Upload
global-ccs-institute
View
2.169
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presentation by Anthony Veder Vopak at the Global CCS Institutes 2011 Member's Meeting in Rotterdam
Citation preview
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
GCCSI StudyLiquid logistic Shipping Concept
Lessons learned to date
5/13/2011 1
Rotterdam May 11th, 2011
Michael Tetteroo & Cees van der Ben
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
CINTRA logistic concept
5/13/2011 2
• Bulk making/breaking for off shore CO2 storage• Intermediate Storage• Combine and link pipeline systems and barging/shipping routes: 4 routes• Provide independent custody transfer metering (for ETS)• Network building block (at rivers and coast lines)
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Hub service: CO2 transfer barge/ship pipe
PIPE
BARGE/SHIP
5/13/2011 3
PIPE
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
CO2 Transport and Storage systems
• Transport from the Emitters via pipelines or barges;
• Collecting CO2 in storage tanks at the CO2 Hub;
• Loading sea vessels for transport to depleted offshore gas fields.
Liquefaction at the Emitter’s siteor at the CO2 Hub
Connecting Hub
5/13/2011 4
• Locking the sea vessel to a floating turret or loading tower linked with the sub-sea system of the depleted gas field;
• Injecting the CO2 into the porous rocks (depleted gas or oil field or aquifers, at required temp’s and pressures ;
• As an alternative, mooring near a platform for discharging the CO2 into a depleted field via the platform utilities
• Ship is designed to carry both CO2 and LPG
Connecting Hubto offshore trunk line
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Hub Concept Organic Growth Model:Asset build up follows the volume build-up
Source 1 Source 2
1. Early scheme: single source flow too small to justify off shore pipe
Source 3 Source 4 Source n
3. Final mature scheme:
12 2
3
5/13/2011 5Sink 1 Sink 1
Sink 3: EORat oil field
Sink 2 Sink n
pipe
2. Intermediate scheme: two combined flows do allow for an off shore pipe => ship moves into alternative CO2 or LPG service
3. Final mature scheme:multiple sources & sinks, both depleted reservoirs and EOR at production wells
1
2
Ship now could become pipe
line for 2 sources
2
Potentially ship that
used to sail on sink 1
33
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
GCCSI LLSC study: lessons learned to date
General• Start engineering at the sink• Minimize CO2 composition requirements• Combining multiple emitters in one network is technically feasible. • No metallurgical/corrosion issues found other than water: dry at the
sourceSHE• No items of concern encountered• Low vessel collision risk due to high LCO density
5/13/2011 6
• Low vessel collision risk due to high LCO2 density• On shore pipeline through busy areas: 40 barCompression• Up to 100 bar: bull gear compressor (bull gear), beyond: pump.• Moderate ambient temperatures: no power consumption difference
between compression or compression/liquefaction/pumping.Pipeline• In dense phase in order to minimize costs.
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
GCCSI LLSC study: lessons learned to date
Liquefaction• Optimum CO2 liquefaction condition: -50 ˚C, 7 bara.• Combining parallel compression and liquefaction in one
machine feasible.Storage• Terminal minimum storage volume: 10,000 m3
5/13/2011 7
• Terminal minimum storage volume: 10,000 m3
• Min. costs/m3: > 2000 m3 shop fabricated spheres• Other considerations may call for horizontal bullets.Legislation
Biggest remaining uncertainties: • CO2 custody transfer: who, when and to whom• Monitoring requirements in the mean time
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
2.5
3
3.5
Ship transport capacity [mmt/yr]
• Loading & discharge 2000 t/hr• Sailing speed 15 kts• Voyage related spare 1 day
GCCSI LLSC study: lessons learned to date
ship sizes
5/13/2011 85/13/2011 8
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
10,000 cbm ship
30,000 cbm ship
Distance [nm]
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
LLSC mission statement
400
450
• Depleted gas field NS • Stand alone operation• Stay above hydrate formation bottom hole temperature: 13 ˚C• Challenges: � all solvable
� Intermittent flow � Pressure over sink life time: 150 – 400 bar at well head
5/13/2011 95/13/2011 9
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Time line (years)
Sh
ip m
an
ifo
ld p
ressu
re (
bara
)
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Shipping
5/13/2011 105/13/2011 10
• LPG/CO2 carrier• 30,000 m3
• Stand alone operation• Onboard conditioning• Key challenge: uptime
• Conventional • X - bow
Source Anthony Veder, X-Bow® IP of Ulstein Sea of Solutions
Source: AnthonyVeder – IP Anthony Veder
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Conventional hull
5/13/2011 115/13/2011 11
LOA 210 m DP 2
B 33.6 m Sailing speed 17kts (lpg trade)
T 11 m Gradual power generation build
Source: AnthonyVeder – IP Anthony Veder
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
CO2Conditioning
5/13/2011 125/13/2011 12
Source: AnthonyVeder – IP Anthony Veder
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Rotterdam distance to sinks
Dutch sinks are all within the 400 km range.
5/13/2011 135/13/2011 13
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Barging/shipping• No CO2 venting/re-liquefaction in transit• Barge max. LOA 135 m → 150 m in the future• Max barge size Ruhrgebiet → R’dam: 7500 tonnes (Ruhrgebiet →
Karlsruhe: 6000 tonnes)• Required ship sizes: 10,000 - 30,000 m3
• Ship min. required off loading temperature: 0 ˚C• => sea water suffices as heat source for LCO2 “vaporization”
GCCSI LLSC study: lessons learned to date
5/13/2011 14
• => sea water suffices as heat source for LCO2 “vaporization”Ship off loading• HP pressure CO2 unmanned off loading: technically feasible at
acceptable uptimes in deep and shallow water.• Depleted reservoir’s existing wells require retubing• Ship → sink batch injection technically feasible, multiple wells likely
to be required flow wise.• Tubing: low temperature material of construction.
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
GCCSI LLSC study: lessons learned to date
Costs: contract duration
5/13/2011 15
Pipeline system tariffs are hurt the most by short term contracts
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Source: IEA GHG, 2004
Transportation Costs: insight evolution
LNG CO2
5/13/2011 16
CO2 CO2
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
GCCSI LLSC study: lessons learned to date
Costs
• CO2 transportation is to be considered as a regular infra structural project: 20+ year contract durations
• CO2 liquefaction’s energy intensity is relatively low => cost break even distances are
5/13/2011 17
cost break even distances are1. for on shore pipe versus barge: 200 km (and not 1500 km)
2. for off shore pipe versus ship: 150 km (and not 750 km)
• Depending on flow and distance the transportation costs may vary from 20 to 120 €/ton (20 year contract)
• Combining multiple emitters in one system is paramount to make CCS affordable, especially for industrial (smaller) emitters
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
THANK YOU
5/13/2011 18
QUESTIONS?
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
BACKUP SLIDES
5/13/2011 19
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Which transport solution to choose cost wise
5/13/2011 20
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Transportation tariffs
5/13/2011 21From capture flange to storage well head; 20 year take or pay
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Transportation tariffs
5/13/2011 22From capture flange to storage well head; 20 year take or pay
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Transportation tariffs
5/13/2011 23From capture flange to storage well head; 20 year take or pay
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
Transportation tariffs
5/13/2011 24From capture flange to storage well head; 20 year take or pay
Preliminary resultsPreliminary results
CO2 Hub Process Flow Diagram
5/13/2011 25