Dynamic core flow experiments reveal how injection rates and temperatures influence permeability in geothermal systems, suggesting optimal strategies for reinjection.
Efficient reinjection is critical for maintaining reservoir pressure and ensuring the sustainable development of sandstone geothermal systems. However, complex thermal–hydraulic–chemical (THC) interactions often lead to progressive permeability reduction, significantly impairing injection performance. This study systematically investigates the coupled effects of injection flow rate, temperature, and suspended particle size on permeability evolution during geothermal reinjection. Laboratory-scale core flow-through experiments were conducted using sandstone samples from the Guantao Formation in the Huanghua Depression, Bohai Bay Basin. The experimental schemes included graded flow rate tests, temperature-stepped injections, particle size control, long-term seepage, and reverse-flow backflushing operations. The results reveal that permeability is highly sensitive to injection parameters. Flow rates exceeding 6 mL/min induce irreversible clogging and pore structure damage, while lower rates yield more stable injection behavior. Injection at approximately 35 °C resulted in a permeability increase of 15.7%, attributed to reduced fluid viscosity and moderate clay swelling and secondary precipitation. Particles larger than 3 μm were prone to bridging and persistent clogging, whereas smaller particles exhibited more reversible behavior. During long-term seepage, reverse injection implemented upon permeability decline restored up to 98% of the initial permeability, confirming its effectiveness in alleviating pore throat blockage. Based on these findings, a combined reinjection strategy is recommended, featuring low flow rate (≤5 mL/min), moderate injection temperature (~35 °C), and fine filtration (≤3 μm). In addition, periodic backflushing should be considered when permeability loss exceeds 30% or a sustained injection pressure rise is observed. This study provides robust experimental evidence and practical guidance for optimizing geothermal reinjection operations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: