co2 c t i d t i l sco2 capture: industrial sources – glblglobal technology roadmap ... ·...

GLOBAL CCS INSTITUTE

CO2 C t I d t i l S Gl b lCO2 Capture: Industrial Sources – Global Technology Roadmap for CCS in IndustryKlaas van Alphen Global CCS InstituteKlaas van Alphen - Global CCS Institute IEAGHG Summer School, Norway, August 2010


TODAY’S PRESENTATION: CO2 CAPTURE -INDUSTRIAL SOURCES

Scene SettingSectoral Focus

High-purity CO sourcesHigh-purity CO2 sourcesCementIron and steel

fRefineriesBiomass-based industrial CO2 sources

UNIDO ROADMAP U O O

1


SCENE SETTING• Industry accounts for approx. 40% of total energy-related CO2

emissions• The majority of industrial energy use and CO2 emissions takes place

in developing countries; • CCS is one of the few low-carbon options for energy-intensiveCCS is one of the few low carbon options for energy intensive

industries– Cement clinker making: no alternative !– Biomass + CCS = net negative emissions (backstopping option)

• Not considering CCS is expected to increase mitigation costs significantly (by about 70%) – (IEA Blue map scenario)g y ( y ) ( p )

• Half of the CO2 emission reduction potential from CCS is in industry• Lots of attention for CCS in the power sector, but limited for industry

2


CCS APPLIED TO INDUSTRIAL PROCESSESREPRESENTS 45% OF CAPTURED CO2 BY 2050REPRESENTS 45% OF CAPTURED CO2 BY 2050

Global installed CCS by sector - 2050

0%8%

5% 3% 4%10 000

12 000

MtCO2/year

8%4%

21%6%

100%6 000

8 000

40%

8%100%

2 000

4 000

Pulp and paper

Coal power

Gas power

Synfuels + H2 (gas)

Biomass power

Synfuels + H2 (biomass)

Iron and steel

Cement Chemicals

Gas process.

Total0

3

IndustryFuel Trans.Power

Source: EIA CCS Roadmap 2009, BLUE Map scenario (estimated data)


+50% OF CO2 CAPTURED FROM INDUSTRIAL SOURCES IN INDIA, CHINA AND NON-OECD COUNTRIESIN INDIA, CHINA AND NON OECD COUNTRIES

4

Source: IEA, CCS Roadmap .


INDUSTRIAL SOURCES PROVIDE LOW COST OPPORTUNITIES FOR CCS

183%Fertilizer Avoided CO2 cost ($/tonne)

19

50

3%

1%Natural Gas

C t Kil

Avoided CO2 cost ($/tonne)

Production cost increase

50

52

36%

18%

Cement Kiln

Blast Furnace

66

81

60%

74%

Oxy‐combustion

IGCC

91

112

82%Post‐Combustion

NGCC 11243%NGCC


CURRENT CCS IN PROJECTS IN OPERATION RELATE TO ‘LOW COST’ INDUSTRIAL SOURCESTO ‘LOW COST’ INDUSTRIAL SOURCES

Project N

District,C t

Capture f ilit

Capture t

Transport t

Storage t

Scale Year of tiName Country facility type type type operation

In Salah Ouargla, Algeria

Natural gasprocessing plant

Gas processing

14 km pipeline

Geological 1.2 Mtpa 2004

Sleipner North Sea, Norway

Gas processingplatform

Gas processing

Reinjection Geological 1 Mtpa 1996

SnOhvit North Sea, N

LNG plant Gas i

160 km i li

Geological 0.7 Mtpa 2008Norway processing pipeline

Weyburn Saskatche-wan,Canada

Great PlainsSynfuels plant

Pre-combustion

330km pipeline

EOR 3 Mtpa 2000

Gorgon Western Australia, Australia

LNG processingplant

Gas processing

pipeline Geological 3.4 Mtpa 2014

6


WHY HIGH PURITY SOURCES? • 350-400 MtCO2 globally generated from high purity sources; i.e.

gas processing/refining; hydrogen/ammonia production (and f tili d ti f NH3) th ti f l d ti ( th tifertiliser production from NH3); synthetic fuel production (synthetic gas production/coal-to-liquids/gas-to-liquids);

