Fastest
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/geological-carbon-storage-co2-plume-monitoring-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Carbon Capture, Utilization & StorageGeological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patents
49
Published Records
-90%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
40
Active Filers Ranked
Filing growth compares 2021 (10 records) with 2024 (1) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field.
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
CO2 plume monitoring sits at the intersection of geophysical surveying and subsurface risk management: once CO2 is injected into a storage formation, operators need a way to locate the plume, confirm it stays within the licensed volume, and detect leakage before it reaches groundwater or the surface. The patent record in scope spans 49 published records filed between 2015 and mid-2026, covering methods that range from 4D seismic inversion to sensor networks and computational uncertainty models.
The dataset is small relative to adjacent fields like carbon capture chemistry, which is consistent with plume monitoring being a specialised, service-heavy niche rather than a mass-market hardware category. Most of the filing activity traces back to a handful of oilfield-services and research entities, with a long tail of single-filing organisations behind them.
Filing activity by year, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The data
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 49-record dataset: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the underlying methods actually sit in.
A sharp peak, then a pullback
Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 10 records in 2021, then fell to 1 by 2024 — a -90% change over that span. 2025 and 2026 figures will keep filling in as publication catches up with filing, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the apparent drop after 2024 should not yet be read as a trend.
Material analysis and geophysics dominate the claim set
G01N (material analysis & testing) appears in 49.0% of the 49 records in scope, and G01V (geophysics & gravity surveying) in 28.6%. G06F (electric digital data processing) reaches 26.5%, reflecting how much of this field is now claimed as data-processing and modelling methods rather than pure sensor hardware. E21B (drilling) sits lower at 16.3%, and G06G, G06Q, A01G and A61B each cover a small slice — 4.1% or less — of the same record set.
Shares are the percentage of the 49 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about geological carbon storage: co2 plume monitoring patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey patents
The most-cited prior art
Representative filing
Method of characterizing a CO2 plume in a geological storage aquifer (US8532954B2, IFP Energies Nouvelles)
IFP ENERGIES NOUVELLES
The method locates a free CO2 plume in a geological storage aquifer using 4D seismic data. A stratigraphic inversion produces P- and S-impedance values before and after injection, from which density-variation and incompressibility-modulus-variation cubes are built. The plume is identified in subsurface cells where both variations are negative and exceed a set threshold in absolute value.Filed by IFP Energies Nouvelles; published 2013-09-10.
Highest-cited records in this dataset
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7704746B1 | Method of detecting leakage from geologic formations used to sequester CO2 | 111 |
| 2 | US20100299126A1 | Method for uncertainty quantifiation in the performance and risk assessment of a carbon dioxide storage site | 82 |
| 3 | WO1996003566A2 | Improvements in or relating to drilling with gas liquid swirl generator hydrocyclone separation combustion th… | 58 |
| 4 | US20040104345A1 | Method and a measuring system for determining and monitoring exhaust gas emissions from a vehicle | 45 |
| 5 | CN112800592A | 一种二氧化碳地质封存体中泄漏风险的评价方法 | 40 |
| 6 | WO2002082059A1 | A method and a measuring system for determining and monitoring exhaust gas emissions from a vehicle | 16 |
| 7 | US8548785B2 | Method for uncertainty quantification in the performance and risk assessment of a carbon dioxide storage site | 14 |
| 8 | WO2010129247A2 | Method for uncertainty quantification in the performance and risk assessment of a carbon dioxide storage site | 13 |
| 9 | US20110196613A1 | Method of characterizing a co2 plume in a geological storage aquifer | 9 |
| 10 | US20230168232A1 | System and method for monitoring emission of greenhouse gas | 8 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and favour older filings; they are not a measure of current commercial importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →Insights
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-outs from the same dataset, aimed at where to file, who to watch, and what is already crowded.
Concentration at the top
11 vs 2
leader vs. tenth place, in records
The ranking thins out fast below the leader
The leading assignee holds 11 records in the ranking of 40 companies, fifth place holds 7, and tenth place holds only 2. That drop-off suggests a small group of oilfield-services and research organisations built an early position, while everyone below them filed only sporadically.
