The role of CCS/CCUS in the Climate Action Plan
Global CCS Institute, delivered at the Global CCS Institute's Third Americas Forum
Feb. 27th, 2014, Washington, DC
Kalyanpur ) Call Girls in Lucknow Finest Escorts Service 🍸 8923113531 🎰 Avail...
Â
The role of CCS/CCUS in the Climate Action Plan - Dr S. Julio Friedmann
1. Dr. S. Julio Friedmann
Deputy Assistant Secretary
Office of Clean Coal
January 2014
The role of CCS/CCUS in the
Climate Action Plan
Global CCS Institute – 3rd Americas Forum
Feb. 27th, 2014, Washington, DC
2. We live in a time of energy abundance
2
We’re #1!
• In Oil and Gas production
• In Innovation
We’re #2!
• In Coal production & use
• In GHG emissions
We’re top 10
• In renewable loading
• In uranium production
Once in a generation opportunity to build
3. 3 3
Increasing energy demand (2-3x increase)
Water scarcity
Pollution reduction
Greenhouse gas emission reduction
Climate change and arctic impacts
40 years of EOR and 15 years of CCS
Where are we today?
4. 4
IEA CCS Roadmap 2013: Key Technologies for
Reducing Global CO2 Emissions
Source: IEA Roadmap 2013.
Note: Numbers in brackets are shares in 2050. For example, 14% is the share of CCS
in cumulative emission reductions through 2050, and 17% is the share of CCS in
emission reductions in 2050, compared with the 6DS.
Most 2050 climate budgets require CCUS from NatGas power
5. US climate change policy currently consists of a
portfolio of federal and state initiatives
(in effect unless noted)
• Federal renewable fuel standard
• Federal vehicle fuel economy
standards
• Various alternative vehicle tax
credits, rebates, and sales
targets
• Infrastructure tax credits
• Fuel tax credits (most expired)
• California economywide
GHG cap-and-trade
• California Low Carbon Fuel
Standard (in effect, but suit
pending)
5
(in effect unless noted)
• Federal renewable tax credits
Federal appliance standards
• Federal conventional pollutant
regulations*
• Federal CO2 performance
standards (under
development)
• State renewable portfolio standards
• State energy efficiency programs
• California economywide GHG
cap-and-trade
• RGGI cap-and-trade
• Other state programs
*Not explicitly targeting CO2 emissions, but nonetheless impactful.
Note: RGGI = Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
Source: US EIA; IHS CERA
Power
Other
On-
road
trans-
port
2011 US CO2 emissions
by major sector
Key policies targeting
transportation CO2
Key policies targeting
power CO2
Slide from IHS Forum “International Carbon Policy Trends:
Is a role reversal under way”, 19 September 2013 • Houston
6. President’s Climate Action Plan:
Three overarching themes
6
Mitigation (emissions reduction)
• ALL OF THE ABOVE
• Efficiency, Renewables, Nuclear, Gas
• Coal with CCS/CCUS
Adaptation and resilience
• Smart, reliable grid
• Key infrastructure investments
International Partnerships
• China and Asia
• Coordinated intl. efforts
Once in a generation opportunity to build
7. 7
President Obama’s Climate Action Plan focuses on
US power sector CO2 emissions
7
• ~20 directives and initiatives to reduce US GHG emissions.
• The EPA WILL complete CO2 performance standards for power plants under
the Clean Air Act
Final ruleDraft rule
2013 2014 2016 20172015
20 Sept.
2013
1 June
2014
1 June
2015
30 June
2016
State implementation plans
New presidentElection year
CO2 NSPS – New Source
Performance Standards*
CO2 ESPS – Existing Source
Performance Standards
2014–15
8. CCS is THE key technology for the
2nd era of fossil energy abundance
8
Policy drivers
• President’s Climate Action Plan
• EPA: NSPS (draft) and ESPS (pending)
• State actions (AB32 etc.)
Technical findings (2008-present)
• IPCC WG1 report: must read policy summary!