• Capture of CO2 from dilute gas streams is the most expensive t f th CCS h icomponent of the CCS chain:

– Combustion plants (4-14% CO2) – must be concentrated to make transport & storage economic

– High temperature – must be cooled to avoid solvent degradation (postcombustion)

– Low pressure & partial pressure – must use chemical solvents– High-levels of impurities (SO2, particulates) – contaminate

solvents– High energy demand for flue gas treatments (increases costs)

• High purity sources avoid many of these issues

7


CHARACTERISTICS

• All highly amenable to low cost capture (and compression)g y p ( p )• Several pathways to high purity CO2 process streams

8


GAS PROCESSING PATHWAY

• New natural gas resources: challenges includeNew natural gas resources: challenges include increasing CO2 content

9


GASIFICATION/REFORMER PATHWAY

SMR = Steam methane reforming; ATR = Auto thermal reforming; POX = Partial oxidation

10


WAY FORWARD ON HIGH PURITY SOURCES• Need to work on data for all high purity sectors:

– Gas processing – gas demand + qualityp g g q y– Ammonia – need to understand projections for future

NH3 and fertiliser demandCtL tl l 1 ti l l t (S d– CtL – currently only 1 operational plant (Secunda, Sasolburg, RSA). Number of proposed projects (c. 30 worldwide in discussion))

– H2 – potential emergence for use in fuel cells and transportation

11


CEMENT• Carbon capture at cement plants

– 0.6 – 1.0 tCO2/tonne of cement– CO2 emitted:

– 50% from calcination of calcium carbonate to calcium oxide CaCO3 CaO + CO2CaCO3 CaO + CO2

– 40% from fuel (Coal/Pet coke/Tyres/Waste/Oil/Solvents/ Sewage Sludge etc.)g g )

– 10% from electricity and transportation– Pre-combustion capture not viable (only PCC and Oxy)– Exhaust gases contain approx. 25% CO2 compared to

approx. 12% CO2 for coal-fired power plants and approx. 4% CO2 for gas-fired power plants4% CO2 for gas fired power plants

– 95% of calcination occurs in precalciner and 60% of fuel used in precalciner 12


CEMENT: POST COMBUSTION CAPTURE • Advantages for cement plants

– The cement plant itself is unaffected– Except more stringent flue gas cleaning may be needed

– Retrofit to existing plants is possible• Disadvantages

– A substantial quantity of low pressure steam is needed for solvent stripping, requiring an on-site CHP plant

13


CEMENT: OXYCOMBUSTION• Advantages for cement plants

– Low oxygen consumptionLow oxygen consumption– Compared to a coal fired boiler, 1/3 of the amount of

O2 is needed per tonne of CO2 captured• Disadvantages

– Retrofit would be more difficult than for post combustion capturecombustion capture

– Oxy-firing the precalciner only limits the amount of CO2 that can be captured

– For full oxy-firing, air in-leakage in mills and the kiln would have to be greatly reduced

Th i t f f ll fi i kil h i t t• The impacts of full oxy-firing on kiln chemistry etc are uncertain (More R&D is needed!)

14


• CCS research programmes in the cement sectorCCS research programmes in the cement sector– ECRA CCS Project – Phase II complete– IEA GHG / BCA (now MPA) – complete( ) p– CO2CRC– WBCSD / CSI – Cement Technology Roadmap 2009– Cansolv– DVV / VDZ

Th E th I tit t t C l bi U i it– The Earth Institute at Columbia University (Zeman/Lackner) Institute of Energy Systems

• Pilot projectsPilot projects– CEMEX USA DOE project– ECRA Phase III, IV and V– LaFarge– Cansolv trial in California 15


STEEL AND CCS • there is no such technology as CCS for the steel industry• the only existing program where the construction of the y g p g

technology has been attempted is the ULCOS program• CCS is thus part of 3 process concepts, ULCOS-BF,

HIsarna and ULCORED which have reached variousHIsarna and ULCORED, which have reached various stages of development (demonstrator, pilot, modelling and lab).

