1 / 36

Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Co-Director, Carbon Mitigation Initiative

Robert Socolow – Princeton University. Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Co-Director, Carbon Mitigation Initiative. Putting CO 2 Capture and Sequestration into First Gear. Robert Socolow Princeton University socolow@princeton.edu February 14 th , 2008 

arlene
Download Presentation

Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Co-Director, Carbon Mitigation Initiative

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Robert Socolow – Princeton University Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Co-Director, Carbon Mitigation Initiative

  2. Putting CO2 Capture and Sequestration into First Gear Robert Socolow Princeton University socolow@princeton.edu February 14th, 2008  Earth Institute, Columbia University Global Task Force on Carbon Capture and Storage

  3. Outline of talk • A wedge of CCS is an immense undertaking. • CCS is ready for full-scale deployment and on-the-job learning (both policy and technology) • CCS deployment is urgently needed in the developing world. • Conundrum: Given the capital cost crunch, the sunk cost in existing plants, and the seduction of natural gas, is CCS-coal really imminent in the U.S.? Might CCS with coal-for-fuel arrive before CCS with coal-for-power?

  4. Interim Goal Historical emissions Stabilization Wedges Billions of Tons Carbon Emitted per Year 60 GtCO2/yr ≈ 16 GtC/yr Current path = “ramp” 60 Eight “wedges” 30 Flat path 6 0 1950 2000 2050 2100 Today and for the interim goal, global per-capita emissions are ≈ 4 tCO2/yr.

  5. 4 GtCO2/yr Total = 100 Gigatons CO2 50 years • Cumulatively, a wedge redirects the flow of 100 GtCO2 in its first 50 years. This is three trillion dollars at $30/tCO2. A “solution” to the CO2 problem should provide at least one wedge. What is a “Wedge”? A “wedge” is a strategy to reduce carbon emissions that grows in 50 years from zero to 4 GtCO2/yr. The strategy has already been commercialized at scale somewhere.

  6. Coal with Carbon Capture and Storage Graphics courtesy of DOE Office of Fossil Energy Effort needed by 2055 for 1 wedge: Carbon capture and storage (CCS) at 800 1000-MW coal power plants. CCS at “coal-to-liquids” plants producing 30 million barrels per day. Graphic courtesy of Statoil ASA

  7. The Future Fossil Fuel Power Plant • Shown here: After 10 years of operation of a 1000 MW coal plant, 60 Mt (90 Mm3) of CO2 have been injected, filling a horizontal area of 40 km2 in each of two formations. • Assumptions: • 10% porosity • 1/3 of pore space accessed • 60 m total vertical height for the two formations. • Note: Plant is still young. Note: Injection rate is 150,000 bbl(CO2)/day, 3 billion barrels over 60 years.

  8. A 1000 MW coal plant with CCS requires lifetime storage of 3x109 barrels of CO2 • CO2 emissions rate: 6 MtCO2/yr = 150,000 bbl/day. • Assume: 1) 9 barrels CO2/t, and 2) extra coal for CCS balances less than 100% CO2 capture. • For 60-year plant lifetime: 3 billion barrels. • World’s oil fields larger than 3 billion barrels*: 80. • Percent of total production from these 80 fields: 40%. • This is familiar territory for the oil industry. • * Including water reinjection, fluid flow in and out of a 500 million barrels (Mbbl) field may be 3000 Mbbl. 500 fields are > 500 (Mbbl) and account for 2/3 of global production.

  9. $30/tCO2≈ 2¢/kWh induces CCS. Three views. Transmission and distribution Wholesale power w/o CCS: 4 ¢/kWh } 6 6 • A coal-gasification power plant can capture CO2 for an added 2¢/kWh ($30/tCO2). This: • triples the price of delivered coal; • adds 50% to the busbar price of electricity from coal; • adds 20% to the household price of electricity from coal. Plant capital 3 Coal at the power plant 1 Retail power w/o CCS: 10 ¢/kWh CCS 2

  10. Readiness: CCS capabilities today • Technologies for both capture and storage exist at scale. Linking them will get us started. • Market niches exist: • where CO2 is cheap to capture (natural gas separation plants, hydrogen plants for ammonia and refineries) • where CO2 is worth paying a lot for (Enhanced Oil Recovery, or EOR) • Regulation is already developed for fluids injected below ground: for natural gas seasonal storage, EOR, hazardous waste disposal, and municipal waste disposal.

