GEOLOGICAL STORAGE OF INDUSTRIAL CO 2 EMISSIONS IN THE BALTIC STATES: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS

1. GEOLOGICAL STORAGE OF INDUSTRIAL CO2 EMISSIONS IN THE BALTIC STATES: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS Alla Shogenova1, Saulius Sliaupa2,3, Kazbulat Shogenov1 Rasa Sliaupiene2, Rein Vaher1 and Angelina Zabele4 1Institute of Geology, Tallinn University of Technology, 2Institute of Geology and Geography, Lithuania 3Vilnius University 4Latvian University

2. Problem • Carbon dioxide (CO2), emitted largely from the burning of fossil fuels, is the main agent causing global warming. • According to the Kyoto protocol signed by the Baltic countries in 2002, the level of air-polluting greenhouse gases should be reduced by 8% compared to the 1990 level. • Reduction of carbon dioxide could be reached using different measures including : • the improvement of energy efficiency and demand, • use of renewable energy sources • capture and geological storage of CO2 (CCS).

3. CO2 capture and storage process

4. http://www.gi.ee/co2net-easthttp://www.gi.ee/co2net-east/r/ • In 2006 the Baltic States, together with other European countries, started an inventory of major CO2 emission sources, assessment of CO2 geological storage capacity and dissemination of information about CO2 capture and storage in the frame of • EU GEOCAPACITY (25 countries) project and • CO2NETEAST (8 countries) project supported by EU Commission Framework Programme 6. • Both project were organized by GEO ENeRG – European Network for research in GEOENERGY http://www.energnet.com .

5. Compared to the other European countries, the Baltic States are in a rather unique geological setting. Most of the countries contain a number of small basins that have different characteristics. • Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are situated within one common Baltic sedimentary basin. Therefore, a joint study is required for the assessment of the geological sinks. • The source types and emission amounts differ considerably in the Baltic countries, depending on the socio-economic conditions. • Geological conditions are also different, as these countries represent different parts of the Baltic basin.

6. Baltic States 1990 – 2005GHG emissions in CO2 equivalents • 1990: Reduction in 2005 • 48 Mt in Lithuania 53% • 42.6 Mt in Estonia51% • 26.4 Mt in Latvia 59%

7. Energy Sector -2005 • 89% of GHG in Estonia • 72% in Latvia • 58% in Lithuania

8. GHG (%) by sectors

9. All registered industrial sources(European Trading Scheme) • 12.7 Mt (42 sources) - 59.3% of total GHG in Estonia • 2.98 Mt (92 sources)- 26.7% in Latvia • 6.6 Mt (89 sources) - 32.5% in Lithuania

10. Emissions per capita • Estonia - 11.7 tonnes • Lithuania - 3.4 tonnes • Latvia -2.5 tonnes • 6.6 tonnes in Europe and Central Asia (data of the World Bank).

11. Baltic industrial emmisions • 24 big emissions (+ 3 in Lithuania and +2 in Estonia close to 100kt) • 2005: • 11,5 Mt in Estonia • 5,6 Mt in Lithuania • 1,9 Mt of CO2 in Latvia

12. Industrial CO2 emissions in the Baltic States

13. Industrial CO2 emissions in Estonia

14. In Lithuania -Latvian–Lithuanian border • (Mazeikiai–Akmene area), • oil-processing factory - 1870 Kt • EPS - 273 Kt of CO2 • In Latvia, - western part of the country. • Liepaja metallurgical enterprise - 366 Kt of CO2, • Liepaja EPS - 108 Kt of CO2 • cement factory in Broceni - 285 Kt of CO2. • Three EPSs emit 619, 381 and 136 Kt of CO2 in the Riga area • Cement production - northern Lithuania. • The Naujoji Akmene Boiling Plant for Cement Plant produces 783 Kt of CO2. • southeastern Lithuania - EPS in Elektrenai (715 Kt of CO2), • two EPSs in Vilnius (701 and 260 Kt of CO2)

15. Only industrial sources >100 kt CO2will be captured • After capture, CO2 can be either stored or re-used. • CO2 can be stored in geologic formations including • depleted oil and gas reservoirs • deep saline aquifers and (salinity >100g/l) • unminable coal seams and abandoned coal mines • CO2 can also be fixated in the form of minerals.

16. Geological storage for CO2

17. Baltic Emissions and natural gas pipelines Russia – Estonia – Latvia – – Lithuania (WP1)

18. Depths of top of the Cambrian aquifer. The P-T fields of gaseous and supercritical state of CO2 (P = 73.8 bars, T = 31oC) are shown. The line of the geological cross-section is indicated.

19. Geological cross-section across Estonia, Latvia, and LithuaniaMajor siliciclastic aquifers are shown in yellow

20. Prospective for undeground gas storage structures in Latvia (LEGMA, 2007)

21. Incukalns local structure in Latvia (LEGMA, 2007)

22. General Geology of EstoniaTop of the Precambrian basement is shown by contours. Flexures above the basement fault are shown by yellow lines. Section linesare shown by green..

23. General Geology of Estonia • Section along Valga-Letipea line is modified after Puura & Vaher, 1997.

24. Stratigraphy and properties of Cambrian reservoir rocks

25. Hydrogeology of Estonia • Hydrogeological cross-section of Estonian bedrock (compiled by R.Perens, 1997, prepared for GEOBALTICA project by IG TU, edited for EU GEOCAPACITY project)

26. Ordovician-Cambrian Aquifer System • Compiled by R.Perens, 1997. • Prepared for GEOBALTICA project by IG TU, edited for EU GEOCAPACITY project.

27. Cambrian-Vendian (Ediacaran) Aquifer System • Compiled by R.Perens, 1997. • Prepared for GEOBALTICA project by IG TU, edited for EU GEOCAPACITY project by IGTUT.

28. Baltic Emissions and natural gas pipelines Russia Estonia – Latvia – – Lithuania

29. CONCLUSIONS • The Middle Cambrian siliciclastic reservoirs are considered prospective formations for CO2 trapping in the Baltic region. • The structural trapping is an option in Latvia having number of large anticlinal structures with a total potential of more than 500 Mt in the Middle Cambrian aquifer. • The shallow sedimentary basin (100–500 m), small depth of the closed oil-shale mines (60–65 m) and use of all aquifers for drinking water supply make geological conditions in Estonia unfavourable for CO2 geological sequestration. • Lithuania has a potential for CO2 solubility storage in Devonian and Middle Cambrian saline aquifers, but without possibilities for structural trapping (Šliaupa et al. 2005).

30. CONCLUSIONS • The Inčukalns underground gas storage operating in Latvia, which is used for the supply of natural gas to Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, is a positive example of collaboration in the region. • The existing infrastructure of pipelines, already connecting the large Baltic CO2 sources with Latvian prospective anticlinal structures, provides a possibility of reducing the price of the future CO2 pipelines and a good prospect for geological storage of the substantial Baltic industrial CO2 emissions in the most favourable geological conditions available in Latvia.

31. Other options in Estonia • Eesti Energia is utilizing a process for neutralizing alkaline ash transport water through a reaction with liquid CO2. • In June of this year Eesti Energia launched a research project to study the potential for CO2 capture by the alkaline ash that is generated as a residue during power generation. This solution will be an alternative to the many developing CO2 sequestration technologies.