Carbon, Capture And Storage

Capture and Storage  Not quite this simple:

Carbon Storage What Can actually be deployed?

Stabilization Concept  We can’t correct the past but maybe we can target some level at which CO 2 reaches a constant value  Pre-industrialized value: 280 ppm  Currently Value: 388 ppm  Highest in Last 450,000 years: 310 ppm  2 degrees C increase: 450 ppm

Stabilization Continued Stabilizing atmospheric concentration is more physically important than limiting annual emission levels Allows one to plan for the rest of the century  a ton you put in now, means a ton you can’t put in later Shared planetary greenhouse gas emissions budget As emission space dwindles, emission permit prices should rise

But Carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas  Methane is becoming important Current CO 2 trajectory reaches 720 ppm by 2100 Stabilizing at 550 ppm (by 2100) requires reducing coal usage by about a factor of 3 relative to current trend  CHINA CHINA CHINA

Options for Global Energy System Carbon Dioxide capture and storage (CSS) may play a pivotal role if we plan to implement it. This may allow CHINA CHINA CHINA to continue what its doing

CSS potential Plenty of theoretical storage capacity but this is not evenly distributed around the world If no access to natural storage reservoir then this might compel countries to build different infrastructure Baseload coal fired power plants and coal- to-liquids facilities are the largest potential market for CSS

Geological Options for CSS Depleted oil and gas reservoirs Deep saline formations Deep “unmineable” coal seams Deep saline filled basalt formations Basic Mechanism is Direct injection Ocean Sequestration

World Wide Capacity 11,000 Gigatons But unevenly distributed relative to load centers (China, Japan, Korea) Canada, US and Australia are good

Required CSS Scale is Massive There are currently 8100 individual point source CO 2 emitters – most of these are power plants

Emission Contributors Coal is a good target

CCS Potential 450 ppm stabilization requires 2200 GT of storage or roughly 1/5 of the world’s potential  this is enormous! Regional Ratios of Production to local storage show immense variation

An Economic Chain  Natural Gas Fired electricity produces about 1 lbs of Carbon Dioxide per KWH generated  Assume 5 cents per KWH for competitive price to consumer  1 Ton of CO 2 is then 2000 KWH which is 100$  Current injection prices are about $ per ton.  This is a therefore difficult economic model to make work Goal is $10 per ton; what economy of scale is there?

Worse Still is Down Turn IN Carbon Market

The Price Problem  Current price of Carbon Current price is about $19.50 per ton for carbon. Thus, as of February 2010 it essentially costs 4-5 times more to put Carbon in the ground than in the atmosphere. This is the essential financial reality!

Cost is not the only obstacle Goal: Capture 100% of a large power plants emissions and store them for 50 years? Goal: Capture 100% of a large power plants emissions and store them for 50 years? Wow Wow How many injector wells are needed and what is their spacing? How many injector wells are needed and what is their spacing? Can same injectors be used for 50 years? Can same injectors be used for 50 years? Does the reservoir leak? Does the reservoir leak?

Conclusions CSS has high potential and does represent a direct climate-change mitigation technology CSS has high potential and does represent a direct climate-change mitigation technology CSS economic model is not good unless significant fines/penalty for total country emissions are enacted CSS economic model is not good unless significant fines/penalty for total country emissions are enacted The next 5-10 years are a critical window to build pilot projects to gain real world experience and assess scaled up feasibility The next 5-10 years are a critical window to build pilot projects to gain real world experience and assess scaled up feasibility

Conclusions II Clearly the electric power sector is the prime target. Production of electricity and in situ injection could determine sites of future LNG facilities. Clearly the electric power sector is the prime target. Production of electricity and in situ injection could determine sites of future LNG facilities. But  what is wisest? Investing limited resources in CSS or ramping up other sustainable energies (wind, solar, biofuel, hydrogen (from wind and solar))  this is a very tough call to make right now But  what is wisest? Investing limited resources in CSS or ramping up other sustainable energies (wind, solar, biofuel, hydrogen (from wind and solar))  this is a very tough call to make right now