• Continued GHG accumulations
• Challenges will all energy scale-ups
Global economic context
• G2 world
• Investors speak
• Return to growth
Once in a generation
opportunity to build
9. 9
Large Scale Integrated Projects
World Wide
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1972
1982
1986
1996
2000
2004
2008
2010
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2022
Operate Execute Define Evaluate Cum. Volume
NumberofProjects
VolumeCO2(mtpa)
Data from Global CCS Institute
10. 10
The US and international community have deployed over a
dozen large CCS projects
Large commercial projects
Pending commercial projects
CO2-EOR
DOE Regional Partnerships Intl. research projects
Key unit of innovation – global engines of discovery
11. DOE’s top CCS/CCUS priorities
11
Success of the demos
• Serial # 1 in operation 2013-2018
• A deep and rich set of public learning
Reimagining the coal and CCS RD&D portfolio
• Advanced combustion
• Capture and storage: incl. footprint reduction
• 2nd generation large pilots
International Partnerships
• China
• Key OECD countries
New mode: delivering solutions
12. 12
DOE CCUS Demonstration Projects
CCPI
FutureGen
ICCS (Area I)
Hydrogen Energy California
IGCC with EOR
$408 Million - DOE
$4.0 Billion - Total
Summit Texas Clean Energy
IGCC with EOR
$450 Million - DOE
$1.7 Billion - Total
NRG Energy
Post Combustion with CO2
Capture with EOR
$167 Million – DOE
$339 Million - Total
Air Products
CO2 Capture from Steam
Methane Reformers with EOR
$284 Million - DOE
$431 Million - Total
Leucadia
CO2 Capture from Methanol
with EOR
$261 Million - DOE
$436 Million - Total
Archer Daniels Midland
CO2 Capture from Ethanol w/ saline storage
$141 Million - DOE
$208 Million - Total
FutureGen 2.0
Oxy-combustion with CO2 capture
and saline storage
$1.0 Billion - DOE
$1.3 Billion - Total
Southern Company Services
IGCC-Transport Gasifier w/CO2 pipeline
$270 Million - DOE
$2.67 Billion - Total
Focus – Large-scale commercial demonstration of CCUS integrated with
coal power generation and industrial sources.
13. 13
Major Demonstration Projects
13
Recipient Project Location DOE Funding Status
Storage
Type
CO2 Seq.
(Metric Tons Per Year)
Storage
Start
Air Products
Steam Methane Reformer
Hydrogen
Production
Port Arthur, TX $284M Operations EOR ~925,000 2013
Southern Company
Services
(Kemper)
Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle (IGCC)
Kemper County,
MS
$270M
Under
Construction
EOR ~3,000,000 2014
Archer Daniels
Midland
Ethanol Fermentation
CO2
Decatur, IL $141M
Under
Construction
Saline ~900,000 2014
NRG Energy (Petra
Nova )
WA Parish
Retrofit Pulverized Coal
plant
Thompson, TX $167M Financing EOR 1,400,000 2016
Summit
Texas Clean Energy
Project
Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle
Polygeneration
Penwell, TX $450M Financing EOR 2,200,000 2017
Leucadia Energy, LLC
Methanol from Petcoke
Gasification
Lake Charles, LA $261M
Front End
Engineering &
Design
EOR ~4,500,000 2017
FutureGen 2.0
Oxycombustion
Pulverized Coal Boiler
Retrofit
Meredosia, IL /
Morgan County, IL
$1B
Front End
Engineering &
Design
Saline 1,000,000
2017
(est.)
Hydrogen Energy
California (HECA)
Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle
Polygeneration
Kern County, CA $408M
Front End
Engineering &
Design
EOR 2,570,000
2019
(est.)
16. 16
Loan Program Office Project Development Financing
LPO Advanced Fossil Energy Solicitation
CARBON CAPTURE
• From traditional coal or NG generation
• Saline formations or EOR
ADVANCED RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
• ECBM, UCG, novel oil and gas drilling
• Use of co-produced waste gases vs. flaring
LOW CARBON POWER SYSTEMS
• Oxycombustion, chemical looping
• Syngas-, H2, or NG-based fuel cells
EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS
• CHP and waste-heat recovery
• High-T or high-efficiency cycles
18. 18
Pathway for Technology Commercialization
TRL 2 Successes
from
FWP, SBIR/STTR, AR
PA-E
Transfer to Office of
Major Demonstrations
Scope of
Capture Program
“Valley of Death” for Technologies
We need more 2nd generation pilots!
19. What 2nd gen large pilots should deliver
19
2-3 NEW and credible pathways to low-cost CCS
• 25-50 MW scale unit performance
• Working partnerships for commercialization
• Robust economic characterization
Rich engineering data and results
• Steady state and dynamic performance
• Full footprint accounting (products; water)
Definitive storage knowledge and tools
• Data needs for quantitative risk assessment
• Sites to field test technology
• Foundation for subsurface mastery
20. 20
This work performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344
• Many 10’s of billions producible just US;
100’s of billions worldwide
• Required to finance first set of projects;
required to drive down costs through
deployment
• Additional domestic supply, revenues;
reduced imports
BillionBarrels
88.1
47.4
2.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
Technically
Recoverable
Economically
Recoverable*
Already
Produced/
Proven
Domestic Oil Resources
ARI, 2008
MillionMetricTons
Total U.S.
CO2 Demand
New
Lower-48
CO2 Demand
Net Lower-48
From Captured
CO2 Emissions
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
12,500
9,700
7,500
2,800*
2,200**
Market CO2 demand
In the near term, EOR is a critical bridging step that
brings near-term benefits to the US
21. 21
Emergent networks of EOR-anchored projects:
Anchors for additional development
Ground work for pipeline networks; fast followers; CO2 utilities
• Permian basin; Gulf
Coast; California; N.
Dakota/ Saskatchewan
• Central Alberta Basin
• Scotland/Central N. Sea
• Ordos basin
MIT, 2010
Opportunity for govt. fast-tracking and co-development
22. 22
The future looks bright – we should pursue
important new opportunities
WATER: Both challenge and opportunity
• Water co-production: 8M m3 water for 6M tons CO2.
• Water reclamation: lignite drying
• Water integration: upgrading municipal water with waste heat
UTILIZATION: Part of the work and value
• EOR already common; ROZ advancing (Negative C oil demonstration)
• CO2-Algae: small volumes, tough economics; improving
• Cement and mineralization: small volumes, tough economics; improving
Entering commercial realm; now it gets exciting
23. Co-produced freshwater as utilization
23
Ready to pilot! Seeking partners and possibilities
Bourcier et al., 2011
24. Below 80,000 TDS, costs ~50% of conv. desal.
24
Ready to pilot! Seeking partners and possibilities
Bourcier et al., 2011
25. 25
Longer than expected: ROZ volumes
This work performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344
• 2x-3x recovery potential and
storage potential (12-18 Gt in
ROZ vs. 6.4 for main pay
zones, PB)
• Possibility for carbon-negative
HC
Main Pay Zone (MPZ)
Transition Zone (TZ)
Residual Oil Zone (ROZ)
Base of Ultimate OWC
Base of Producing OWC
4900
4950
4800
4850
5000
5050
5400
5350
5300
5250
5200
5150
5100
5450
OWC
100 0
Oil Saturation %
“State of the Art” “Next Generation”
(millions) (millions)
CO2 Storage (tonnes) 19 109
Storage Capacity Utilization 13% 76%
Oil Recovery (barrels) 64 180
% Carbon Neutral (“Green Oil”) 80% 160%
ARI, 2008
ARI, 2008
Sources: MIT, 2010; ARI 2007 and 2010; NETL 2008
26. 26
Global challenge global progress:
new global solutions still required
Key unit of innovation – global engines of discovery
Uthmaniyah (KSA)
Lula (BRA)
Quest (CAN) Mongstad (NOR)
ESI (UAE)
Gorgon (AUS)
GreenGen (PRC)
We just need more projects and more information
27. We must harness this age of abundance
27
Know something
• Learning opportunity in CCS and clean fossil
• Information sharing: partnership as product
Do something worthy
• Opportunity to invest: in plants, infrastructure, R&D
• Opportunity in grand bargains
Ask friends for help
• Friends in the US
• International partners
Once in a generation opportunity to build
Hinweis der Redaktion
Public sentiment fickle – engineers, scientists and others in the technology development space need to weather the changes in public attitudes and continue to develop and mature optionsExamples, wind power, ethanol, coal, natural gas (fracking)China seems to be getting more serious about CCS as evidenced by comments by NDRC that they want to become the leader in CCS Others in the US and elsewhere are also becoming more pragmatic about the that Coal will be with us for some time.
