1. CO 2 balances and mitigation costs of CHP systems with CO 2 capture in pulp and paper mills Kenneth Möllersten International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

2. Overview of talk Background: - Opportunities for cost-effective CO 2 reductions through energy measures in Swedish pulp and paper mills CO 2 capture and storage: - How far can pulp and paper mills go in the direction of low-CO 2 production? - Economic evaluation of CO 2 capture and storage

3. Reduction options: Emissions from the mills Emissions from the mills – Decreased energy consumption – Fuel switch – CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) Emissions from marginal electricity production reduced in case of Emissions from marginal electricity production reduced in case of – Decreased on-site electricity consumption – Increased on-site electricity production

4. Reduction potential in Sweden Assuming marginal electricity from natural gas-fired CC power plants Measure Potential MtCO (MtCO 2 /yr) % of 1990 Swedish emissions Conventional technologies - Improved performance of steam power cycles - Electricity conservation - Substitution of oil for biofuels 3 5 % Black liquor gasification 2.5 5 % CO 2 capture and storage 90 % of carbon in black liquor ~90 % of carbon in black liquor andbark and bark 10 16% 16 % 155 15.5 26 % Source: Möllersten K, (2002). Opportunities for CO 2 reductions and CO 2 -lean energy systems in pulp and paper mills

5. Biomass energy with CO 2 capture and storage Energy products Biofuels CO 2 CO 2 to underground storage CO 2 (Forest Products)

6. A:Reduced process steam requirements: Utilisation of surplus steam for additional power production, C:Electricity conservation: TMP, D:Electricity conservation: Pumps, fans, mixers, and other motor systems, E:Increased utilisation of installed steam turbine capacity, F:Adjusting steam turbine capacity to present process steam demand, G:Wood powder-fired superheater after Tomlinson boiler, K:Electricity production from waste heat, L:Conversion of lime kilns to biofuels, M:Substituting fuel oil for biofuels in steam production. 100 200 8 4 EA G D F M C K L COR [US$/tCO 2 ] Reduction potential [MtCO 2 /y] A D E C G F K M L Marginal electricity from coal-fired power plants 100 200 8 4 E A G D M C K L COR [US$/tCO 2 ] Reduction potential [MtCO 2 /y] F A D E C G F M K L Capital valuation: Industrial Societal Marginal electricity from NGCC Reduction potential and cost of reduction - conventional technologies

7. Marginal electricity from coal-fired power plants 100 10 2 COR [US$/tCO 2 ] Reduction potential [MtCO 2 /yr] +H * H + * I I + * J J * + N N 6 Capital valuation: * Industrial + Societal H:Black liquor integrated gasification combined cycle, I: Black liquor integrated gasification combined cycle with pre-combustion CO 2 capture and sequestration, J: Black liquor integrated gasification with pre-combustion CO 2 capture and sequestration, methanol production and combined cycle, N:Recovery and bark boilers with flue gas CO 2 capture and sequestration. 100 10 COR [US$/tCO 2 ] Reduction potential [MtCO 2 /yr] +H * H + * I I + * N J + * J N 2 6 Marginal electricity from NGCC Reduction potential and cost of reduction - emerging technologies

8. CO 2 capture in pulp and paper mills Energy efficiency of technologiesEnergy efficiency of technologies CO 2 balanceCO 2 balance Capture cost, transportation and storage costCapture cost, transportation and storage cost Focus:

9. CO 2 capture technologies CO 2 capture Energy Flue gas CO 2 Heat & electricity Boiler and turbines Air Black liquor Biomass CO 2 -lean flue gas Post-combustion capture Compressor

10. CO 2 capture technologies CO 2 Capture CC H 2 or H 2 and CO CO 2 Pressurised gasifier O2O2 Energy CO shift (optional) Flue gas Heat & electricity Pre-combustion capture CO-shift: CO + H 2 O vap → CO 2 + H 2 +44.5 MJ/Mol co Compressor ASU Black liquor Biomass

11. Storage options Underground geological formations Depleated gas & oil wellsDepleated gas & oil wells Deep aquifersDeep aquifers Deep coal bedsDeep coal beds Enhanced oil recoveryEnhanced oil recovery The deep oceans

12. Studied mills “ Ecocyclic pulp mill” reference mill (STFI, 2000) 1550 t pulp/day Late 1990’s state-of-the-art technologies in all departments Market pulp mill – “MPM” –Process steam is 24% lower than the 1994 Swedish average Integrated pulp & paper mill – “IPPM” –Process steam is 5% lower than the 1994 Swedish average Same pulp wood input. IPPM has higher heat and electricity demand

13. System for detailed study -recovery boiler case Simulations with Aspen+Simulations with Aspen+Simulations with Aspen+Simulations with Aspen+

14. System for detailed study - gasification case

15. Performance MPM

16. Performance IPPM

17. Conclusion: In addition to pulp and paper, the mills could potentially -Export electricity, AND -Remove substantial amounts of CO 2 from the atmosphere on a net basis CO 2 captured and stored (tCO 2 /ADt) Net electricity export (MWh/ADt) CO2 emissions (tCO 2 /ADt) Market pulp mill 1.50.5 (ref. case 1.0) -1.3 Integrated mill 2.20.5 (ref. case 0.5) -2.2 “Global” CO 2 emissions compared to reference (NGCC marginal power production)

18. Cost of CO 2 capture and storage (USD/tCO 2 )= Annual incremental cost / Annually captured CO 2 Where: Economic evaluation Annual incremental cost = + Delta capital cost + Delta O&M + Delta electricity * Price electricity + Delta biomass * Price biomass + Cost of CO2 transportation and storage 11% Discount rate 11% Discount rate

19. Estimated capital costs - example: pre-combustion CO 2 capture Economic evaluation Incremental capital cost relative to base case [MUSD] MPM4IPPM5 Biomass gasification island (with ASU) -74 Biomass boiler--11 Shift reactor1420 CO 2 absorber1420 Gas turbine418 HRSG07 Steam turbine-2-2 CO 2 compressor811 Total38137

20. Scale issues in CO 2 transportation PipelinePipeline - results from IEA model: TankerTanker ~ 15-20 USD/t CO 2

21. Cost of capture and storage: Dependence on technology and transportation distance

22. Conclusions 1.Evaluated energy efficiency, CO 2 balances, and cost-effectiveness of biomass-based CHP systems with CCS in pulp and paper mills 2. Steep CO 2 reductions can be achieved through CCS 3. Systems based on black liquor and biomass gasification have several advantages: - energy efficiency - self-sufficiency in electricity and biomass - a lower cost of CO 2 capture Last conclusion confirmed by economic assessment using price scenarios for CO2, biomass, and electricity (2020 –2070)