CCS in the Oil refining Industry System Solutions and Assessment of Capture Potential Daniella Johansson (PhD student) Supervisors: Prof. Thore Berntsson & Dr. Per-Åke Franck Division of Heat and Power Technology Department of Energy and Environment Financially supported by:
Outline Background Oil refining industry in Europe Post-combustion capture from refinery flue gases System solutions and economic evaluation of different heat supply options for the desorber in the post-combustion process Aim Studied system Methodology Result Mapping the potential for CCS for the European Oil Refining Industry
The Oil refining Industry in Europe Ca: 155 Mt CO 2 /year (roughly 3% of the total CO 2 emissions) Total refinery output stable Trend is increasing CO 2 emissions (17% 1990-2005) Increasing fuel production of lighter fuels (e.g. diesel) Harder environmental and quality specifications Petroleum production most likely to play important role (e.g. IEA, 2010, Azar et. al, 2003, Wahlund, 2004)
Post - Combustion Reboiler temperature: 120 C Normally, no revamp is needed Chemical Absorption with MEA New energy efficient absorption media under development (e.g. Chilled Ammonia) Cost for energy is a large part of the costs
System solutions and evaluation of different heat supply options to the desorber in the postcombustion process Aim: Examine how the costs for CO 2 capture in refineries are affected by different heat supply options in a future energy market
Studied systems Two case refineries A hydroskimming refinery (CO 2 to capture: 0,45 Mt/y, from two sources) A complex refinery (CO 2 to capture: 1,64 M/t/y, from four sources) No excess heat is assumed for district heat delivery Excess heat above 129 C is used for steam production Excess heat above 90 C is used for heat pumping
Studied systems Post-combustion MEA Desorber heat demand: 2800 kj/kgco 2 and 4700kJ/kgCO 2 Post-Combustion efficiency: 85% Transportation and storage costs not including
Energy choices to supply the heat demand in the desorber Excess heat from the current process, > 129 C (EH) Excess heat from current process (<129 C) using heat pump (HP) Natural gas boiler (NB), in combination with steam turbine Biomass Boiler (BB), in combination with steam turbine Natural gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) Flue gases for NB, BB and NGCC also captured
Methodology and input data Combination of knowledge of the refinery process with knowledge of the CCS process : Identify available excess heat Determine the energy demand and costs for the different heat supply options Evaluate the operation costs by using future energy market scenarios, developed at our division
Future energy market scenarios Fossil Fuel Price Low High CO 2 Emissions Charge High Low 85 15 [ /t CO2] Crude oil: 29 /MWh Natural gas: 22 /MWh Coal: 7.5 /MWh 1, Marginal electricity producer: Coal Condensing Power 2, Marginal electricity producer: Coal Condensing Power with CCS Crude oil: 49 /MWh Natural gas: 37 /MWh Coal: 9.9 /MWh 3, Marginal electricity producer: Coal Condensing Power 4, Marg.inal electricity producer: Coal Condensing Power with CCS * Fossil fuel prices taken from European energy transport trends 2006
Results C avoided, global = C annual / CO 2 avoided, global CO 2 avoided, global = CO 2 before capture - CO 2 after capture + CO 2 reduced by replacing electricity production
Hydroskimming refinery /tonne CO2 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Global CO 2 Avoidance Costs EH&HP NGCC BB NB EH&HP NGCC BB NB EH&HP NGCC BB NB EH&HP NGCC BB NB Scenario: Low CO2 price - Scenario: High CO2 price- Scenario: Low CO2 price - Scenario: High CO2 price - Low fossil fuel price Low fossil fuel price High fossil fuel price High fossil fuel price EH&HP(2800kJ/kgCO2) NGCC(2800kJ/kgCO2) BB(2800kJ/kgCO2) NB(2800kJ/kgCO2) 4700kJ/kg CO2 CO2 charge For alternative EH&HP (2800kJ/kg CO 2 ) heat above 129 C is enough For alternative EH&HP (4700 kj/kg CO 2 ) heat pumping is needed
Result - Complex refinery /tonne CO2 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Global CO 2 Avoidance Costs EH&HP NGCC BB NB EH&HP NGCC BB NB EH&HP NGCC BB NB EH&HP NGCC BB NB Scenario: Low CO2 price - Scenario: High CO2 price- Scenario: Low CO2 price - Scenario: High CO2 price - Low fossil fuel price Low fossil fuel price High fossil fuel price High fossil fuel price EH&HP(2800kJ/kgCO2) NGCC(2800kJ/kgCO2) BB(2800kJ/kgCO2) NB(2800kJ/kgCO2) 4700kJ/kg CO2 CO2 charge For both EH&HP alternative (2800kJ/kg CO 2 and 4700 kj/kg CO 2 ) heat pumping is necessary
Conclusions CO 2 avoidance costs in most cases highly dependent on future energy prices and heating demand CO 2 avoidance costs when using excess heat are stable to changes in specific heat demand The most cost efficient alternative is using excess heat The excess heat alternative shows a possible economy for CCS
Most likely capture potential: 23 29 Mt CO2/year
Thank you for listening Questions?