www.slb.com/carbonservices

Review of the Petrophysics for the Cranfield Phase III Project

Michael Carney – Subsurface Technical Manager Schlumberger Carbon Services

12 March 2013

Any interpretation, research, analysis, data, results, estimates, or recommendation furnished with the services or otherwise communicated by Schlumberger to customer at any time in connection with the services are opinions based on inferences from measurements, empirical relationships and/or assumptions, which inferences, empirical relationships and/or assumptions are not infallible, and with respect to which professionals in the industry may differ. Accordingly, Schlumberger cannot and does not warrant the accuracy, correctness or completeness of any such interpretation, research, analysis, data, results, estimates or recommendation. Customer acknowledges that it is accepting the services "as is", that Schlumberger makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, of any kind or description in respect thereto. Specifically, customer acknowledges that Schlumberger does not warrant that any interpretation, research, analysis, data, results, estimates, or recommendation is fit for a particular purpose, including but not limited to compliance with any government request or regulatory requirement. Customer further acknowledges that such services are delivered with the explicit understanding and agreement that any action taken based on the services received shall be at its own risk and responsibility and no claim shall be made against Schlumberger as a consequence thereof.

© 2013 Schlumberger. All rights reserved.

An asterisk is used throughout this presentation to denote a mark of Schlumberger. Other company, product, and service names are the properties of their respective owners.

2

Presentation Overview

!!Project Overview !!Summary of Data !! Interpretation Results !!Discussion on the Integration, Results and “What it all means”

3

Regional Overview of Cranfield

Project Area

4

Cranfield Cross Section

West East

5

CFU Detail Area of Study Well Configuration

!"#! !$! !%!

$$&#'(! ")*#'(!

F2 & F3 are 2° down dip of F1

West East

6

Tuscaloosa Fm.

Logging Program – Cranfield Phase III DAS

Openhole Logging: CFU 31 F#1 CFU 31 F#2 CFU 31 F#3

Date Jun 6, 2009 Aug 18, 2009 Jul 10, 2009 Logs run Platform Express* Platform Express Platform Express

Sonic Scanner* CMR*, Sonic Scanner Sonic Scanner Other data Core Core

7

Cased Hole Logging: A base RST* reservoir saturation tool log was run in all 3 wells. Starting on 12/1/09, 250 tons/day of CO2 were injected into F1. On 12/19/09 the rate was increased to 500 tons/day. Injection continued for nine months. RST logs were made during the injection period as follows:

CFU 31 F#1 CFU 31 F#2 CFU 31 F#3 Cemet Eval CBL USIT/CBL+AIT USIT/CBL+AIT RST 1 (base): 11/30/09 11/27/09 12/12/09 RST 2: N/A 12/15/09 12/15/09 RST 3: N/A 12/30/09 12/30/09 RST 4: 9/7/2010 9/9/2010 9/8/2010 After Killing Well AIT, Sonic AIT, Sonic

Observation Well Construction

8

CFU 31 F#2 CFU 31 F#3

USIT & CBL – Standard Processing (9,550’-10,640’) CFU 31 F#2

9

GR-QC Diag Amp Casing Int Rad Thick Thick Imped BI Z map Amp-BI VDL

Cable on Outside of Casing Cable on Outside of Casing

Fiberglass Casing Fiberglass Casing

USIT – Fiberglass Processing CFU 31 F#2

10

GR-QC Diag Amp Casing Int Rad Thick Thick Imped BI Z map

Casing Collars Casing Collars

Injection Well – CFU 31 – F#1

11

Closest Observation Well – CFU 31–F#2

12

Far Observation Well – CFU 31 F#3

13

CFU 31 – F#1 Data Overlay

14

GR SIBH - INFD Porosity TPHI Porosity PHIC SIGM SIGM_TDTL PL CALI

Borehole

Formation Formation

CFU 31 – F#1 Data Analysis

15

GR Resis OH Por Sigma RST Por Perm VCO2 SCO2 Lith RST 1 RST 2 PL inj

CFU 31 – F#2 Data Overlay

16

GR SIBH - INFD Porosity TPHI Porosity PHIC SIGM SIGM_TDTL

Borehole

Formation

CFU 31 – F#2 Data Analysis

17

GR Resis OH Por Sigma RST Por Perm VCO2 SCO2 Lith RST 1 RST 2 RST 3 RST 4

CFU 31 – F#3 Data Overlay

18

GR SIBH - INFD Porosity TPHI Porosity PHIC SIGM SIGM_TDTL

Borehole

Formation

CFU 31 – F#3 Data Analysis

19

GR Resis OH Por Sigma RST Por Perm VCO2 SCO2 Lith RST 1 RST 2 RST 3 RST 4

Cranfield – Cross Well Seismic with RST

20

31-F#3 RST3 RST4

31-F#2 RST3 RST4

31-F#1 R1 PL

Pre/Post Sonic Comparison

21

"#$%&!'!()! "#$%&!'!(*!

CFU 31 – F#2 Pre/Post AIT Comparison

22

POR GR OH RAW-1 RAW-2 PROC1 PROC2 1 VS 2

Initial AIT Reprocessing

23

Open Hole Case Hole Field Cased Hole

Re-processed

Conclusions

!!RST Results "! !! measurement is able to identify and quantify changes in saturations

of all fluids in the formation. "! C/O measurement may provide additional information but carries

additional expense and time. "! Borehole measurements in !! mode provide information on fluid

contacts in the wellbore. !!PL measurements run during injection provided valuable information

on injection profile. !!Sonic data quality is in question – possible problems with additional

hardware in wellbore and injecting kill fluids into formation. !!AIT data quality is in question due to electrodes and additional

hardware in wellbore as well as injecting kill fluids into formation

24

Lessons Learned

!!There is an obvious casing leak below the injection zone. !!Trying to do too much in a single well causes problems !!The data is supportive across technologies !!Killing the wells was should be avoided !!The real world is different from research

25

Acknowledgements

!!This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory.

!!Cost share and research support provided by SECARB/SSEB Carbon Management Partners.

!!Anthropogenic Test CO2 Capture Unit funded separately by Southern Company and partners.

26 26