Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Carbon capture and climate intervention · Algeria · 2004–2011

In Salah CO2 storage at Krechba (Sonatrach, BP, Statoil)

Nature's voice · report
Near the injection wells my surface rose by 14 to 21 mm in 2010, measured by satellite radar (InSAR), according to a 2022 study citing Ringrose et al. (2020).
Did nature suffer? Yes. Harm is on record. Disputed
Recorded
  • In 2012 the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory reported that pressure may have migrated into my lower caprock and that the hydrofrac pressure had been exceeded; its best estimate of the vertical fracture extent was 200 metres. US DOE NETL
  • Above the reservoir my overburden includes the Pan-Saharan aquifer, with a water table at about 150 m. US DOE NETL
  • MIT's project database states that no leakage of CO2 from me was reported during the lifetime of the project. MIT CCS Technologies (archived; programme closed 2016)
  • CO2 from combustion sources at the facility was vented into my air rather than stored, according to a BP presentation. CSLF / US DOE archive
What the record lacks: 5 none on record · 1 not disclosed · 1 insufficient · 1 disputed · 1 unclear See the gaps
Accounts of the harm differ
Reason given for halting injection in June 2011
  • Government and regulators US Department of Energy / LLNL review: Injection was halted 'to allow the operator to re-evaluate the injection strategy'. US DOE NETL
  • Researchers MIT CCS Technologies database: Injection was halted over 'concerns about the integrity of the seal'; no leakage of CO2 was reported during the lifetime of the project. MIT CCS Technologies (archived; programme closed 2016)

A Sonatrach, BP and Statoil joint venture injected 3.8 million tonnes of CO2 at the Krechba gas field in the Algerian Sahara between 2004 and 2011. Injection was halted in June 2011; US Department of Energy laboratory work in 2012 reported that pressure may have migrated into the lower caprock.

3.8 MtCO2 injected at Krechba, 2004–2011, against about 17 Mt planned over the project life
The planned figure comes from a BP presentation; injection was halted in June 2011.

Status Injection has been halted since June 2011 (latest source: US DOE/LLNL review, 2013).

What?
A Sonatrach, BP and Statoil joint venture injected 3.8 Mt of CO2 at the Krechba gas field in 2004–2011. Injection was halted in June 2011; a 2012 LLNL review reported that pressure may have migrated into the lower caprock. KIGAM / SENSE project, NGI
Where?
Krechba gas field, In Salah Gas project, central Algerian Sahara; reservoir of Carboniferous sandstone at about 1,880 m depth. US DOE NETL
When?
Full production and injection from September 2004; JIP 2004–2009; injection halted in June 2011; LLNL review August 2012. CSLF / US DOE archive
Who?
Gained
  • Sonatrach, BP and Statoil (joint venture) — Operated the project; the JIP's stated aim was eligibility of geological storage for GHG credits; no credits are on record CSLF / US DOE archive
Lost
Harmed
  • Lower caprock above the injectors at Krechba — Fracture/damage zone with a best-estimate vertical extent of 200 m (LLNL, 2012) US DOE NETL
  • Surface near the injection wells — Uplift of 14–21 mm recorded in 2010 KIGAM / SENSE project, NGI
Why?
Carbon capture and storage was presented as a greenhouse-gas mitigation demonstration, with a research programme intended to set precedents for eligibility for GHG credits. CSLF / US DOE archive
How?
Separated CO2 from the gas stream was re-injected through three horizontal injectors into the reservoir; CO2 from combustion sources was vented. CSLF / US DOE archive
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

The In Salah Gas project was a joint venture of Sonatrach, BP and Statoil at the Krechba field in the central Algerian Sahara. According to a BP presentation, the reservoir gas contained 5–10% CO2; only the separated CO2 was to be re-injected, about 1 million tonnes a year (60 mmscf/d), with about 17 million tonnes to be stored over the project life, while CO2 from combustion sources would be vented. Full production and injection began in September 2004, into Carboniferous sandstone at about 1,880 m depth and about 20 m thick, through three horizontal injectors (KB-501, KB-502, KB-503). A 2022 study put the CO2 injected in 2004–2011 at 3.8 million tonnes.

