The NORDICCS CCS Roadmap

Transcription

1 Nordic CCS Competence Centre The NORDICCS CCS Roadmap Marit J. Mazzetti Keynote TCCS7, Trondheim, Norway, Contributions by all NORDICCS WPs

2 NORDICCS Nordic CCS Competence Centre Operating under the Nordic Top-level Research Initiative (TRI) Vision for NORDICCS Become a Center of Expertise on CCS by developing Joint Nordic Strategiesto promote Widespread Implementation of CCS, and effectively Communicatethe strategies to the Decision makersand the General public Funded by Nordic Innovation (75%) and Partners (25%) 16 Partners from research, industry and NGOs Duration: 5 years Total budget: 6.2 million Euro

3

4 Opportunity: Nordic Synergies Vast storage capacity off the coasts of Norway and Denmark & Large emission sources in Sweden & Finland Joint CCS projects could allow scale up Reductions in cost due to economies of scale

5 Nordic Synergies - Biogenic emissions Great biomass energy sources in Sweden and Finland Potential for BECCS projects that can go carbon negative! CO 2 Emissions from Stationary Point Sources With emissions > tonnes (2009)

6 Status of CCS 97% hydropower, 2 % from CCGT and 1% wind. CO 2 emissions mainly from transportation(30%) offshore oil and gas production(29%), and industry (25%). Goal of carbon neutral by CCS important for CO 2 reduction in industry and gas fired power plants Power supply from hydro (53%) and nuclear (40%) Goal of carbon neutral by CCS assumed major share of the reductions from the industry sector starting at 2040 Fossil and some wind. Target of 100% renewable energy by 2050 CCS for EOR a possibility, new climate plan this year Power from fossil, bio, nuclear. Extensive industrial-scale use of biomass. Goal 80 % reduction in GHG by 2050 VTT Analysis suggests 18 Mt of CO 2 removed by CCS by 2050, BECCS, bio-refineries, steel mills, cement, pulp & paper 85% Renewable energy: hydro and geothermal. Goal 50-70% red GHG by 2050 Industry: Aluminium plants 40% of CO Numbers

7 Analysis of Nordic CCS Includes CCS in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Source: International Energy Agency (2013), Nordic Energy Technology Perspectives, OECD/IEA, Paris CCS for CO2 removal Country Industry Power Total Source (Mt/year) Nordic International Energy Agency (2013), Nordic ETP 2 DS Energy Technology Perspectives, OECD/IEA, Nordic International Energy Agency (2013), Nordic ETP CNS Energy Technology Perspectives, OECD/IEA, VTT Green Energy, 2012;Includes BECCS in pulp Toni and paper ind VTT Green Energy, 2012;Includes BECCS in pulp Inno and paper ind Norway Lavutslippsutvalget, 2006 Finland VTT Green Energy, 2012;Includes BECCS in pulp and paper ind Tonni: Industrial production increases Using current technology Inno: Rapid Technology development More Urbanization

8 Economy of Scale CCS Implementation Oil industry through EOR (Enhanced Oil Recovery) Could be economical for the operator CO 2 is excellent agent to enhance oil recovery Sweetening: Purification of Norwegian export gas Industries with high concentrations of CO 2, operational close to 100% of the year Steel Cement Pulp and paper Fertilizer plants Gas fired Power plants with CCS Refinery emissions(processing and power plants)

9 Case 3: Skagerrak Industry Cluster Capture Sites: Esso Refinery, Norway Norcem Cement plant, Norway Preemraff Refinery, Sweden Borealis Chemical Plant, Sweden Portland Cement, Denmark Nordjyllands verket, Denmark World s first CO 2 capture test facility in cement industry Norcem Brevik - Norway Transport: via ship Hub: Kårstø, Norway Hirtshals, Denmark Location chosen closest to first capture site Storage: Utsira, Norway or Gassum, Skagerak

10 Case 6: Zero Emission Power Production Scope: Large scale power plant using Combined Cycle Gas Turbines w/ccs Economy of Scale: 2000 MW Plant Five Combined Cycle Gas Turbines CO 2 emissions: 5 Mt/annually for possible use in EOR Capture: MEA post-combustion 5 Mt CO2 /y, 5.6 Mt CO2 /y, 3.9/7.8 % CO2, Location: Stavanger Transport and Storage: Utsira via pipeline Power End Use: Electrification Export to Europe Metals Industry, e.g. Aluminium CO 2 End Use: EOR

11 Case 7: Sweetening The Deal Challenge: CCS Expensive, EOR possible solution Prior EOR projects failed due to lack of steady supply of CO 2 Opportunity: Remove and store more of CO 2 present in Norway's Natural Gas Currently Exported to Europe Location: Close to Source & Sink On shore, close to the source New oil and gas fields at Utsira Arctic or Northern Norway w/high CO 2 Steady CO 2 supply: Currently export 100 B Sm 3 /annually at 2.5% Economy of scale significant for volumes of CO 2 captured of up to 2-3 M tonnes/year

12 Cost of different NORDICCS Case Scenarios - N th of a kind (NOAK) Capture Technology Large Sweetening comb. cycles Skagerak cluster Storage cost ( /t) Transport cost ( /t) Capture cost ( /t)

13 How do we Realize Deployment? Economy of Scale & Continued R&D to Reduce Capture Costs EOR storage to further reduce costs of Sweetening Several Successful CCS Offshore Storage Projects Initially, then Onshore Changes to the European Carbon Market are Necessary for Industrial CCS The current European carbon market is not proving to be effective: Bio emissions should count Incentives/legislation needed Feed in Tariffs, Emission Performance Standards, CCS Certificates Strengthening ETS (backloading.) Risk Distribution Necessary Governmentwill have to support the first implementations to reduce risk (CAPEX & OPEX) Support for infrastructure development Hubs for transport to storage site Transport network for CO 2 in the Nordic region is too costly Ship only option until scale is large enough to justify pipeline

14

15 Scenarios for Implementation

16

17

18 Conclusions from NORDICCS Roadmap Nordic Countries as a group cannot reach CO 2 emission goals without CCS Scenario 1: As is: Sleipner and Snøhvit: 1.7 M tonnes, Scenario 2: Mongstad: 0.5-1M tonnes Scenario 3: Large-scale sweetening, potentially w/ EOR 2-3 projects by 2050: 5 M tonnes Scenario 4: Industry and Power projects viable with incentives Industry located within the Nordic "Skagerrak cluster": 3 M tonnes large scale power plant w/ccs: 5 M tonnes Bio CCS in Finland and Sweden closer to 2040: 5 M tonnes Added Cost benefit from EOR Added cost benefit from import of CO 2 from large European CCS projects by pipeline Implementing Scenarios 2-4 allows storing 20 M tonnes CO 2 /year by CCS by 2050 and fulfil the CCS part of our climate goals!

19 Acknowledgements/Thank You/Questions This work is supported by the NORDICCS Centre, performed under the Top-level Research Initiative CO 2 Capture and Storage program, and Nordic Innovation. The authors acknowledge the following partners for their contributions: Statoil, Gassco, Norcem, Reykjavik Energy, CO 2 Technology Centre Mongstad, Vattenfalland the Top-level Research Initiative (Project number 11029) NORDICCS Centre Contact Information: Dr.Nils A. Røkke, Vice President, SINTEF, Nils.A.Rokke@sintef.no