Overview of CCS development

Overview of CCS development

Presentation titlePage 2

“The Development of clean coal technology is one of the biggest challenge of our industry. Indeed, it may be the biggest” -

Wulf Bernotat, CEO, EON

-


“Electricity generation is entering a period of transformation as investment shifts

to low-carbon technologies — the result of higher fossil-fuel prices and

government policies to enhance energy security and to curb emissions of CO2.

In the New Policies Scenario, fossil fuels — mainly coal and natural gas —

remain dominant, but their share of total generation drops from 68% in 2008 to

55% in 2035, as nuclear and renewable sources expand. The shift to low-carbon

technologies is particularly marked in the OECD. Globally, coal remains the

leading source of electricity generation in 2035, although its share of electricity

generation declines from 41% now to 32%.” – IEA Analysis WEO 2010.

Where are we and where we are heading- hard facts


What does it mean?


Increase in GHGs

310 PPB

1650 PPB

380 PPM2000 AD

280 PPB

775 PPB300 PPM1800 AD

270 PPB

750 PPB280 PPMBefore 1800 AD

NOxMethaneCO2

Atmospheric ConcentrationPeriod

Even if CO2 emissions are stabilized at present levels, its atmospheric concentrations will reach 500 PPM by the end of 21st century

If methane emissions are held constant at current levels, its atmospheric would stabilize at 1900 ppb (11% higher than present levels) in less than 50 years.


What does it mean?


With 5-6°C warming - which is a real possibility for the

next century - existing models that include the risk of

abrupt and large-scale climate change estimate an

average 5-10% loss in global GDP, with poor countries

suffering costs in excess of 10% of GDP.


UN FrameworkRio TreatyNon-binding targets 1990 levels by 2000

Berlin MandateFurther reductions neededJI Pilot Phase

Kyoto ProtocolBinding Targets , Emissions Trading + CDM

The Hague CollapseNegotiation suspended on KP rules

Marrakesh AccordsKP rules agreed

Kyoto PeriodNational trading & compliance programs in place

EU ETS Phase ITargets on Major Industrials in EU 15 + Accession Countries

EU ETS Phase IIMore sectors + 6 gasses, links to Kyoto Parties

JI Pilot PhaseNo formal crediting; testing market solutions

Bush Administration US withdraws from KP

Danes Open CO2 Market Power sector

UK Open CO2 Market All industrials

92 94 96 98 0400 04 08-1205-0702

Global responses- International Policy & Market Evolution


Relevance of CCS


Without CCS cost will go up by 70%


Relevance of CCS- Quantitative terms


The ultimate objective of that Convention is the “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that prevents dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system”. From this perspective, the context for considering CCS (and other mitigation options) is that of a world constrained in CO2 emissions, consistent with the international goal of stabilizingatmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

With respect to the period up to 2020 and taking into account natural gas processing, the cement sector and the power sector the technical potential of CCS is of 1.45 GtCO2. A portfolio of other candidates CDM abatement options suggested that around 3.7 GtCO2 abatement potential is available in these sectors in 2020 (i.e. CCS constitutes 28% of the total potential supply of abatement options to 2020). For 2020, the analysis suggests, assuming an annual demand of 2,100 MCERs in 2020, that CCS would be deployed under the CDM, with total levels in the range 117‐314 MtCO2 per year. This would represent between 6‐9 percent of total CER supply..

Relevance of CCS- Supply potential


Why CCS is necessary

The only technology available to mitigate greenhouse

gas (GHG) emissions from large-scale fossil fuel usage

is CO2 capture and storage (CCS). The ETP scenarios

demonstrate that CCS will need to contribute nearly

one-fi fth of the necessary emissions reductions to

reduce global GHG emissions by 50% by 2050 at a

reasonable cost. CCS is therefore essential to the

achievement of deep emission cuts.


Electricity Sector will be in focus as far as CCS is concerned


Typical CCS Options

CCS through Amine route

CCS through Separation route

CCS through natural absorption of CO2 in brine solution

– Kenya example

CCS through natural absorption of CO2 in brine solution –

Australian example

CCS through molten sodium ( Doosan R&D)

CCS through enhance afforestation (enhancing green

cover)

