Information and computing system for modeling gas hydrate dissociation in coal seams
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33271/crpnmu/86.069Keywords:
coal seam, methane, gas hydrates, dissociation front, degasification, Stefan problem, computer modelingAbstract
Purpose. To develop and substantiate an information and computing system for studying the effects of porosity and temperature conditions on the position and propagation rate of the gas hydrate dissociation front in coal seams.
The methods. An analytical solution to the one-dimensional Stefan problem for a porous medium with a moving phase boundary is used. Calculations use a scenario-based approach with variation of coal seam parameters. The procedure for comparing results with measurement data includes analysis of local deviations and statistical measures of model agreement.
Findings. A modular information and computing system has been developed with a separate computational core and tools for storing and visualizing results. Rules for checking the numerical validity of results and terminating a scenario have been defined. The data structure links an immutable version of coal seam parameters to an individual run, its summary characteristics and time series.
The originality. A method has been developed for computer modeling of gas hydrate dissociation in a coal seam, combining checks of scenario thermobaric admissibility with calculation of the spatial and temporal evolution of the phase transition zone. A compensatory relationship has been established for the effects of porosity and temperature on front position and propagation rate, allowing identification of parameter combinations that yield equivalent evolution of the dissociation zone. A procedure has been developed for assessing model applicability by comparing front positions and temperatures at aligned temporal and spatial coordinates, and average front propagation rates over identical observation intervals, accounting for measurement uncertainty.
Practical implementation. The system can be used for preliminary assessment of the spatial extent and time evolution of the gas hydrate dissociation zone near a degasification borehole. Comparing scenarios helps define conditions for further studies of the methane phase state in a coal seam and prepare inputs for refined gas emission models. The calculated characteristics help account for the thermal component of gas hydrate dissociation when studying coal seam degasification conditions.
References
1. Karacan, C. Ö., Ruiz, F. A., Cotè, M., & Phipps, S. (2011). Coal mine methane: A review of capture and utilization practices with benefits to mining safety and to greenhouse gas reduction. International Journal of Coal Geology, 86(2–3), 121–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2011.02.009
2. Gao, C., Liu, D., Li, Z., Cai, Y., & Fang, Y. (2021). Fluid performance in coal reservoirs: A comprehensive review. Geofluids, 2021, Article 6611075. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6611075
3. Bustin, A. M. M., Bustin, R. M., Moudrakovskim, I. L., Takeya, S., & Ripmeester, J. A. (2016). Formation of methane clathrate hydrates in coal moisture: Implications for coalbed methane resources and reservoir pressures. Energy & Fuels, 30(1), 88–97. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b01922
4. Sun, C., Liu, S., Li, S., Wang, K., Dong, Z., & Kong, S. (2025). Methane hydrate formation characteristics under different initial conditions and their impact on coal seam properties. Advances in Geo-Energy Research, 16(3), 229–243. https://doi.org/10.46690/ager.2025.06.04
5. Ruppel, C. D., & Waite, W. F. (2020). Grand challenge: Timescales and processes of methane hydrate formation and breakdown, with application to geologic systems. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 125(8), Article e2018JB016459. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JB016459
6. Dreus, A. Yu., Bondarenko, V. I., Biletskyi, V. S., & Lysenko, R. S. (2020). Mathematical simulation of heat and mass exchange processes during dissociation of gas hydrates in a porous medium. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu, (5), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.33271/nvngu/2020-5/033
7. Dreus, A., Gubin, O., Bondarenko, V., Lysenko, R., & Liu, B. (2021). An approximate approach to estimation of dissociation rate of gas hydrate in porous rock bed. E3S Web of Conferences, 230, Article 01002. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202123001002
8. Ning, Z.-J., Lu, H.-F., Zheng, S.-F., Xing, D.-H., Li, X., & Liu, L. (2023). Modeling and numerical investigations of gas production from natural gas hydrates. Energies, 16(20), Article 7184. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16207184
9. Moridis, G. J., Kowalsky, M. B., & Pruess, K. (2008). TOUGH+HYDRATE v1.0 user’s manual: A code for the simulation of system behavior in hydrate-bearing geologic media (Report No. LBNL-149E). Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. https://doi.org/10.2172/927149
10. White, M. D., & McGrail, B. P. (2006). STOMP-HYD: A new numerical simulator for analysis of methane hydrate production from geologic formations. In A. Reedman, Y. S. Park, J. J. Bahk, & N. Chaimanee (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Gas Hydrate Technology at the 43rd CCOP Annual Session (pp. 77–86). Coordinating Committee for Geoscience Programmes in East and Southeast Asia. https://www.pnnl.gov/publications/stomp-hyd-new-numerical-simulator-analysis-methane-hydrate-production-geologic
11. White, M. D., Kneafsey, T. J., Seol, Y., Waite, W. F., Uchida, S., Lin, J. S., Myshakin, E. M., Gai, X., Gupta, S., Reagan, M. T., Queiruga, A. F., Kimoto, S., & IGHCCS2 Participants. (2020). An international code comparison study on coupled thermal, hydrologic and geomechanical processes of natural gas hydrate-bearing sediments. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 120, Article 104566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104566
12. Sandve, G. K., Nekrutenko, A., Taylor, J., & Hovig, E. (2013). Ten simple rules for reproducible computational research. PLOS Computational Biology, 9(10), Article e1003285. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003285
13. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. (2009). Standard for verification and validation in computational fluid dynamics and heat transfer (ASME V&V 20-2009, reaffirmed 2021). https://www.asme.org/codes-standards/find-codes-standards/standard-for-verification-and-validation-in-computational-fluid-dynamics-and-heat-transfer
14. Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology. (2008). Evaluation of measurement data–Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (JCGM 100:2008). Bureau International des Poids et Mesures. https://doi.org/10.59161/JCGM100-2008E
15. Hyndman, R. J., & Koehler, A. B. (2006). Another look at measures of forecast accuracy. International Journal of Forecasting, 22(4), 679–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2006.03.001
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to deposit the final published version of their article, or the Author's Accepted Manuscript (AAM), in institutional or subject-specific open-access repositories (including the university's own institutional repository, CORE, Zenodo, or Figshare), ensuring maximum visibility, accessibility, and impact of the publication.
