Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

March 2013
Sohei SHIMADA

Outline
CCS system (General) CO2 Capture and Transportation Geological CO2 storage Storage Mechanism Risk Assessment Economy of CCS Summary
2

Introduction
CCSCarbon Capture and Storage (Sequestration): CCUS:Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage To capture and store CO2, which is usually emitted to the atmosphere and causes the global warming.

Targetstationary sources
Process: capture, transportation, storage, monitoring
IPCC Special Report on CCS, 2005 http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/srccs.htm
3

World CO2 Emission

CCS System

Geological CO2 Storage

Ocean Storage

Mineral Carbonaization

Technological Level of CCS

Sources of CO2 Emission

10

CO2 Emission and Economic Activity

GDP per capita, Energy intensity, Emission intensity

This shows that the level of CO2 emissions can be understood to depend directly on the size of the human population, on the level of global wealth, on the energy intensity of the global economy, and on the emissions arising from the production and use of energy

11

World Sedimentary Basin Possible for Geological CO2 Storage

12

Capture Process
Power Generation

13

CO2 Separation Process

14

Schematic of Coal-fired Power Plant

15

Industrial CO2 Capture Plant

16

Fuel Use

17

Electricity Cost

18

CO2 Pipeline in USA

19

Why Geological Storage?

20

Why Geological Storage

21

Geological Storage Formation

22

World Geological Storage Capacity

23

World Project Sites

24

World Large Scale Project Sites

GCI: The global status of CCS 2012

25

Large Scale Integrated Projects by Stage and Region

GCI: The global status of CCS 2012

26

Volume of Potentially CO2 Stored by Large Scale Integrated Projects

27

GCI: The global status of CCS 2012

Large Scale Integrated Projects in Operation

GCI: The global status of CCS 2012

28

Large Scale Integrated Projects in Execute Stage

GCI: The global status of CCS 2012

29

Sleipner CO2 Storage Project

Norway, North Sea, since 1996, natural gas field, CO2 concentration about 10%. CO2 capture and storage in aquifer, 1Mt- CO2 /y, avoid carbon tax about US$50/t-CO2.

30

31

In Salah Gas Project

32

Weyburn EORUSA, Canada

Since 2001, CO2 capture at gas chemical plant in North Dakota (USA) . Transport 330km to Weyburn oil field for EOR (EOR: Enhanced Oil Recovery, CO2 miscible flooding)(Canada) , 5,000t- CO2 /day

33

Trapping Mechanism
A trap is a configuration of rocks suitable for containing fluids and sealed by a relatively impermeable formation through which fluids will not migrate. CO2 is held in place in a storage reservoir through one or more of five basic trapping mechanisms: stratigraphic, structural, residual, solubility, and mineral. Trapping mechanisms depend on the local geology and work together when more than one is present. Physical Trapping: stratigraphic, structural, residual

Geo-chemical Trapping:
solubility, mineral
.

34

Stratigraphic and Structural Trapping

Generally, the initial dominant trapping mechanisms are stratigraphic trapping or structural trapping, or a combination of the two.

Cap rock is a dense layer of impermeable rock that overlays the rocks holding the CO2 and forms a continuous primary seal. In stratigraphic trapping, cap rock, sometimes coupled with impermeable rocks elsewhere within the same layer as the CO2, forms a closed container to trap the CO2. In structural trapping, impermeable rocks shifted by a fault or fold in the geologic strata hold the CO 2 in place. In addition, CO2 storage rocks are generally separated from the surface by other thick layers of impermeable rock, called secondary seals.

35

Residual Trapping
Over time, other even more secure trapping mechanisms take over. In residual trapping, which usually begins after injection stops, the CO2 is trapped in the tiny pores in rocks by the capillary pressure of water. After injection stops, water from the surrounding rocks begins to move back into the pore spaces containing the CO2. As this happens, the CO2 becomes immobilized by the pressure of the added water.
Water Water CO2 CO2 CO2
Residual CO2
36

Water

Solubility (Dissolution) and Mineral Trapping

As more CO2 is injected, the CO2 moves further from the injection site and, since it is lighter than the highly saline water or oil, the CO2 may also initially rise toward the top of the porous storage rocks, where stratigraphic and structural trapping keep it in place. Injection pressures must be high enough to force the liquid CO2 into the porous rock, but not so high as to break the cap rock forming the primary seal immediately above the storage formation.