ETP2010 identifies the low-carbon energy technologies that can help achieve such a 50% reduction and sets out the policies and other actions that will be necessary. The most important option in both the short and longer-term is improving energy efficiency. Improved energy efficiency in the end-use sectors accounts for 38% of the total emissions reduction in 2050.In addition, decarbonizing the power sector will be critical to achieving deep reductions. Under the BLUE Map scenario the emissions intensity of power generation (g/KWh) falls by almost 90% in 2050 in the BLUE Map scenario compared to the Baseline scenario.[N.B: the relative share contribution of renewables to emission reduction in 2050 is smaller than CCS also because there is already a lot of renewables in the baseline scenario in 2050]
DOE is also supporting nearly $10 billion worth of demonstration projects through base program funding and ARRA funding to demonstrate large-scale integrated CCS projects in a number of industries, utilizing a number of different technologies to help with the initial deployment of CCUS at scale and to provide data, knowledge, and experience. Additionally, the Demonstration Program will offer a way to test new technologies being developed in the R&D program as they mature.The DOE is funding, in partnership with industry, several large-scale projects to demonstrate first-generation capture technologies and carbon utilization and storage. These first-gen capture technologies are currently available for various industries but have not been demonstrated for coal-fired power plants at scale. 8 active projects7 commercial5 power plants, 3 industrial 3 IGCC, 4 post-processing (1 post-combustion), 1 oxycombustionFeedstock: 4 coal, 1 petroleum coke, 1 coal/coke, 1 natural gas, 1 ethanol2 polygeneration (urea)Storage: 6 EOR, 2 saline formationsThe next slide will show some of the details of these projects.
In November 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized requirements for geologic storage of CO2, including the development of a new class of wells, Class VI, under the authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act’s Underground Injection Control program. These requirements, also known as the Class VI rule, are designed to protect underground sources of drinking water and to ensure safe, permanent CO2 storage. The Class VI rule builds on existing Underground Injection Control program requirements, with extensive tailored requirements that address CO2 injection for long-term storage to ensure that wells used for geologic storage are appropriately sited, constructed, tested, monitored, funded, and closed. The rule also affords owners or operators injection depth flexibility to address injection in various geologic settings in the United States in which geologic storage may occur, including deep saline formations and oil- and gasfields that are transitioned for use as CO2 storage sites. In a separate, yet complimentary, rulemaking under authority of the Clean Air Act, the EPA has finalized reporting requirements under the GHG reporting program for facilities that inject CO2 underground for geologic storage (Subpart RR) and all other facilities that inject CO2 underground (Subpart UU). Information obtained under the GHG reporting program will enable the EPA to track the amount of CO2 received by these facilities. Over the last several years, a number of U.S. States have also begun to implement rules that govern the injection of CO2 within their borders. These U.S. States have enacted elements of legal frameworks for CCS. These elements include comprehensive State frameworks for regulating pore space ownership, eminent domain for CO2 pipelines, facility performance standards, portfolio standards, and a fund for administering State activities on CCS.
2nd gen technologies – Ready fo scale up to large scale pilots in 2015/16Transformational Technologies – Need to begin adding transformational technologies to the R&D portfolio starting in 2015