A modified and rapid method for the single-well push-pull (SWPP) test using SF, Kr, and uranine tracers.

In the present study, a single-well push-pull (SWPP) test was conducted with multi-component tracers, including inert gas (SF and Kr) and uranine (conservative), to understand the volatile/semi-volatile component transport characteristics in the groundwater system. In an SWPP test, it is essential to obtain an initial breakthrough curve (BTC) of the inert gas concentration at the beginning of the pulling stage to analyze the hydraulic properties of the groundwater system. As a result of the SWPP test using a proposed method in this study, physicochemical parameters of the groundwater and BTC of gas tracers and uranine were acquired simultaneously and successfully.

Constraining the effectiveness of inherent tracers of captured CO for tracing CO leakage: Demonstration in a controlled release site.

Geological storage of carbon dioxide (CO) is an integral component of cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reduction scenarios. However, a robust monitoring regime is necessary for public and regulatory assurance that any leakage from a storage site can be detected. Here, we present the results from a controlled CO release experiment undertaken at the K-COSEM test site (South Korea) with the aim of demonstrating the effectiveness of the inherent tracer fingerprints (noble gases, δC) in monitoring CO leakage.

Quantitative assessment of deep-seated CO leakage around CO-rich springs with low soil CO efflux using end-member mixing analysis and carbon isotopes.

This study examined a mountainous area with two hydrochemically distinct CO-rich springs to understand the origin, flow, and leakage of CO, which may provide implications for precise monitoring of CO leakage in geological carbon storage (GCS) sites. The carbon isotopic compositions of dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) in CO-rich water (δC) and those of soil CO (δC) indicated a deep-seated CO supply to the near-surface environment in the study area. The hydrochemical difference (e.