Ranking covers 40 companies, counted in records.
Peak, then pullback
-90%
2021 (10 records) to 2024 (1 record)
2021 was the high point for filing activity
Filings climbed from zero in 2017 to a peak of 10 in 2021, then declined to 1 by 2024. That -90% change over three years is the clearest signal in the trend data, though 2025-2026 counts are still incomplete because of publication lag.
2024 is the most recent year treated as complete.
Where the claims sit
49.0% / 28.6%
share of 49 records in G01N / G01V
Data and signal analysis outweigh drilling hardware
Material analysis and testing (G01N) touches roughly half of the 49 records in scope, and geophysical surveying (G01V) touches over a quarter. Earth and rock drilling (E21B) is present in only 16.3% of records, indicating that most of the recent claim activity is in interpretation methods rather than downhole equipment.
Classes overlap, so shares exceed 100% combined.
Filing venues
US 11 · WIPO 9
receiving-office counts
US and PCT routes carry the most filings
The United States receives the largest single share of filings at 11, with the WIPO/PCT route close behind at 9. China and Europe each sit at 5, and Australia and Canada at 4 apiece, showing filers spreading coverage across several jurisdictions rather than concentrating in one.
Counts are by receiving office, not by family.
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to geological carbon storage: co2 plume monitoring patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's next
Where to take this analysis
The trend and composition data point to specific next steps depending on whether you are scoping freedom to operate or looking for open filing space.
Check freedom to operate against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 11 of the ranked records, any new filing in 4D seismic plume location or leakage detection should be checked against that portfolio before drafting claims.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaWatch for the 2025-2026 filing catch-up
Because publication lags filing by about 18 months, the apparent drop after 2021 will fill in further as 2025 and 2026 records publish. Re-run the trend view periodically rather than treating the current low counts as final.
Track this landscape in EurekaLook past G01N and G01V for underclaimed angles
Business-process and horticulture-adjacent classes (G06Q, A01G) each cover only 4.1% or less of the 49 records, which may indicate underexplored claim angles around MRV reporting or land-use monitoring tied to storage sites.
Explore adjacent IPC classes in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on CO2 plume monitoring patents
In this dataset, one assignee leads the ranked field with 11 records, well ahead of fifth place at 7 and tenth place at just 2. The leading names are concentrated among oilfield-services companies and public research institutes, reflecting the technology's roots in seismic and subsurface characterization work developed for oil and gas. The ranking covers 40 companies in total, so most participants hold only a small number of filings each.
Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 10 records in 2021, then fell to 1 by 2024, a -90% change over that three-year span. That said, publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 counts are still incomplete and should not yet be read as a continuing decline. The 2021 peak is the most reliable high-water mark in the current data.
The bulk of activity sits in material analysis and testing (G01N, 49.0% of the 49 records) and geophysical surveying (G01V, 28.6%), which together cover seismic inversion, sensor-based sampling and subsurface characterization methods. Electric digital data processing (G06F) appears in 26.5% of records, showing a substantial share of claims are now written around modelling and uncertainty-quantification software rather than physical sensors alone. Drilling equipment (E21B) is present in 16.3% of records, a smaller but still notable share.
US8532954B2, assigned to IFP Energies Nouvelles, claims a method for locating a CO2 plume in a geological storage aquifer using 4D seismic data, with a stratigraphic inversion producing density and incompressibility variation cubes to identify the plume boundary. It matters because seismic-inversion-based plume location is one of the more heavily cited approaches in this space, and later filings on 4D seismic monitoring need to be checked against its specific thresholding method. Anyone drafting claims in this area should read the full claim set rather than relying on the abstract alone.
The United States receives the largest number of filings at 11, followed by the WIPO/PCT route at 9, then China and Europe tied at 5 each, and Australia and Canada at 4 each. This spread suggests applicants are pursuing multi-jurisdiction protection through PCT rather than filing narrowly in a single home market. It also means a freedom-to-operate review for this technology should not stop at a single-country search.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Geological Carbon Storage: CO2 Plume Monitoring Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole geological carbon storage: co2 plume monitoring patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company's registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.