  11. Already, in the middle of the Sahara! At In Salah, Algeria, natural gas purification by CO2 removal plus CO2 pressurization for nearby injection Separation at amine contactor towers

  12. A 500-mile CO2 pipeline built in the 1980s Connects McElmo Dome, Colorado, to Permian Basin, west Texas. CO2 is for enhanced oil recovery McElmo Dome: A huge natural CO2 reservoir In place: 1500 MtCO2 Production: 15-20 MtCO2/yr • Two conclusions: • CO2 in the right place is valuable. • CO2 from McElmo was a better source than CO2 from any local power plant. Rule of thumb: 2 to 5 bbl incremental oil per tCO2 injected.

  13. Power generation Other 4 000 TE Other OECD 3 500 EU27 3 000 Japan US 2 500 Other DC Mtoe 2 000 India China 1 500 1 000 500 0 2005 2030 2005 2030 The developing world is expecting a huge expansion of coal power Coal input Global CO2 emissions from coal: 11 GtCO2 in 2005, 19 GtCO2 in 2030. Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2007, Reference scenario.

  14. Historic emissions, all uses 2003-2030 power-plant lifetime CO2 commitments Source: IEA, WEO 2004, Reference scenario. Assumed lifetime: coal 60 yr, gas 40 yr, oil 20 yr. CO2 emission commitments from new power plants 100 GtCO2 not emitted = 1 wedge 1400 GW new coal plants Policy priority: Deter investments in new long-lived high-carbon stock Needed: “Commitment accounting.” Credit for comparison: David Hawkins, NRDC

  15. Power generation 49% Exploration and development 73% Transmission and distribution Electricity Refining 51% 22% Oil 53% 5% Other 24% $11.6 trillion $5.4 trillion Biofuels 1% $0.6 trillion $4.2 trillion Exploration and development Gas 55% Mining Coal 90% 19% 3% LNG chain 8% Transmission and distribution Shipping and ports 37% 10% Total investment = $21.9 trillion (in $2006) How can we redirect the expected $22 trillion global investment in energy supply, 2006-2030? Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2007, Reference scenario.

  16. 250 256 GWe 121 GWe 120 Total SO 2 Scrubber 215 GWe Wet Scrubber 105 GWe 100 200 80 150 60 Cumulative Installed FGD Capacity (GWe) U.S. 40 China 100 20 50 0 1970 1975 80 1985 90 1995 00 2005 2010 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007* China has installed SO2 scrubbers at an astounding rate since 2005 100 GW Slope:100 GW/yr 100 GW

  17. U.S. Power Plant Capacity, by Vintage • 300 GW of existing coal plants. Options: • Retirement • Rebuild, i.e., “scrap-and-build” • End-of-pipe CO2 capture • (vs. SOx-NOx Clear Skies lock-in) If we push hard on end-use efficiency, will our current fleet suffice for >20 yrs? Source: EIA

  18. Efficient Use of Electricity lighting motors cogeneration Effort needed by 2055 for 1 wedge: . 25% reduction in expected 2055 electricity use in commercial and residential buildings Target: Commercial and multifamily buildings.

  19. Coal-based Synfuels with CCS* *Carbon capture and storage • Effort needed for 1 wedge by 2055 • Capture and storage of the CO2 byproduct at plants producing 30 million barrels per day of coal-based synfuels • Assumption: half of C originally in the coal is available for capture, half goes into synfuels. Graphics courtesy of DOE Office of Fossil Energy Result: Coal-based synfuels have no worse CO2 emissions than petroleum fuels, instead of doubled emissions. Will the oil market lead to CCS with coal synfuels before CCS with coal power?

  20. Further Considerations • Carbon policy must assure that natural gas carbon emissions are priced. • Regional CO2 pipeline systems are required, with trunks and branches. Future coal plant locations will be affected by available CO2 destinations. • The co-sequestration option (putting sulfur underground) is clever, but is it workable? • Storage pore space is another mineral reserve: the more you use, the more you have. • Never forget public acceptance!

  21. $30/tCO2 CO2 emissions price 0 5 10 Year of policy Avoid Mitigation Lite Mitigation Lite: The right words but the wrong numbers. Companies’ investments are unchanged: the emissions price is a cost of business. Individuals change few practices. For specificity, consider a price ramp that is not “lite,” one rising from zero to $30/tCO2 over 10 years.

  22. Carbon emission charges in the neighborhood of $30/tCO2 can enable scale-up of most of the wedges, if supplemented with sectoral policy to facilitate transition. Benchmark: $30/tCO2 $30/tCO2 is the current European Trading System price for 2008 emissions. At this price, current global emissions (30 GtCO2/yr) cost $900 billion/yr, 2% of GWP.

