Search

Abstract: Portland cement can play a major role in providing cost-effective, long-term zonal isolation for CO2 capture and storage (CCS) used to mitigate climate change. However, achieving zonal isolation with Portland cement under supercritical CO2 environment for the required 1,000 year trapping period may be challenging. Some laboratory researchers report that Portland cement disintegrates when exposed to CO2, leading to potential leakage into the atmosphere or other to underground zones. Other researchers cite Portland cement samples from 30–50 year old CO2 EOR wells where sealing integrity was maintained, even though carbonation was found. In this paper we will discuss reasons likely for this disparity between research lab test results and actual well performance data. Carbonation of Portland cement is a thermodynamically favorable process and therefore difficult to avoid. But the effects can be minimized by various reactive chemical components optimized for the specific thermodynamic conditions. Our research shows partial carbonation of Portland cement is not detrimental unless the mechanical integrity is insufficient to provide effective zonal isolation. For these studies we have developed CO2 treatment test cells capable of producing conditions up to 200 °F and 2,000 psi. In addition, various analytical instruments including x-ray diffraction (XRD), thermo-gravimetric analysis (TGA) and mechanical properties measurement devices have been used for this study. In this paper we will discuss the importance of understanding the percentage of carbonation and depth of CO2 penetration, and how to control these factors by optimizing the cement blend. Interestingly, we found the amount of Portlandite { Ca(OH)2} that forms due to cement hydration and the cement-to-water ratio dictates the depth of penetration as well as percentage carbonation. The implications of this in relation to the long term chemical integrity of the cement sheath under downhole CCS conditions is discussed. This paper also includes the results of recent studies on the changes in mechanical properties of a properly optimized Portland cement blend for a period of up to one year. During this period, measurements were made at different time intervals to examine cement specimen treated with CO2 at 200 °F and 2,000 psi in the presence of water. The results show carbonation without any sign of loss of mechanical or sealing integrity that could lead to zonal isolation failure. Results from a separate set of experiments show the following: (1) Carbonation could be minimized by reducing the Portland cement content by adding Pozzolanic materials and by reducing the permeability and (2) Carbonation could help heal micro-cracks that may be caused by various well operations or ageing. However, such carbonation-induced healing is limited only to a certain width of cracks. In summary of this research, it is recommend that: (1) a high quality primary cement job be performed in adherence to all industry best practices; (2) the cement blend be properly optimized to minimize long-term CO2 corrosion; and (3) the sheath be designed for long-term mechanical integrity. This paper will discuss a comprehensive approach that may be taken to help ensure longer-term effective zonal isolation in new CO2 wells and remedial solutions for old wells and for plugging and abandoning wells. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The IEA CCS Roadmap highlighted the significance that CCS will play in achieving an atmospheric CO2 stabilization on 450 ppm. In the scenario it is based on, CCS will provide approximately 20% of the total CO2 emissions reductions out to 2050. To achieve this contribution it will require an ambitious CCS growth path with 100 projects needed globally by 2020 and over 3000 by 2050. In both 2020 and 2050 the major developing countries will need to contribute to this deployment. Brazil has a unique electricity and emissions profile. Over 80% of Brazils electricity is produced from hydropower with the rest being made up by a combination of fossil fuels, biomass, and nuclear. This means the energy emissions in Brazil are relatively low. Many people within Brazil see stopping the deforestation of the Amazon as the key emissions reduction mechanism for Brazil. However, the contribution to CO2 emissions from coal is expected to increase due to 6000 MW of coal power that is planned to be installed in Brazil by 2030, although this still only represents 2.7% of grid compared to 83% from renewables. CCS in Brazil will be more relevant to industry rather than for electricity generation. In particular CCS could be crucial for the development of some of the “Pre-salt” petrol eum fields which bring new challenges. Although there are no conclusive studies on the concentration o f carbon dioxide (CO2) in the region, some wells have shown concentrations of CO2 above those found in the Campos Basin, while others showed concentrations close to zero. Still, Petrobras have proactively committed to not releasing to the atmosphere, the CO2 associated with the natural gas produced in the pre-salt layer. In addition, the pre-salt oil is considered of good quality, light oil and therefore, the refining process consumes less energy and will emit less CO2 when compared to the processing of heavier crude. This paper looks to discuss the current status of CCS in Brazil. This includes looking at the current status of a number of demonstration projects that are already underway in Brazil as well as additional ones that are planned. The paper will also discuss the. Public awareness and engagement about CCS given the crucial role the public play in the smooth progress of projects. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Coupling flexible power generation with Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) technology may be important for substantial reductions in CO2 emissions. In this paper we consider some of the implications of flexible power plant operation on the CCS process. Specifically, we consider the CCS chain capacity selection decision, by which we mean the choice of the optimal plant size, to understand what determines the amount of CO2 that is efficient to capture and how the decision to invest in CCS chain capacity is affected by price volatility of CO2 emissions quotas. We found that the plant''s emissions profile determined a range of CCS capacities that could be efficient with the tradeoff between the price of CO2 emissions quotas and the cost of CCS technology determining the specific optimal chain capacity. Secondly, investment into CCS technology for a flexible load power plant was more likely to be delayed in a multiple time point investment decision tree model as a result of price volatility, compared to investment in CCS technology on a base load power plant. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Geologic carbon dioxide (CO2) storage verification tests by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) seven Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs) provided the experience base for the Public Outreach and Education for Carbon Storage Projects, a best practices manual, published in December 2009. This paper summarizes these outreach best practices; discusses their application in Aquistore, a greenfield CO2 storage project under way in western Canada; and reviews the implications for applying the best practices to new projects during the Development Phase of the DOE’s RCSP Program. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Adding post-combustion capture technology to existing coal-fired power plants is being considered as a near-term option for mitigating CO2 emissions. To supply the thermal energy needed for CO2 capture, much of the literature proposes thermal integration of the existing coal plant’s steam cycle with the capture process’ stripper reboiler. This paper examines the option of using an auxiliary natural gas turbine plant to meet the energetic demands of carbon capture and compression. Three different auxiliary plant technologies were compared to integration for 90% capture from an existing, 500 MW supercritical coal plant. CO2 capture (via a monoethylamine (MEA) absorption process) and compression is simulated using Aspen Plus. Thermoflow software is used to simulate three gas plant technologies. In some circumstances, it is found that using an auxiliary natural gas turbine may make retrofits more attractive compared to using thermal integration. The most important factors affecting desirability of the auxiliary plant retrofit are the cost of natural gas, the full cost of integration, and the potential for sale of excess electricity. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: To fulfill the energy demand now and in the next decades, coal-fired power plants will be an essential part of the portfolio of power plants that supply electricity cheaply and in a reliable way. The specific CO2 emissions of these plants can be reduced by increasing the efficiency. For that reason KEMA did optimize the steam water cycle of ultra super critical (USC) coal-fired power plants within the EOS program. The improvements are based on the application of the so-called Master Cycle, and on the application of higher steam temperatures. In the Master Cycle cold reheat steam is used in an extra turbine and with steam extraction of this turbine feed water preheating is realized with reduced exergy losses. The turbine is called a tuning turbine reflecting the improved possibilities to tune and optimize the steam cycle with the new coupling where the regenerative heater train and the re-heaters have been decoupled. The Master Cycle is proposed by Dong Energy . The first approach deals with the USC technology with a steam temperature of 600 °C and reheat temperatures of 620 °C. This technology is available at the moment and is applied in new built coal-fired power plants. The second approach deals with the USC technology with a steam temperature of 700 °C and reheat temperature of 720 °C. The expectation is that this technology can be applied around 2025 with the same availability as the USC units with 600 °C. The thermodynamic analyzes are carried out with KEMA’s flow sheeting package SPENCE®. In all considered cases the thermal input was 2400 MWth. In case of the application of the Master Cycle a second reheat is introduced. Results will be discussed and presented in tables, t-s diagrams and h-p diagrams. Improvement of efficiency of coal fired power station technology can reduce the amount of CO2 emitted significantly. This paper shows that with current available technology and improvements an additional emission reduction of almost 10% can be realised by applying the USC 700 + MC. Compared to the world wide average an emission reduction of 66% can be achieved without CCS. In the continuation of the analysis post combustion technology will be integrated in the concept to analyze possible additional benefits of the master cycle with respect to steam supply for the regeneration of the solvents. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The IEA CCS Roadmap highlights the significance that CCS will play in achieving an atmospheric CO2 stabilisation of 450ppm. In the scenario it is based on, CCS will provide approximately 20% of the total CO2 emissions reductions out to 2050. To achieve this contribution, an ambitious CCS growth path will be required, with around 100 projects needed globally by 2020, and over 3000 by 2050. As a result of the required CCS expansion, a number of regulatory issues associated with protecting public health, safety and the environment, as well as ensuring stewardship for permanent CO2 storage, will need to be addressed. There is also a need to provide flexible, adaptive regulations for the first set of demonstration projects. To address these issues, governments are amending existing resource extraction or environmental impact frameworks to allow the first demonstration projects to move forward, while at the same time developing dedicated legal frameworks to facilitate CCS commercialisation for the longer-term. In some cases, project-specific regulations may also be needed. In recent y ears, the international community has amended a number of legal instruments to advance CCS development. The London Protocol was amended in 2006 to allow for offshore CO2 storage and in 2009 to allow fo r cross -border transport of CO2; in 2007, the OSPAR Convention adopted similar provisions. The UNFCCC does not include a fi rm commitment for parties with regard to CCS; however, in 2006, the IPCC released the revised Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, which are used for calculating and reporting national GHG emissions and removals. Although not yet officially sanctioned for use, these guidelines include a complete methodology for the treatment of CCS under the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC and currently have to be used in Kyoto Protocol Annex 1 countries (industrialised), but not yet by non-Annex 1 countries (developing). In parallel, many countries are developing comprehensive domestic regulatory frameworks for CCS. Dedicated legal frameworks enable CCS activities either through licensing regimes or by providing regulatory support for the fi nancing of demonstration projects. The European Commission’s 2008 CCS Directive establishes a regulatory framework for the geological storage of CO2. Australia has also enacted comprehensive state and national CCS regulatory frameworks for CO2 storage. Additionally, regulations are currently being pursued in the United States, Canada, Norway and Japan. To assist in the rapid deployment of CCS in line with the recent findings of the IEA CCS Roadmap, the IEA, with assistance from Carbon Counts, Reed Smith LLP and UCL CCLP, has developed the IEA CCS Model Regulatory Framework, which is intended to serve as a tool to assist governments around the world in the development o f national regulatory frameworks. The Model Framework draws from current CCS regulatory developments in Europe, Australia, the USA, and elsewhere, to ensure that the work done in these countries can be leveraged around the world. The IEA, through this analysis, provides non-prescriptive assistance in CCS regulatory development to countries looking to develop their own domestic framework. This paper discusses the major features of the IEA CCS Model Regulatory Framework and how it can be best distributed and used to assist in the development of regulatory frameworks in all key regions of the world. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper explores the impact of the temporally dynamic demand for CO2 for CCS-coupled EOR by evaluating the variable demand for new (i.e., non-recycled) anthropogenic CO2 within EOR projects and the extent to which EOR-coupled CCS is compatible with the need for baseload CO2 storage options for large anthropogenic point sources. A profile of CO2 demand over an assumed EOR project lifetime is applied across two different storage scenarios to illustrate the differences in cost associated with different EOR-coupled CCS configurations. The first scenario pairs a single EOR field with a DSF used to store any CO2 that is not used to increase oil recovery in the EOR field; the second scenario is designed to minimize storage in the DSF and maximize lower-cost EOR-based storage by bringing multiple EOR projects online over time as the previous project’s CO2 demand declines, making the source’s CO2 available for a subsequent project. Each scenario is evaluated for two facilities, emitting 3 and 6 MtCO2/y. Annual and lifetime average CO2 transport and storage costs are presented, and the impact of added capture and compression costs on overall project economics is examined. The research reported here suggests that the cost of implementing a CCS-coupled EOR project will be more than is typically assumed; in many cases a positive price on CO2 emitted to the atmosphere will be required to motivate deployment of these CO2-based EOR projects, except in the most idealized cases. The reasons for this conclusion are twofold. First, the costs of capitalizing, operating and monitoring a secondary DSF to provide backup storage for CO2 not demanded by the EOR operation can cut sharply into EOR revenues. Second, except in cases where a single firm figures both the CO2 source emissions and the associated EOR recovery on the same balance sheet, the oil production company is not likely to share a significant portion of revenues from the EOR field with the CO2 source. Thus, while EOR-coupled CCS may offer attractive early opportunities, these opportunities are likely only available to a small fraction of the CO2 source fleet in the U.S. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Consistent with other published studies, the modelling presented here reveals that baseload power plants are the first aspects of the electricity sector to decarbonize and are essentially decarbonized once CO2 permit prices exceed a certain threshold ($90/ton CO2 in this study). The decarbonization of baseload electricity is met by significant expansions of nuclear power and renewable energy generation technologies as well as the application of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technologies applied to both coal and natural gas fired power plants. Relatively little attention has been paid thus far to whether intermediate and peaking units would respond the same way to a climate policy given the very different operational and economic context that these kinds of electricity generation units operate under. In this paper, the authors discuss key aspects of the load segmentation methodology used to imbed a varying electricity demand within the GCAM (a state-of-the-art Integrated Assessment Model) energy and economic modelling framework and present key results on the role CCS technologies could play in decarbonizng subpeak and peak generation (encompassing only the top 10% of the load) and under what conditions. To do this, the authors have modelled two hypothetical climate policies that require 50% and 80% reductions in US emissions from business as usual by the middle of this century. Intermediate electricity generation is virtually decarbonized once carbon prices exceed approximately $150/ton CO2. When CO2 permit prices exceed $160/ton CO2, natural gas power plants with CCS have roughly the same marketshare as conventional gas plants in serving subpeak loads. The penetration of CCS into peak load (upper 6% here) is minimal under the scenarios modeled here suggesting that CO2 emissions from this aspect of the U.S. electricity sector would persist well into the future even with stringent CO2 emission control policies in place. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In May 2007, E.ON Group (E.ON) set an ambitious target for reducing the specific CO2 emissions of the overall group’s electricity generation. By 2030, E.ON will reduce the specific CO2 emissions to 360 grams per kilowatt hour, half the 1990 figure. Thus, besides increasing the share of renewables and maintaining the nuclear share, E.ON identified the need to advance the technology of fossil fuel fired power plants. E.ON pursues a strategy of replacing power stations at the end of their life cycle with new, state-of-the-art power stations which are ready to be equipped with CCS (carbon capture and storage) and therefore “capture ready”. Moreover, E.ON is developing CO2 capture and storage as this technology has the potential to drastically reduce emissions from coal-fired plants. Beginning in 2020, E.ON intends to have large scale CCS technology available. E.ON’s coordinated strategy encompasses research, development and demonstration (RD&D) and is directed towards pre combustion capture, oxyfuel and post combustion capture with a focus on the latter. E.ON is working together with international partners to further develop the existing technologies for capturing of CO2 by testing advanced technologies in several pilot plants at our sites. The goal of the pilot projects is to optimise the downstream capture of CO2 from flue gas (post combustion capture) hence reducing the auxiliary power consumption of the capture process. An update on the pilot projects, suppliers and achievement made will be given. Besides improving the capture process itself the technology needs a significant increase of the treatable flue gas capacity compared to today’s limits known from chemical industry. Therefore E.ON is also involved in the development of demo scale projects proving the feasibility of the full CCS chain (including transport and storage). E.g. our Kingsnorth power station in the UK has entered the next stage of the UK Government’s carbon capture and storage (CCS) competition after developers. We submitted an Outline Solution Bid competition on 9 November 2009. The competition is aiming to deliver the UK’s first fullscale CCS demonstration project. We have come to an agreement with both the European Commission and the Dutch Government on the funding of our ROAD-project. This is our joint project with Electrabel (part of GDF SUEZ) at RotterdamMaasvlakte (NL). The Dutch part of the funding is now before the European Commission for State Aid approval. We will report about the projects and the progress made in our market units. In addition E.ON is engaged in the development of storage sites and transport routes for CO2. Our business unit E.ON Gas Storage is involved in several research and development activities. The paper will highlight E.ON’s main CCS activities. An overview will be given as well as an update on the status of the current projects and available results. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Carbon capture and storage (CCS) might be an important climate protection technology for coal-rich countries. This paper presents first results of a systemic and long-term analysis of a future CCS implementation in India. It focuses on potential storage formations in the geological subsurface and the geographic match of these sinks with CO2 emissions of current and future largepoint power plants. The analysis is framed by an overview on India’s position on CCS, ongoing Indian research and development projects as well as its international activities. The geological potential for CO2 sequestration in India is subject to large uncertainty because, so far, only few studies estimated it in a vague manner. A first meta-analysis shows that there is a huge variation between 48 Gt and 572 Gt of CO2. The main differences between the evaluated studies are the assumed capacities for deep saline aquifers and basalt formations. Taking the ongoing discussion and the existing uncertainties into account, the storage potential might be provided only by aquifers (in the range of 44 to 360 Gt of CO2) and hydrocarbon fields (2 to 7 Gt of CO2). The amount of CO2 emissions possibly available for sequestration is assessed by applying three substantially different long-term energy scenarios for India. These scenarios, indicating pathways between a ”low carbon” and a ”high carbon” development until 2050, result in cumulated CO2 emissions between 30 and 171 Gt if all new large-scaled power plants will be based on CCS from 2020 on. Compared with the sink capacities, only the CO2 emissions of scenario S2 (30 Gt) could theoretically be stored with high certainty. Considering the scenarios S3 and S1, their CO2 emissions (94 Gt and 171 Gt, respectively) could only be sequestered if the aquifer capacity would prove to be usable. Geological storage sites do not appear to be located close to sources in South West, Central, North and North East India. This first rough analysis means that only those CO2 emissions occurring in the Western parts of North and West India, the Eastern part of South India as well as the South part of East India might be suited for sequestration nearby. A more detailed source-sink matching will follow in the next phase of the project, including results of expert meetings in India. Furthermore, this analysis will be complemented by an additional assessment from economic, ecological and resource-strategic points of view, which might further affect the potential for CCS. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: In the eyes of energy analysts and bureaucrats as well as media and environmental NGO’s, CCS now appears to be synonymous with “clean coal”, meaning coal fired power plants with CCS. While recognising the role of coal–emitting nearly 42 percent of man-made CO2 globally–we want to focus on other aspects of CCS that we find are just as, or more important in actually driving the deployment of CCS in the coming years. One of these factors is what we see as an evolving “industry norm” to inject, into geological formations, CO2 extracted from high- CO2 natural gas in gas refineries or LNG plants. A second trend driving CCS in the petroleum sector is the need to produce increasingly acid natural gas (CO2 and/or H2S rich) and heavier oil. This will certainly accelerate the number of petroleum related CCS-projects in the next decades and thus be valuable for geo-storage learning. A third and already important factor is the use of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR). Today CO2-EOR is mostly limited to USA - with nearly one hundred operating projects–and a small but increasing number in other countries. In the period to 2030 and beyond, it is the view of the authors that CO2-EOR will fan out across the sedimentary basins of the world. These three factors will not only add to our knowledge of geological storage of CO2, but also be important drivers to develop storage sites, pipeline networks, shipping routes and other infrastructure components for CO2. There are in fact some profitable CCS-projects or at least projects with modest needs for subsidies. With the present electricity-from-coal focus of CCS, it is easy to forget the potential role of other branches of industry with large point sources of CO2. The branches of iron and steel, cement, petrochemicals, refining, fertiliser, biomass-to-energy are examples we should focus more on. This lack of broad focus is regrettable for two reasons. Firstly, some of these are CO2 sources which lend themselves to CCS by having higher CO2 concentrations or higher pressures than power plant flue gas, resulting in potentially lower capture cost. Secondly we need these branches of industry to learn CCS-capture technologies from each other, to progress their own demo-projects and become familiar with the practices of geo-store companies. The main focus in this paper is learning geo-storage by taking available CO2-streams rather than creating such streams through billion dollar investment projects. One such example is that hydrogen today is largely produced and distributed by pipelines and other methods by a small group of specialised industrial gas companies. The connection between these companies and CO2-storage operators are, however, nearly non-existent. Hydrogen–except for pre-combustion to electricity - has been put on the back-burner in connection with CCS. We here argue for focussing more on hydrogen from fossil fuels with CCS aimed at end-use in industry. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has the potential to contribute to reductions in atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions and thus help mitigate climate change. Although awareness of the potential of CCS technology is increasing among the public and specific energy/climate stakeholders, understanding remains limited and engaged opportunities for learning about CCS technology have been minimal. This paper explores stakeholders’ perceptions of the risks and benefits of CCS technology, and how those perceptions changed with additional information provided by CCS technology experts. In October 2007, a unique day-long CCS educational event was held at the Chewonki Foundation’s Center for Environmental Education in Wiscasset, Maine, U.S.A. This event brought a dozen CCS experts from academia, industry, and government to Maine to discuss CCS technology, its potential role in mitigating CO2 emissions, and its place within the evolution of an increasingly carbon constrained energy system. Approximately one hundred key policy and decision-makers with interest and involvement in the northeast United States’ energy system were invited and participated in the seminar. All participants were asked to complete a survey on their perceptions of the risks and benefits of CCS technology before and after the event. The results indicate that exposure to information about CCS technology increased stakeholder reporting of their level of understanding of the technology and of their level of support for advancing the technology. Several interesting changes in perception were associated with age, level of education and gender. Significant changes in the reported level of support for CCS advancement was found in more educated and younger stakeholders while this change did not appear with older and less educated individuals. A distinct and significant increase was identified in the level of concern about CCS reported among women before and after the event. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Reduction of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere can be realized by the implementation of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technology. Successful implementation of CCS will depend on public acceptance of this technology. It has been argued that public trust in organizations involved in complex novel technologies influences risk/benefit perceptions and, consequentially, public acceptance of these technologies (e.g., Siegrist, 1999, 2000). This paper discusses whet her or not this model holds true in the context of CCS and whether or not it holds true for both integrity -based trust and comp etence-based trust. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: While the share of renewables has been growing rapidly since the 1990s, at present electricity generation in Germany is still based on coal and nuclear energy, with nuclear power and lignite covering almost the whole base load electricity generation, and hard coal serving as the main energy carrier for medium-load generation. However, both coal and nuclear energy are facing major challenges. The future of coal in Germany is uncertain against the background of strong climate policy regulations and issues of public acceptance. In line with current legislation, nuclear power is being phased out. In its strategy for CO2 emissions reduction, the German government has identified the carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies as one of the options. Major government papers highlight the importance of further research and development (R&D) in the field of CCS technologies. German industry supports R&D activities on CCS by participating in the work of public–private partnerships (PPP), e.g. the COORETEC initiative, the GEOTECHNOLOGIEN programme, as well as by implementing CCS demonstration projects. In view of the difficulties coal has been facing with regard to public acceptance in Germany, the public acceptance of CCS technologies is recognised as an important precondition for their large-scale deployment. Thus, research on public acceptance of CCS is one of the priorities accompanying R&D on these technologies. Besides the strategy of fostering national R&D activities on CCS, Germany is actively participating in international networks and organisations dealing with the CCS issues. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Effective large scale deployment of CCS requires recognized standards and guidelines. This paper presents a new 18 month Joint Industry/Public Project (CO2QUALSTORE) that aims to develop a systematic risk-based procedure for selection, characterization and qualification of sites and projects for geological storage of CO2. The project will integrate and interpret results from R&D and pilot projects into a guideline format. Target users are operators, authorities, verifiers, and other stakeholders. The guideline will include examples from case studies; links to decisions during development, operation and closure; assistance in complying with regulations; as well as accounting for emissions avoided. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]