Scholarly article on topic 'Integration and findings from the EU-China COACH project'

Integration and findings from the EU-China COACH project Academic research paper on "Earth and related environmental sciences"

CC BY-NC-ND
0
0
Share paper
Academic journal
Energy Procedia
Keywords
{"CCS feasibility" / Polygeneration / "Carbon capture" / Storage / "Bohai Basin" / China}

Abstract of research paper on Earth and related environmental sciences, author of scientific article — Tony Espie, Juitian Zhang

Abstract The COACH project was an EU-China collaboration funded by the EU’s FP7 R&D programme to assess the potential for a CCS demonstration project in China. The Jing-Jin-Ji Region of North-Eastern China is a major contributor to China’s CO2 emissions profile with large stationary sources currently contributing annual emissions of nearly 350 million tonnes CO2 per year, of which approximately 300 million tonnes CO2 has the potential to be captured and stored annually. Two scenarios for a CCS demonstration project located in the onshore section of the Bohai Bay region in Shandong Province in the North East of China were assessed in this study. Capture studies considered a polygeneration scenario while scoping studies were performed of storage potential within the onshore Bohai Bay area. Size scales of <1 Mtonnes/year (c. 5 million tonnes storage capacity) and >1Mtonnes/year (c. 100 million tonnes storage capacity) were considered. Introductory screening was performed for four areas to review their potential for development for CO2 storage. These included two oilfield provinces, a regional saline formation and a coal mining area. A preliminary risk assessment was prepared covering both technical and non-technical issues. Order of magnitude costs likely to be incurred in implementing a CCS demonstration project were assessed. These included estimates of the cost of capture and conditioning of the CO2, transportation to a storage site and the storage of the CO2 in a geological formation. The cost of capture was expressed relative to a reference case comprising an IGCC without CCS. A single product, electricity, was considered. Storage costs were assumed to arise from appraisal (saline formations and coal mining areas), wells (new CO2 injectors and remediation or upgrading for existing wells) and monitoring.

Academic research paper on topic "Integration and findings from the EU-China COACH project"

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com -

ScienceDirect Ener9y

Procedia

Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 5948-5955 :

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

GHGT-10

Integration and findings from the EU-China COACH project

Tony Espie1, Juitian Zhang2

1 BP Alternative Energy International ltd, Chertsey Road, Sunbury-on-Thames TW16 7LN, United Kingdom 2 Administrative Centre for China's Agenda 21, 109 Wanquanhe Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100089, People's Republic of China

Abstract

The COACH project was an EU-China collaboration funded by the EU's FP7 R&D programme to assess the potential for a CCS demonstration project in China.

The Jing-Jin-Ji Region of North-Eastern China is a major contributor to China's CO2 emissions profile with large stationary sources currently contributing annual emissions of nearly 350 million tonnes CO2 per year, of which approximately 300 million tonnes CO2 has the potential to be captured and stored annually. Two scenarios for a CCS demonstration project located in the onshore section of the Bohai Bay region in Shandong Province in the North East of China were assessed in this study.

Capture studies considered a polygeneration scenario while scoping studies were performed of storage potential within the onshore Bohai Bay area. Size scales of <1 Mtonnes/year (c. 5 million tonnes storage capacity) and >1Mtonnes/year (c. 100 million tonnes storage capacity) were considered.

Introductory screening was performed for four areas to review their potential for development for CO2 storage. These included two oilfield provinces, a regional saline formation and a coal mining area. A preliminary risk assessment was prepared covering both technical and non-technical issues.

Order of magnitude costs likely to be incurred in implementing a CCS demonstration project were assessed. These included estimates of the cost of capture and conditioning of the CO2, transportation to a storage site and the storage of the CO2 in a geological formation. The cost of capture was expressed relative to a reference case comprising an IGCC without CCS. A single product, electricity, was considered. Storage costs were assumed to arise from appraisal (saline formations and coal mining areas), wells (new CO2 injectors and remediation or upgrading for existing wells) and monitoring.

(c©2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords : CCS feasibility; polygeneration; carbon capture; storage; Bohai Basin; China

ELSEVIER

doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.597

1. Introduction

The Jing-Jin-Ji Region of North-Eastern China is a major contributor to China's CO2 emissions profile. Analyses show the potential for this region to become a major CCS hub in the future.

