- Javandel, 1988, Hydrologic detection of abandoned wells near proposed injection wells for hazardous-waste disposal, Water Resources Research, 24, 261, 10.1029/WR024i002p00261 · DOI
- Kuchuk, F., 2009. Radius of investigation for reserve estimation from pressure transient well tests. Paper SPE 120515, SPE Middle East oil and gas show and conference, Bahrain, 15–18 March. · DOI
- Mancini, 1987, Environments of deposition and petroleum geology of the Tuscaloosa Group (Upper Cretaceous), South Carlton and Pollard fields, southwestern Alabama, AAPG Bulletin, 73, 1128
- Mathias, 2009, Approximate solutions for pressure buildup during CO2 injection in brine aquifers, Transparent Porous Media, 79, 265, 10.1007/s11242-008-9316-7 · DOI
- Mathias, 2011, Role of partial miscibility on pressure buildup due to constant rate injection of CO2 into closed and open brine aquifers, Water Resources Research, 47, 11, 10.1029/2011WR011051 · DOI
- Nicot, 2008, Evaluation of large-scale CO2 storage on fresh-water sections of aquifers: an example from the texas gulf coast basin, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2, 593, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2008.03.004 · DOI
- Nordbotten, 2005, Semianalytical solution for CO2 leakage through an abandoned well, Environmental Science and Technology, 39, 602, 10.1021/es035338i · DOI
- Theis, 1935, The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and rate and duration of discharge of a well using ground water storage, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 16, 519, 10.1029/TR016i002p00519 · DOI
- van der Meer, 2008, Calculating subsurface CO2 storage capacities, The Leading Edge, 27, 502, 10.1190/1.2907182 · DOI
- Zhou, 2008, A method for quick assessment of CO2 storage capacity in closed and semi-closed saline formations, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2, 626, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2008.02.004 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Overview of the Status and Challenges of CO2 Storage in Minerals and Geological Formations
Kelemen, P., Benson, S. M., Pilorgé, H., Psarras, P., & Wilcox, J. (2019) · Frontiers in Climate · doi:10.3389/fclim.2019.00009 · Cited by 587
“, 2014), but pressure changes in aquifers above the reservoir indicate leakage in the overlying aquifer (Meckel et al., 2013; Kim and Hosseini, 2014; Cameron et al., 2016).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Meckel, T. A., Zeidouni, M., Hovorka, S. D., & Hosseini, S. A.
- Affiliations
- Bureau of Economic Geology (US)
- Corresponding author
- Meckel, T.A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-10
- Volume
- 18
- Pages
- 439-448
- ISSN
- 1750-5836 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2059571524
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 2.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- International journal of greenhouse gas control (publishedVersion)
- Texas Digital Library (University of Texas)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Energy
- National Energy Technology Laboratory
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › CO2 Sequestration and Geologic Interactions
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Fuel Technology › Reservoir Engineering and Simulation Methods
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
- Keywords
- well leakage, CO2 sequestration, reservoir pressure monitoring, pressure transients, storage integrity, sensitivity analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
