There are sometimes large variations in the requirements concerning modelling, risk assessmentA process intended to calculate or estimate the risk to a given target, part of a risk management system, monitoringMeasurement and surveillance activities necessary for ensuring safe and reliable operation of a CGS project (storage integrity), and for estimating emission reductions and safety demonstration between the different regulations. However the standard is that these requirements are met already during application in an after-injectionThe process of using pressure to force fluids down wells plan, approved by the competent authorities. There are few prescriptions of the requirements during the closure and post-closurePeriod after transfer of responsibility to the competent authority stadiums, as there are no projects within this time-frame yet, but better definitions of necessary tasks would lead to better understanding on the operator's part.
In general not requiring any particular monitoringMeasurement and surveillance activities necessary for ensuring safe and reliable operation of a CGS project (storage integrity), and for estimating emission reductions techniques allows for an application of updated technologies and methodologies. OSPARConvention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic, which was adopted at Paris on 22 September 1992 FRAM, which provides a really good basis for modelling and risk assessmentA process intended to calculate or estimate the risk to a given target, part of a risk management system, specifies instead the outcomes of the risk assessmentA process intended to calculate or estimate the risk to a given target, part of a risk management system which will lead to desired results in a flexible environment.
CO2Carbon dioxide safety can be split up in three main parts: demonstration of no leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column, demonstration of conformity with prediction models, demonstration of long-term stability. An additional requirement may also be the demonstration of no possible environmental endangerment. Demonstrating no leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column is dependent on the used monitoringMeasurement and surveillance activities necessary for ensuring safe and reliable operation of a CGS project (storage integrity), and for estimating emission reductions system, which should be suited for the site-specific requirements. So far no regulation permits leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column, but this condition is severely discussed as it may be necessary to allow minor leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column in some cases. This discussion is also linked to the definition of leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column, which also varies within the regulations. Furthermore there is an obvious limitation of demonstrating the safety by comparing model predictions and monitoringMeasurement and surveillance activities necessary for ensuring safe and reliable operation of a CGS project (storage integrity), and for estimating emission reductions. Diffuse leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column may be found but not detected with the used monitoringMeasurement and surveillance activities necessary for ensuring safe and reliable operation of a CGS project (storage integrity), and for estimating emission reductions time interval. There are also a number of different geological models or scenarios matching the observed data but with different riskConcept that denotes the product of the probability of a hazard and the subsequent consequence of the associated event factor, therefore any conformity with the observed data may not demonstrate safety.
And there are still certain points which will need to be addressed during the development of the regulations for closure and post-closurePeriod after transfer of responsibility to the competent authority of CO2Carbon dioxide storage(CO2) A process for retaining captured CO2, so that it does not reach the atmosphere. Is any leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column acceptable? What about the environmental impact and the leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column rates? If diffuse leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column occurs with a small amount of CO2Carbon dioxide, remediation may be unfeasible, but what if the environmental effects were minor? Is the requirement of no leakage(in CO2 storage) The escape of injected fluid from the storage formation to the atmosphere or water column too restrictive?