Large stationary point sources in this region include 6 types of CO2 sources with an annual emission of 346.1 Mt CO2 per year, of which 296 Mt CO2 could be captured and sequestrated annually. Large potential reservoirs in oil fields, gas fields, coal seams, and saline formations have a possible total storage capacity of 6791 Mt CO2 based on published geological data.

Distribution of CO2 sources and sinks in Jing-Jin-Ji Region

Options were identified for source-sink matching based on best economic performance (ammonia plants feeding EOR) or a maximum storage case (requires all types of sources matching with all types of sinks).

2. Project Scenarios

Two scenarios were considered for a possible future demonstration of CCS in the Bohai Basin region in the North East of China.

C02 emissions from 100MW + power stations fTsinghua University)

co2_REPORT

@- 0-0+8

China Pipelines (Petroleum Economist)

------- Gas under construction or planned

— Oil

— Oil under construction or planned - Products

Capture studies were based upon a hypothetical polygeneration plant. Storage studies considered at a high level four separate areas within the basin where storage might be possible. The scenarios may be summarised as follows :

Region Bohai Basin region in the North East of China

CO2 source Polygeneration plant

Transportation Pipeline

Feedstock Coal with railway transport from Inner Mongolia

Gasifier TPRI / GreenGen

Products Power and methanol

Scenarios A (Small scale) Scenarios B (Large scale)

CO2 amount <1 million tonnes /year >1 million tonnes /year

CO2 sink EOR Saline aquifer

3 Storage options and risk analysis

The larger scale scenario flowrate of >1 million tonnes/year coupled with the economic modelling lifetime implied the need for 60 million tonne storage for a demonstration project. This was increased to a targeted capacity of 100 million tonnes to enable a higher flowrate in the later stages of the project and / or an extended lifetime.

Scoping studies were performed to assess the potential for the following sites to be developed for CO2 storage :

• The Dagang oilfield province

• The Shengli oilfield province

• The Huimin Sag saline formations

• The Kailuan mining area

Risk Assessment for CO2 Storage Potential Options

Data availability

Capacity -envelope volume & reservoir quality

Geological complexity

Containment Injectivity

Pipeline

Well Reservoir distance to Conflict of integrity Availability Power interests Station

No of reds

Dagang oilfield complex

Shengli oilfield complex

Huimin Sag saline aquifer

Kailuan coalfield NA

Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk

3.1 Cost of a CCS Demonstration Project

Order of magnitude costs for a CCS demonstration project were assessed as follows : 3.1.1 Capture

Capture costs were estimated relative to a reference case of IGCC without CCS and considered a single product, electricity. CO2 conditioning and compression were included within the cost of capture. A financial analysis (assuming 7000 operating hours per year) yielded the following :

Based upon the definitions in the IPCC special report on CCS, the cost of CO2 captured and the cost of CO2 avoided were :

Cost of CO2 avoided :

Cost CO2 avoided = 22.50 €/t

Cost of CO2 captured

Cost Captured = 17.90 €/t

3.1.2 Transport

The following assumptions were used to estimate transport costs :

• CO2 flowrate : 3 million tonnes/year

• Pipeline diameter : 300 mm (12 inches)

• Facility lifetime : 20 years

• CO2 inventory : 60 million tonnes

Then, for a 100 mile pipeline :

Unit Cost = Capex / CO2 project inventory + Opex / Annual throughput = €0.43 / tonne / 100 miles + €0.12 / tonne per 100 miles

= €0.55 / tonne per 100 miles 3.1.3 Storage

Storage costs were assumed to arise from the following components :

3.1.3.1 Appraisal : it was assumed that producing oilfields (Dagang province and Shengli province) would require no new appraisal. However, the Huimin Sag and possibly Kailuan were assumed to require a full appraisal sequence to identify and evaluate suitable storage locations. Appraisal was assumed to comprise a combination of seismic acquisition, appraisal wells and associated studies

Then, for a 60 million tonne storage site :_

Unit cost = €0.83 / tonne

3.1.3.2 Wells : it was assumed that new wells will be required as CO2 injectors and that any existing production wells would require remediation or upgrading for high pressure CO2 service.

Although for the most part, the potential storage formations have a moderate to high permeability, the degree of compartmentalisation was a concern with the result that the number of wells required was a major uncertainty. Costs were estimated for a range of 8 - 15 - 30 wells (0.57 - 0.28 - 0.14 million sm3/day/well for 3 million tonnes/year)

It was assumed that remediation and upgrading would be required for wells in the producing oilfields (Dagang and Shengli) but was not required for the saline formations options (Huimin Sag) or coalfield options (Kailuan). It was arbitrarily assumed that 300 wells might need to be screened for integrity for high pressure CO2 and that remediation and/or upgrading may be required on up to 50 of these.

Then, for a 60 million tonne storage site:

Without remediation of existing wells

Unit cost = €0.67 - 1.25 - 2.50 / tonne

With remediation of existing wells

Unit cost = €2.84 - 3.42 - 4.67 / tonne

3.1.3.3 Monitoring : for the purposes of this study it was assumed that a demonstration of geological storage of CO2 would be accompanied by an extensive monitoring campaign. There are many options for a monitoring campaign and it is premature to focus on individual techniques before key uncertainties have been established for the demonstration site. Accordingly, it was assumed that the monitoring over the facility life could be divided into an initial intensive five year period and then a reduced level of monitoring for the remainder of the project.

Then, for a 60 million tonne storage site :_

Unit cost = €0.83 / tonne

3.1.4 Integrated Cost

All cases considered lie in the range €25 - 30 / tonne of CO2 avoided, this cost being dominated by the cost of CO2 capture, conditioning and compression (80 - 88% of total).

Distance Capture Transport Site Appraisal Wells Monitoring Total

km €/t €/t €/t €/t €/t €/t

Dagang 70 22.50 0.24 0 2.84-3.424.67 0.83 26.41 - 26.99 -28.24

Gudao 200 22.50 0.68 0 2.84-3.424.67 0.83 26.85 - 27.43 -28.68

Huimin Sag 250 22.50 0.85 0.83 0.67-1.252.50 0.83 25.68 - 26.26 -27.51

Kailuan 170 22.50 0.58 0.83 0.67-1.252.50 0.83 25.41 - 25.99 -27.24

These costs are indicative only. The cost differences between the options are not material as they are within the uncertainty of the numbers.

4 Policy and regulation

Policy and regulatory issues relevant to CCS in China were summarised as follows : 4.1 Issues for Regulators to Consider

The following guidance for regulators on issues to be considered when developing regulatory frameworks for CCS was developed by the CO2 Capture Project (www.co2captureproject.org)

Building a framework to regulate CCS

Widespread deployment of CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS) will require standards and criteria to provide assurance of the long-term security 0/CO2 Geological Storage (CCS).

— C O 2 Ca pt u re P roje ctr Poficy PrincipSes Paper.■ A Framework/or Certification and Operation ofCOs Geological Storage Sites

1 Site certification

2 Operation

3 Closure

4 Post closure

A An operational framework

Site certification

Necessary preliminary steps before initial site certification:

1 Local and national a uthorities must gra nt the right to store COz.

2 The govern ment a nd the operat ing company wiII need to agree to both the initial site conditions and the operational limits of the site.

3 The capacity ofthe site must be determined

4 The quality ofthe site must be assessed The risk of leakage will need to be evaluated,

5 A risk assessment shou Id address factors, such as the strength ofthe seal and the pressure and chemistry of fluids a nd gases within the reservoi r.

A high-quality storage site should fit the following criteria:

■ The site must be of sufficient depth not to endanger underground sources of drinking water. The ideal depth would be between one and th ree thousand metres.

■ The formation should contain a large amount of potentia I storage space.

■ The site should have an effective trappi ng mechanism with thick, impermeable confining rock layers (such as shales) that are free of major (non-seali ng) faults.

Operation

The length of time it takes to inject the COiimrto

the site could vary from a few yea rs to decades.

Meter Regulate Examine Comply Adhere Report

▲ Ope rati o n a I ta sk s

Site operators should undertake the following

operational tasks:

■ Meterthe pressure and regulate the flow-rate.

■ Examine the composition ofthe COz stream to detect impurities.COafrom industrial sources could be m ixed with other gases and trace elements, which may need to be removed before the CO2 is stored.