A joint industry project (JIP) on storage assurance ran for five years, 2004–2009, at a total cost of US$30 million. Its stated purpose was to 'set precedents for the regulation and verification of the geological storage of CO2, allowing eligibility for GHG credits'. Laboratory research by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) was performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy, with data and co-funding from the JIP; the amounts are not stated.

In June 2011 'injection operations were halted at the site to allow the operator to re-evaluate the injection strategy', according to the LLNL/DOE review. The MIT carbon capture database stated that injection was halted over 'concerns about the integrity of the seal', that 3.8 million tonnes of CO2 were 'successfully stored in the Krechba Formation', and that 'No leakage of CO2 was reported during the lifetime of the project.'

In 2012 LLNL reported from satellite radar (InSAR) monitoring an 'anomalous double lobe feature' that 'suggests pressure may have migrated into lower caprock', that hydrofrac pressure was exceeded, a best estimate of 200 m for the vertical fracture extent, and a low probability that the feature had grown beyond the lower caprock interval. A 2022 study citing Ringrose et al. (2020) gave surface uplift of 14 to 21 mm near the injection wells in 2010. The overburden includes the Pan-Saharan aquifer, with a water table at about 150 m, and one research question posed in the review was whether a leak to the shallow groundwater aquifer would be detectable.

  1. 2004Full production and injection begin (September); storage-assurance JIP starts (2004–2009)
  2. 2009Storage-assurance JIP ends
  3. 2010Surface uplift of 14–21 mm recorded near the injection wells (InSAR)
  4. 2011Injection halted to re-evaluate the injection strategy (June); 3.8 Mt injected 2004–2011
  5. 2012LLNL/DOE review reports a double-lobe deformation feature and a best-estimate vertical fracture extent of 200 m

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

“Demonstrate to stakeholders that industrial-scale geological storage of CO2 is a viable GHG mitigation option.”

“Set precedents for the regulation and verification of the geological storage of CO2, allowing eligibility for GHG credits.”

Stated purpose of the storage-assurance JIP, CSLF presentation by P. Sharman · c. 2004–2005 · CSLF / US DOE archive

“injection operations were halted at the site to allow the operator to re-evaluate the injection strategy”

LLNL review for the US Department of Energy · 2013 · US DOE NETL

“Anomalous double lobe feature suggests pressure may have migrated into lower caprock”

LLNL (J.A. White et al.), US DOE Carbon Storage R&D review · August 2012 · US DOE NETL

“concerns about the integrity of the seal”

“No leakage of CO2 was reported during the lifetime of the project.”

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Reason given for halting injection in June 2011
Government and regulators
US Department of Energy / LLNL review

Injection was halted 'to allow the operator to re-evaluate the injection strategy'.

US DOE NETL
Researchers
MIT CCS Technologies database

Injection was halted over 'concerns about the integrity of the seal'; no leakage of CO2 was reported during the lifetime of the project.

MIT CCS Technologies (archived; programme closed 2016)

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • Industrial-scale geological storage of CO2 presented as a viable GHG mitigation option; only separated CO2 to be re-injected, about 1 million tonnes a year.
    BP and joint venture, CSLF presentation (c. 2004–2005) · CSLF / US DOE archive
  • 3.8 MT of CO2 successfully stored in the Krechba Formation; no leakage reported.
    MIT CCS Technologies project database · MIT CCS Technologies (archived; programme closed 2016)

Recorded

  • 3.8 Mt of CO2 injected in 2004–2011 through three horizontal injectors, against about 17 Mt planned over the project life.
    KIGAM / SENSE project, NGI
  • CO2 from combustion sources at the facility was to be vented, not stored.
    CSLF / US DOE archive
  • Surface uplift of 14 to 21 mm near the injection wells in 2010, measured by InSAR.
    KIGAM / SENSE project, NGI
  • LLNL: 'Hydrofrac pressure was exceeded'; 'Best estimate of vertical fracture extent is 200 meters'; 'Low probability that feature has grown beyond lower caprock interval.'
    US DOE NETL
  • Storage-assurance JIP total cost US$30 million (2004–2009); MIT database: total project estimated to cost US$2.7 billion, injection cost about US$6 per tonne.
    CSLF / US DOE archive

