Carbon Capture and Storage Dr Jon Gibbins Senior Lecturer Energy - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Carbon Capture and Storage

Dr Jon Gibbins Senior Lecturer Energy Technology for Sustainable Development Group Mechanical Engineering Department Imperial College London SW7 2AZ, UK

Principal Investigator UK Carbon Capture and Storage Consortium www.ukccsc.co.uk OSI UK/China Focal Point Scheme contact for Climate Change & Environment

Tel: 020 7594 7036 Mob: 07812 901244 Fax: 020 7594 1472 email: j.gibbins@imperial.ac.uk

Anglo-French Scientific Discussion Seminar, Organised by the Science and Technology Department of the French Embassy in the UK and Imperial College London 27 September, 2007

FOSSIL FUELS: CLIMATE AND ENERGY

STERN REVIEW: The Economics of Climate Change

(already at 430 ppm CO2e and currently rising at roughly 2.5 ppm every year)

CRITICAL ROLE FOR CCS

http://www.ipcc.ch/

CARBON IN FOSSIL FUELS CARBON THAT CAN BE EMITTED TO ATMOSPHERE 1990-2100

‘Unconventional oil’ includes oil sands and oil shales. Unconventional gas’ includes coal bed methane, deep geopressured gas etc. but not a possible 12,000 GtC from gas hydrates.

Coal Oil Gas Uranium*

Australia/New Australia/New Zealand Zealand

Sources: BP Statistical Review 2005; WEC Survey of Energy Resources 2001; Reasonably Assured Sources plus inferred resources to US$80/kg U 1/1/03 from OECD NEA & IAEA Uranium 2003; Resources, Production & Demand updated 2005; *energy equivalence of uranium assumed to be ~20,000 times that of coal

• r

• u

• n

• p

• n

Africa Africa

World Energy Reserves 2004 (Mtoe)

Europe Europe Russian Russian Federation Federation Middle East Middle East China China Other Other Asia/Pacific Asia/Pacific North America North America South America South America

Brendan Beck, World Coal Institute, Coal, 3M Sustainable Energy Engineering, Imperial College, 12 October 2006

COAL IS AN ENERGY ASSET AND A CLIMATE THREAT

GEOLOGICAL STORAGE

Carbon Storage Options

IPCC (2005)

Geological Storage Options for CO2

• 1. Depleted oil and gas reservoirs
• 2. Use of CO2 in enhanced oil recovery
• 3. Deep unused saline water-saturated reservoir rocks
• 4. Deep unmineable coal seams
• 5. Use of CO2 in enhanced coal bed methane recovery
• 6. Other suggested options (basalts, oil shales, cavities)

270 GtC 2700 GtC 185 GtC 245 GtC 55 GtC <4 GtC

www.ipcc.ch

Sleipner, aquifer storage for 1Mt/yr CO2

www.statoil.com, 2002

www.statoil.com, 2002

www.statoil.com, 2002

Time lapse (4D) seismic tracking

• f injected CO2

Will it leak?

• Storage sites won’t have

a design leakage rate

• Remediation possibilities

– remake wells, depressurise reservoir etc.

• Leakage most likely in

the short/medium term

• Even then, hard to

extract all of the CO2

• nce it is spread out in a

porous rock layer

Figure from IPCC (2005)

CO2 CAPTURE

After Jordal, K. et. al. (2004) Oxyfuel combustion for coal-fired power generation with CO2 capture – opportunities and challenges Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, www.ghgt7.ca

O2

CO2 dehydration, compression transport and storage CO2 separation

Power & Heat

Air separation Gasification + shift + CO2 separation Air separation

Coal Air Power & Heat Power & Heat Flue gas N2, O2, H2O CO2 Air Coal Air H2 N2, O2, H2O CO2 Coal O2 Air N2 CO2 (with H2O) Recycle POST-COMBUSTION CAPTURE PRE-COMBUSTION CAPTURE OXYFUEL (O2/CO2 RECYCLE COMBUSTION) CAPTURE

Tilbury. Capture ready- photo montage

(some details omitted)

Richard Hotchkiss, RWE npower R&D, RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE COMBUSTION DIVISION OF THE COAL RESEARCH FORUM . 17 April 2007, http://www.coalresearchforum.org/pastmeetings.html

Tilbury. Capture ready- photo montage

(some details omitted)

Richard Hotchkiss, RWE npower R&D, RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE COMBUSTION DIVISION OF THE COAL RESEARCH FORUM . 17 April 2007, http://www.coalresearchforum.org/pastmeetings.html

IEA GHG (2006), CO2 capture as a factor in power station investment decisions, Report No. 2006/8, May 2006

Costs include compression to 110 bar but not storage and transport costs. These are very site-specific, but indicative aquifer storage costs of $10/tonne CO2 would increase electricity costs for natural gas plants by about 0.4 c/kWh and for coal plants by about 0.8 c/kWh.

Natural gas plants Coal/solid fuel plants

IGCC or PC?

SIMILAR COST TRENDS FROM A NUMBER OF GENERIC UK AND US STUDIES, BUT ACTUAL PROJECTS MORE VARIABLE

? ? ? ?

NEED TO GET PROJECT-SPECIFIC COSTS

FIRST TRANCHE

Demonstration

SECOND TRANCHE

Commercial & Regulatory Drivers

Overall effort also important to maintain continuity

GLOBAL CCS ROLLOUT

Big prize is getting two learning cycles from two tranches of CCS projects before global rollout

EU CCS ROLLOUT

Earliest demo plants? Last plants in first tranche First plants in second tranche Later plant in second tranche First EU rollout plants First global rollout plants PLANTS COMING INTO SERVICE TIMING FOR Design Construction Learning time 2015 DEMO PROJECTS IN PLACE 2020 CCS STANDARD IN EU 2025 GLOBAL CCS ROLLOUT Feedback from first tranche into second tranche Feedback from second tranche into EU and global rollout

12 plants by 2015 in EU CCS build-up plus all plants built capture-ready CCS retrofit on capture-ready plants

How to make plants capture-ready

Must:

• Have access to suitable geological storage
• Have space and access for capture equipment
• Have reasonable confidence it will work (feasibility study)

Also consider:

• Up-front expenditure with savings later, e.g.

Bigger/better equipment? Move near cheaper/better CO2 storage? But only pre-investments with very good returns justified See IEA GHG report on capture-ready

E.ON Robin Irons Doosan-Babcock Gnanam Sekkappan Imperial Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers Jon Gibbins IEA GHG John Davison

POLICY BACKGROUND

CCS DEMONSTRATION PROJECT COMPETITION

Following the 2007 Budget announcement, the Government is engaged in designing a competition framework for the UK CCS demonstration. Our intention is to launch the competition in November 2007. The criteria against which proposals will be assessed are likely to include the need for any project proposal to: – be located in the UK; – cover the full chain of CCS technology on a commercial scale power station (capture, transport and storage); – be based on sound engineering design (reliable and safe) underpinned by a full front-end engineering and design study; – set out the quantum of financial support requested; – be at least 300MW, and capture and store around 90% of the carbon dioxide and thereby contribute at least an additional 0.25 Mt/yr of carbon savings to the UK’s domestic abatement targets (relative to a gas-fired power station of equivalent size without CCS); – start demonstrating the full chain of CCS at some point between 2011 and 2014; – address its contribution to the longer term potential of CCS in the UK, (for example, through the potential of shared infrastructure) and to the international development of CCS; and – be supported by a creditworthy developer entity.

CCS Proposals – UK

PC, CR, new supercritical 3 x 800MW Coal RWE, Blyth PC, CR, supercritical retrofit, (oxyfuel?) ~ 2400 MW Coal Scottish Power, Longannet PC, CR, new supercritical, post-com 2 x 800 MW Coal RWE, Tilbury PC, CR, supercritical retrofit, oxyfuel 1 or 2 x 500MW Coal SSE, Ferrybridge PC, CR, new supercritical, post-com 2 x 800MW Coal E.ON, Kingsnorth PC, CR, supercritical retrofit, (oxyfuel?) ~ 1200 MW Coal Scottish Power, Cockenzie IGCC + shift + precombustion 450 MW Coal (+petcoke?) E.ON, Killingholme, Lincolnshire coast IGCC+CCS addition to planned NGCC CHP plant 450 MW (or more, with retrofit) Coal (+petcoke?) Conoco-Phillips, Immingham IGCC + shift + precombustion Shell gasifier ~900 MW Coal Powerfuel/ Kuzbassrazrezugol Hatfield Colliery IGCC + shift + precombustion 800 MW Coal (petcoke) Progressive Energy /Centrica, Teeside Capture technology Plant output Fuel Project

Proposed full-scale (~300 MWe and above) CCS projects - indicative only

Powerfuel Power Ltd

UK Geological Storage

Future Thames Estuary CO2 gathering hub?

Powerfuel Power Ltd (plus Imperial Thames Estuary proposal)

POTENTIAL FOR BIOMASS WITH CCS

Tyndall Centre 'Decarbonising the UK’ http://www.tyndall.ac.uk

Tyndall UK aviation emissions projections for 2050 ~ 30 MtC RCEP estimates for max UK biomass production by 2050 ~ 60 Mt Carbon content of biomass available for conversion ~ 24 MtC Carbon captured using biomass with CCS ~ 90% Energy recovered compared to use without CCS ~ 75% Oil price equivalent of $50/tonne CO2 $22/barrel Transport Atmosphere carries CO2 from plane to plant for free! But need to supply biomass to CCS plants

WHAT ADVANCES ARE NEEDED?

• Start on first tranche plants – will immediately trigger R&D
• Get new technologies working:

IGCC - mainly engineering

• xyfuel - basic research and engineering in parallel
• Get the best out of existing PC technology

post-combustion capture options capture-ready and retrofit strategies

• Storage issues: ETS, capacity optimisation, safety,

monitoring, long term liability – rapid progress needed

• Transport and storage systems – pipeline routing issues
• Political, regulatory, fiscal backup – post-Kyoto process
• Build capacity: people, expertise, manufacturing capacity
• Decarbonised electricity=new uses in transport & buildings

CCS systems will operate in new ways in new markets

CCS OR THE END!