CCS through algae and bio capturing


Typical CCS process-1) CO2 Capture in Electricity and Heat Generation


CO2 Capture Toolbox: Current and Future Technologies


Commercial CO2 scrubbing solvent


Power Plants: Cost with CO2 Capture


Expected Trends of Chemical Absorption Capture Process Performance


Net Efficiencies of Fossil-Fuelled Power Plants


2010 Coal-Fired Power Plant Investment Costs


Pre Combustion technolgy


Maturity of Pre Combustion technology components


Oxy fuel combustion


Cost of CO2 transfer


Storage of CO2


Techno economic feasibility of storage capacity


Global Potential and status of CCS plants


Global Electricity Production by Fuel and Scenario, 2005, 2030 and2050: Baseline, ACT Map and BLUE Map Scenarios


Global Electricity Production by Fuel and Scenario, 2005, 2030 and2050: Baseline, ACT Map and BLUE Map Scenarios


Timeline expected for implementation


Regional Distribution of proposed CCS projects


India

India is the world’s third-largest coal user. Coal accounts for 62% of the country’s energy supply Use of coal is expected to grow rapidly (IEA, 2007). Nearly 75% of the coal produced in India is used in electricity generation, the remainder being used in the steel, cement, and fertiliser industries. Given the abundance of coal in India, combined with rapidly growing energy demand, the government of India is backing an initiative to develop up to 9 Ultra-Mega Power Projects. This will add approximately 36 GW of installed coal-fi red capacity, offering important opportunities to test CCS. India’s current annual CO2 emissions amount to over 1 300 Mt, about half of which is from large point sources that are suitable for CO2 capture. The 25 largest emitters contributed around 36% of total National CO2 emissions in 2000, indicating the potential existence of a number of important CCS opportunities (IEA GHG, 2008).


Estimates of geological storage potential in India are in the range of

500 to 1 000 Gt CO2, including onshore and offshore deep saline

formations (300-400 Gt), basalt formation traps (200-400 Gt),

unmineable coal seams (5 Gt), and depleted oil and gas reservoirs

(5-10 Gt) (Singh, et al., 2006). A recent assessment of coal-mining

operations in India gives a theoretical

CO2 storage potential in deep coal seams of 345 Mt (see Table

6.5). However, none of the fields has the ability to store more than

100 Mt. CO2 storage in deep coal seams is still in the

demonstration phase (IEA GHG, 2008).


CO2 Storage Capacity of Indian Coal Mines


CO2 Storage Capacity of India

Analysis of oil and gas fi elds around India shows that relatively few fields have the potential to store

the lifetime emissions from even a medium-sized coal-fi red power plant. However, recently discovered

offshore fi elds could provide opportunities in the future. The potential for CO2-EOR needs to be

further analysed on a basin-by-basin basis. It is not possible to develop a suitable estimate today (IEA

GHG, 2008).

Deccan Volcanic Province, a basalt rock region in the northwest of India, is one of the largest potential

areas for CO2 storage. The total area is 500 000 km2 with a total volume of 550 000 km3 with up to 20

different fl ow units. It reaches 2 000 m below ground on the western fl ank. Storage capacity is around

300 Gt CO2 (Sonde, 2006). Thick sedimentary rocks (up to 4 000 m) exist below the basalt trap. In

order to model the long-term fate of CO2 injection in such mineral systems, geochemical and geo-

mechanical modelling of interaction between fluids and rocks is required.


CO2 Storage Capacity of India

There is considerable potential for CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers, particularly at the coast and

on the margins of the Indian peninsula, and in Gujarat and Rajasthan (see Figure 6.9). Aquifer storage

potential has also been demonstrated around Assam, although these reservoirs are 750-1 000 km

from the nearest large point sources.

The Indo-Gangetic area is an important potential storage site (Friedmann, 2006). The Ganga Eocene-

Miocene Murree-Siwalik formations have good storage potential as deep saline formations, but high

salinity and depth preclude economic use. The Ganga area has a basin area of 186 000 km2, with a

large thickness of caprock composed of low permeability clay and siltstone (Bhandar, et al., 2007). The

proximity of sources to the potential storage site makes it a good candidate for a pilot project.


Point Sources of CO2, Storage Basins and Oil and Gas Fields on theIndian Subcontinent


Financial Aspects

Given appropriate emission reduction incentives, CCS offers a viable and competitive route tomitigate CO2 emissions. In a scenario that aims at emissions stabilisation based on options withcosts up to USD 50/t CO2 (ACT Map1), 5.1 Gigatonnes (Gt) per year of CO2 would be capturedand stored by 2050, which is 14% of the total needed for global temperature stabilisation. In theETP BLUE Map scenario, which cuts global CO2 emissions in half and which considers emissionabatement options with a cost of up to USD 200/t CO2, CCS accounts for 19% of total emissionsreductions in 2050. In this scenario, 10.4 Gt of CO2 per year would be captured and stored in2050. Without CCS, the annual cost for emissions halving in 2050 is USD 1.28 trillion per yearhigher than in the BLUE Map scenario. This is an increase of about 71%. About half of all CCSwould be in power generation and half would be in industrial processes (cement, iron and steeland chemicals) and the fuel transformation sector.