• in the "short" term (until 2020), the ULCOS-BF ought to be validated at demonstrator scale;Ulcos is a consortium of 48 European based companies• Ulcos is a consortium of 48 European-based companies and organisations that have launched a cooperative R&D initiative to enable drastic reduction in CO2 emissions from steel production.

16


ULCOS-BLAST FURNACETop Gas Recycling Blast Furnace: blast furnace with “in-process” capture replacing pre-heated air with oxygen and decarbonated off gases (recirculated). PSA (Pressure Swing Adsorption) with g ( ) S ( S g p )Cryogenic process enables separation and purification of CO2 stream, from a concentration of roughly 35% of CO2 up to a very pure (>95%) stream.

17


BIOMASS BASED CO2 SOURCES

• CCS at biomass-based CO2 sources potentially leads to negative CO2 emissions i e CO2 uptake fromnegative CO2 emissions, i.e. CO2 uptake from atmosphere by natural CO2 sequestration in biomass

• Indispensable for low GHG stabilisation levels in the longer term (after 2050)

• A relatively pure CO2 stream is always produced duringbi t bi f l i ( t• biomass-to-biofuel conversion processes (capture-ready)

• Low incremental cost for CO2 capture drying,Low incremental cost for CO2 capture drying, compression, transport and storage

• Large potential for developing nations• Possibly more positive public perception than fossil CCS

18


FUTURE CO2 CAPTURE POTENTIAL

19


WHICH BIOMASS BASED SOURCES CAN BE CONSIDERED INDUSTRIAL • Bio-chemical biomass conversion:

– Ethanol• Thermo-chemical biomass conversion:

– Substitute Natural Gas (SNG)– Fischer-Tropsch Dieselp– Alcohols– Gasoline– Hydrogen

20


BIOMASS BASED SOURCES -SCHEME

21


ETHANOL FROM LIGNOCELLULOSE

22


SUBSTITUTE NATURAL GAS (SNG)( )

23


WHAT DO WE KNOW?• 1st generation ethanol (IEA, 2008):

– Brazilian ethanol production (2007): 18.0×109 literBrazilian ethanol production (2007): 18.0 109 liter– USA ethanol production (2007): 24.4×109 liter– Roughly translates to 32 Mt CO2, being vented from– fermentation operations in Brazil and the USA alone– Average plant size USA: 200 Mliter/a ~140 kt CO2/a– Estimated GHG emission reduction w/o CCS in Brazil:

2.6-2.7 kg CO2 eq./liter 47 Mt CO2 (Macedo, 2004) Including CCS 61 Mt CO2Including CCS 61 Mt CO2

24


QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED REGARDING BIOMASS + CCS

• Which sources have the largest potential forWhich sources have the largest potential for application in developing countries?

• What is the anticipated minimum plant size atWhat is the anticipated minimum plant size at which CO2 should be captured? What are the scale issues?

• What CO2 capture from biomass-based industrial sources can be considered “low-hanging fruit”?

25


Most of the material in this slide pack are based upon

Objective of this Roadmap

p pthe Global Technology Roadmap for CCS in Industry

To advance the global uptake of low-carbon technologies in industry, particularly by involving developing countries and transition economies, by developing a Global Technology Roadmap for CCS in Industry and building the analytical foundationTechnology Roadmap for CCS in Industry and building the analytical foundation allowing to identify early opportunities for pilot/demonstration projects

Expected outcomes

To provide relevant stakeholders with a vision of industrial CCS up to 2050

To strengthen the capacities of various stakeholders with regard to industrial CCSCCS

To inform policymakers and investors about the potential of CCS technology

26

Report due in Q4 2010 – one expert workshop held in Abu Dhabi 30 June – 1 July 2010.


Global Technology Roadmap for CCS in IndustryFunders

Global CCS Institute

gy p y

Ministry of Petroleum and Energy

Implementing Agency

United Nations Industrial Development Organization

Partners

International Energy Agency

IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D ProgrammeIEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme

Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands

Host of the sectoral workshop

27

Host of the sectoral workshop

MASDAR - Abu Dhabi National Energy


28

www.globalccsinstitute.com

co2 c t i d t i l sco2 capture: industrial sources – glblglobal technology roadmap ... ·...

Documents