■ Comply with local regulations on the use of COa-resista nt con struction materia Is in wells, cement plugs and surface facilities,

■ Adhere to a monitoring regi me that will include updates to, and validation of, the reservoir modelling,

■ Report performance re suits to a government

regu I ato r. (The re g u I ator may int e rven e if perfo r m a n ce measurements differ markedlyfrom the modelling predictions).

Closure

■ Commercial businesses may not exist for very long, so to ensure public acceptance of geological storage, it is important that long-term stewardship of storage sites remain with nations or states,

■ When the injection ofCOzhas ended, the operator should apply to the regu lator for a closure certificate.

■ After certification has been agreed, the operator can remove the equipment a nd buildings above the site, unless long-term monitoring is required.

■ Site stewardship should revert to the appropriate government authority.

Post-Closure

■ Post-closu re requirements wi II differ from one site to the next because some sites will present no risk and others may require long-term monitoring.

■ A well-chosen site, wh ich has performed as expected and required, may not need long-term monitoring.

■ A poorly performing site may need continued monitori ngand possibly remediation or mitigation,

4.2 Initiatives Within China

4.2.1 Tsinghua University - WRI Initiative

Tsinghua University is partnering with WRI to develop guidelines for China's deployment of CCS technology. Tsinghua University has assembled a steering committee that includes China's leading CCS experts. This team commenced a two year programme of work in December 2008. The project was funded with support from the U.S. Department of State under the Asia Pacific Partnership.

The project is modelled on a successful effort that WRI helped implement in the U.S., in which a diverse set of stakeholders developed a comprehensive set of guidelines for CCS projects. A Chinese version of the guidelines would foster better understanding in China of how to develop responsible CCS projects, and would provide information to guide decision-making as China addresses the climate-coal challenge.

4.2.2 STRACO2

The EU project STRACO2 concluded in 2009. It was designed to support the ongoing development and implementation of a comprehensive regulatory framework in the EU for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies for zero emissions applications but also aimed to assist in supporting and building a basis for EU-China cooperation on CCS.

STRACO2 had five major objectives: (1) Incentivisation schemes; (2) Financing mechanisms; (3) International trade (and dialogue with associated international bodies); (4) Technology transfer; (5) Socio-economic impacts

5 Conclusions

1. The Jin-Jing-Ji region of North-East China is a material contributor to China's overall GHG emissions profile. However, analyses indicate that this region has the technical potential for CCS to make a significant contribution to reducing emissions in the event that global dialogues continue to show that this is necessary.

2. Two scenarios were used to focus this study to screen options for a possible CCS demonstration project. These considered capture of CO2 from the gasification of coal and storage in one or more geological formations in the Bohai Bay geological basin.

3. Storage for the smaller scale scenario (<1 Mtonnes/year) could be accommodated in the Dagang or Shengli oilfields. Storage for the larger scale scenario (>1 Mtonnes/year) could be accommodated in the Shengli oilfield complex (in a number of fields) or potentially in saline formations in the Huimin Sag area.

4. The assessment of geological storage options was performed at a scoping level. Large uncertainties remain that will require a sustained geological appraisal effort to address. Specific issues include :

• Only public domain data has been used limiting the available database

• Very limited data were available to describe the saline formations of the Huimin Sag.

• As a consequence, estimate of storage capacity was made using analytic approaches rather than based upon detailed geological and dynamic modelling

• Well numbers for CO2 injection were a major uncertainty given the potential for compartmentalisation of the storage formations. Estimates for the number of wells required could easily be in error by a factor of two.

• When considering storage options in existing oilfields, the large number of wells gives rise to concerns over well integrity. This was not reviewed in the current study.

5. Costs for CCS for the larger scale scenario were estimated as :

• Capture, conditioning and compression : €22.50 / tonne CO2 avoided

• Transport, storage and monitoring : €3 - 6 / tonne CO2 stored (depending on the number of injection wells required)

This yielded an integrated cost for CCS for the larger scale scenario of :

CCS cost = €25.41 - €28.68 / tonne CO2 avoided (254 - 287 RMB / tonne CO2 avoided)_

6. In common with most other countries, China did not yet have a functioning regulatory framework for CCS and in particular the geological storage of CO2. Substantial progress has been made in the last two years in clarifying the issues for regulators to consider and in initiating activities that could lead to the formation of a regulatory framework.