Overall, on the basis of current economics, the fi nancial consequences of CCS range from apotential benefi t of USD 50/t CO2 mitigated (through the use of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery)to a potential cost of USD 100/t CO2 mitigated.

CO2 capture leads to an increase in capital and operating expenses, combined with a decreasein plant energy effi ciency. In terms of cost per tonne of CO2 captured, costs are USD 40-55/t forcoal-fi red plants, and USD 50-90 for gas-fi red plants. In terms of cost per tonne of CO2 abated,the fi gures for coal-fi red plants in 2010 are around USD 60-75, dropping to USD 50-65/t CO2 in2030; and for gas-fi red plants, USD 60-110 in 2010, dropping to USD 55-90 in 2030.CO2 Transport


Options for financing CCS


Options for financing CCS


CCS VALUE CHAIN

► SourceThis refers to activities which must occur at the source (e.g. power plant) from which CO2 will be captured, before the capture technology is installed.

► CaptureThe process through which CO2 is separated (or “captured”) from flue gasses, being emitted from the “source”.

► TransportThe transportation of CO2 from the “source”/capture site, via pipeline, to the off-takers.

► Usage & storageThe use of CO2 for purposes such as EOR; and the eventual permanent storage of CO2 underground


PROJECT LIFE CYCLE

Licensing Issues which will require permitting or licensing.

Development The development of technology and facilities (e.g. construction of pipelines, installation of capture technology).

Operation Operation of either the capture technology, transportation via pipeline, injection and usage/storage.

Closure Decommissioning and closure of the relevant activities in the value chain.


POLICY ISSUES

Asset Assets include the CO2 itself, or the infrastructure (e.g. the pipeline, injection site, storage reservoir).

Finance Issues relating to cost and revenue.Technology The need to develop the relevant technology.


Stages of CCS development


Increased support for the research and development (R&D) of energy

technologies that face technical challenges and need to reduce costs before

they become commercially viable.

Demonstration programmes for energy technologies that need to prove they

can work on a commercial scale under relevant operating conditions.

Deployment programmes for energy technologies that are not yet cost-

competitive, but whose costs could be reduced through learning-by-doing.

These programmes would be expected to be phased out as individual

technologies become cost-competitive.

Roadmap to achieve objectives


CO2 reduction incentives to encourage the adoption of low-carbon technologies. Such

incentives could take the form of regulation, pricing incentives, tax breaks, voluntary

programmes, subsidies or trading schemes. The ACT scenarios assume that policies

and measures are put in place that would lead to the adoption of low-carbon

technologies with a cost of up to USD 50/t CO2 saved from 2030 in all countries,

including developing countries.

In the BLUE scenarios the level of incentive is assumed to continue to rise from 2030

onwards, reaching a level of USD 200/t CO2 saved in 2040 and beyond.

Policy instruments to overcome other commercialisation barriers that are not primarily

economic. These include enabling standards and other regulations, labelling schemes,

information campaigns and energy auditing. These measures can play an important role

in increasing the uptake of energy-effi cient technologies in the building and transport

sectors, as well as in non-energy intensive industry sectors where energy costs are low

compared to other production costs.

Roadmap to achieve objectives


THE CCS NETWORK – ABU DHABI

► National Carbon Capture & Storage network ► CO2 capture from existing and future power &

industrial sources ► Transportation pipelines ► Injection in oil reservoirs for EOR

► Target a significant cut to Abu Dhabi’s carbon footprint: 20-30 million Tons (1.5 billion scf/d) by 2030

► Promote clean fossil fuel power and industry► Build an early model of large scale commercial

stage application ► Assume global leadership and drive carbon

capture technological progress


CCS PROJECT – PHASE I

• Operation in phases by Q1, 2013 and Q1, 2015

• Capture 5 million Tons/ year - Largest development in the world

• Engineering and design in progress

• 4 Carbon Capture facilities covering wide range of applications: Power Generation: Pre-combustion, GTs, Boilers; as well as industry (Steel).

• Highly advanced CO2 pipeline network with excess capacity to cater for growth until 2030.



Compression and storage


Risk Profile for In Salah



Monitoring methodology implemented


Satellite imagery

Documents

Overview of CCS development