  23. Some Carbon Policy Principles • Establish a CO2 price schedule forceful enough to drive investment decisions. • Make the price salient as far upstream as possible (best, when C comes out of the ground or across a border). • Supplement the price with sectoral policies (RPS, CCS, CAFE, appliance mandates). • Stimulate international coordination. • Allow a teething period.

  24. Summing Up If coal is as central to global development as it now appears to be, an immense amount of CCS will be deployed. The U.S. can deploy full-scale projects now. The best reason for doing so is to leverage investments outside the U.S. Domestic deployment requires enticements to overcome high capital costs, first-mover costs, and the seduction of natural gas. Clear Skies needs to be overhauled to encourage CCS at existing plants. Success at aggressive end-use electricity efficiency increases the enticements required.

  25. Extra Slides

  26. Fill the Stabilization Triangle with Eight Wedges in six broad categories Energy Efficiency Methane Management Decarbonized Electricity 60 GtCO2/yr Stabilization Triangle Decarbonized Fuels Extra Carbon in Forests, Soils, Oceans 30 GtCO2/yr 2007 2057 Fuel Displacement by Low-Carbon Electricity

  27. U.S. Wedges Source: Lashof and Hawkins, NRDC, in Socolow and Pacala, Scientific American, September 2006, p. 57

  28. “The Wedge Model is the IPOD of climate change: You fill it with your favorite things.” David Hawkins, NRDC, 2007.Therefore, prepare to negotiate with others, who have different favorite things.

  29. Efficient Use of Fuel Effort needed by 2055 for 1 wedge: Note: 1 car driven 10,000 miles at 30 mpg emits 4 tons of CO2. 2 billion cars driven 10,000 miles per year at 60 mpg instead of 30 mpg. 2 billion cars driven, at 30 mpg, 5,000 instead of 10,000 miles per year. • Property-tax systems that reinvigorate cities and discourage sprawl • Video-conferencing

  30. Four ways to emit 4 tonCO2/yr

  31. Smart CO2 injection • Two sets of measurements of the porosity at the 20-m-thick Krechba field in the Algerian desert, near a CO2 injection well (thin tubing): • Coarse mapping by seismic echolocation soundings. Red and yellow represent high porosity regions; blue indicates low porosity areas. • Finer depiction of porosity (looking like colored beads), within a few centimeters of the well, by a down-hole electric sensor probe. Fine-scale is used fo steering the drilling apparatus toward regions of high porosity.

  32. Cement recovered with sidewall corer from a 19 year-old oil well at RMOTC in Wyoming. Cement adhered to outside casing at 933.3 m at a band of dense limestone. Scanning electron microscopy on sample and original cement materials reveal post-injection calcium leaching. Samples of unreacted H-type cement (left) and cement after 3 weeks in flow-through reactor at 50ºC and pH 2.4 (right). Color variation is due to changes in oxidation in iron impurities. Field and Lab Studies of CO2 Effects on Cement Source: George Scherer, Princeton University.

  33. How long will CO2 stay underground and how long is long enough? Oil/gas reservoirs: rare, 1,000,000 year retention. Large unconfined aquifers: abundant, 1000 year retention. This realization, reported in 1996 by Sam Holloway, British Geological Survey for Joule II, revolutionized the world’s perspective on CCS. How nearly permanent should storage be? “Environmental ethics and traditional economics give different answers. Following a strict environmental ethic that seeks to minimize the impact of today’s activities on future generations, authorities might, for instance, refuse to certify a storage project estimated to retain CO2 for only 200 years. Guided instead by traditional economics, they might approve the same project on the grounds that two centuries from now a smarter world will have invented superior carbon disposal technology.” RHS, Scientific American, July 2005, p. 55.

  34. A sequence of CCS opportunities

  35. “No CTL without CCS” • Climate-change concerns will dominate the future of coal. • Key question is whether coal-to-liquids (CTL) option is competitive in a carbon-constrained world. • Incremental costs of CO2 capture and storage (CCS), relative to costs with CO2 venting, are likely to be lower at CTL plants than at coal power plants. • Competitiveness of CTL with CCS, vs. many other options, is uncertain: • CCS costs will come down with experience, but • CCS costs could rise if public distrust inhibits CO2 storage. • Policy recommendation: CTL, starting with the first pilots, should proceed only with CCS.

  36. Global Task Force on Carbon Capture and Sequestration Inaugural meeting February 14, 2008

More Related