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
Carbon credits issued for In Salah—
None on record.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Storage-assurance JIP, total cost$30m
Total project cost estimate (MIT database; scope not stated)$2.7bn
Currency: USD · Window: 2004–2009 (JIP); project total undated. All figures cover the same period. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • bp (c. 2004–2005): A joint venture presentation stated the goal of demonstrating to stakeholders that industrial-scale geological storage of CO2 is a viable GHG mitigation option. · CSLF / US DOE archive
  • us-department-of-energy (2013): The LLNL review prepared under its auspices recorded the June 2011 halt of injection to allow the operator to re-evaluate the injection strategy. · US DOE NETL

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.

Insurers

No insurer decision on record.

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

CO2 injected
3.8 Mt
2004–2011; about 17 Mt planned over the project life
Estimated vertical fracture extent
200 m
LLNL best estimate, lower caprock, 2012
Surface uplift near the wells
14–21 mm
InSAR, 2010
Carbon credits issued
None on record
The JIP's stated aim was eligibility for GHG credits

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
No court case

Nature

  • Disputed Reason given for halting injection in June 2011

Money

Court

Record

  • Insufficient Insufficient: LLNL noted 'significant uncertainties' on whether linear features extend beyond the lower storage unit.
  • Unclear Unclear: the scope of the US$2.7 billion total project cost estimate in the MIT database, whether the whole gas project or the CO2 storage component.
  • Not disclosed Not disclosed: the amounts of US Department of Energy and other co-funding for the research programme.
  • None on record None on record: carbon credits issued for In Salah.
  • None on record None on record: a separate statement from Sonatrach or the Algerian government.
  • None on record None on record: legal proceedings, insurance cover or payments.

Did the harm stop?

Injection was halted in June 2011 after 3.8 Mt had been injected since 2004. The 2012 LLNL review recorded a best-estimate fracture extent of 200 m in the lower caprock.

Who paid?

The storage-assurance JIP cost US$30 million in 2004–2009. None on record: who paid for any remedial work on the caprock; no carbon credits are on record.

Sources

Voices on record: ✓ Company or project✓ Government and regulators— Courts— Press and investigations— Communities and civil society✓ Researchers

Company or project

Government and regulators

Researchers

  2. In Salah Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project
    MIT CCS Technologies (archived; programme closed 2016) · 2016

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
Terms used on this page

Science and environment

Groundwater
Water held underground in soil and rock, drawn through wells.

Carbon and conservation finance

Carbon credit
A certificate representing one tonne of carbon dioxide (or equivalent) that a project says it reduced, avoided or removed. Buyers use credits to balance their own emissions in climate claims.

Law and courts

Plea
In a criminal case, the defendant's formal answer to a charge. A plea agreement settles a case with a guilty plea on agreed terms.

Insurance

Captive insurer, self-insurance
A company covering its own risks, either directly or through an insurance company it owns.
Similar cases
Carbon capture and climate intervention · Carbon credits · Canada · 2015–2020
Quest CCS (Shell, Alberta)
Same type: Carbon capture and climate intervention, Carbon credits
Carbon capture and climate intervention · Carbon credits · Mexico · 2022–2025
Make Sunsets stratospheric balloon launches (Mexico)
Same type: Carbon capture and climate intervention, Carbon credits
Carbon credits · Zimbabwe · 2011–2025
Kariba REDD+ project (Zimbabwe)
Same type: Carbon creditsSame regionHarm to nature disputed
Carbon credits · Protected area / relocation · Kenya · 2012–2026
Northern Kenya Grasslands Carbon Project and the Isiolo court ruling
Same type: Carbon creditsSame regionHarm to nature disputed
Carbon credits · United Arab Emirates · 2011–2025
McKinsey advice to COP28 presidency and fossil clients
Same type: Carbon creditsSame regionHarm to nature disputed
Carbon credits · Tree planting · Senegal · 2009–2026
Livelihoods Fund mangrove project (Senegal)
Same type: Carbon creditsSame regionHarm to nature disputed