Much of the injected CO2 will eventually dissolve in the saline water or in the oil that remains in the rock, somewhat like sugar dissolves in water to make sweetened beverages. This process, which further traps the CO2, is solubility (or dissolution) trapping. Solubility trapping forms a denser fluid which may then sink to the bottom of the storage formation. Depending on the rock formation, the dissolved CO2 may react chemically with the surrounding rocks to form stable minerals. Known as mineral trapping, this provides the most secure form of storage for the CO2, but it is a slow process and may take place over thousands of years. Currently, research is underway to evaluate how mineral trapping works and the longterm impact of CO2 on fluids and rocks in a variety of geologic settings.
37

Stabilization of Stored CO2

38

Possible Leakage Route

39

CO2 Move at Sleipner

40

Life Cycle of CO2 Storage Project

41

Life Cycle of CO2 Storage Project

42

CO2 avoided

43

Avoided Cost of Plant with CCS

44

Regional CCS Partnership (USA)

45

Energy-related CO2 Emission Reductions by Technology

GCI: The global status of CCS 2012

46

Summary

47

Summary

48

Supplement
Enhanced Coalbed Methane Recovery (ECBMR) 1. Gas adsorption on coal 2. Simulation Sensitivity Analysis Swelling

49

Gas Adsorption Measurement

Constant Volume method
Adsorption amount is measured with the change of pressure
V Temperature controller

He container
Pressure transducer

Sample cell
V3

V2
Vacuum pump

Reference cell void

Constant temperature bath

CO2, CH4, N2 container

50

Gas Adsorption in Coal

Methane in coal seam (Coalbed Methane : CBM Methaen in coal seam: free gas (in pore) + adsorption gas (on matrix) Amount of adsorbed gas >> free gas

adsorption capacity : CO2CH4N2

CBM is displaced when CO2 is injected (Enhanced CBM Recovery)
2
Adsorbed Amount (mmoles/g coal)

1. 5 1 0. 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pressure (M Pa) 7

Q ad(C O 2) Langm ui (C O 2) Q ad(C H 4) Langm ui r(C H 4) Q ad(N 2) Langm ui r(N 2)

Adsorption isotherm of Akabira coal

51

Adsorption Equation
For pure gas (CO2, CH4 and N2) Adsorption capacity can be predicted with Langmuir model. Langmuir model Qmaxsaturated volume KLangmuir coefficient Qadsorption capacity Ppressure

QmaxKP Q 1 KP
For mixed gas

Extended Langmuir model

Q A Qm ax A

K A pA 1 K i pi
i A n

Agas A
52

Schematic of ECBMR

Power Plant

Coal Seam

JCOAL

53

Enhanced Coalbed Methene Recovery

Coalbed methane is unconventional natural gas mainly adsorbed on coal surface Enhanced recovery system 0. Depletion 1. Gas injection (CO2, N2 ) 2. CO2 adsorption 3. CH4 desorption 4. Gas production Gas injection promote CH4 desorption and maintain reservoir pressure. 54 Enhancement of methane recovery

Simulation
ECOMERS-UT
(Enhanced COalbed MEthane Recovery Simulator)

Models Structure: Dual porosity system Storage: Langmuir's adsorption isotherm Sorption: Ficks law Flow in cleat: Two phase, Darcy flow Solving method Governing equations:
Mass balance equations of water & gases
MATRIX CO2 N2 CH4 CLEAT

Space: Finite volume method Time: Implicit method

Gas flow

55

Sensitivity analysis

1. Gas composition injected

Condition Well pattern: 1/4 of 160-acre 5-spot pattern (realistic scale) Oxygen Steel or Thermal Gas composition [CO2]:[N2] Source combustion cement plant power plant =0.9:0.1, 0.3:0.7, 0.15:0.85 CO conc. [%] 9025-35 10-20
2

Mole fraction in cleatCO290 case

years CH4
CO2 N2
56

10

14

INJECTION WELL

PRODUCTION WELL

Sensitivity analysis

1. Gas composition injected

Methane production rate [m3/day]

35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Time[day] 6000 7000 8000 CO2-100% CO2-90% CO2-30% CO2-15%

1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 2000 4000 Time[day] 6000

Methane fraction [-]

CO2-100% CO2-90% CO2-30% CO2-15%

8000

Production pattern

Methane fraction pattern

N2 rich injection led to

Enhancement of production rate Early breakthrough =Low recover and CO2 sequestration
57

Sensitivity analysis

2. Absolute permeability
Condition Well pattern: 1/4 of 160-acre 5-spot pattern Permeability: 1 - 10md Result
4.0E+04 3.5E+04 3.0E+04 2.5E+04 2.0E+04 1.5E+04 1.0E+04 5.0E+03 0.0E+00 0
Methane fraction [-]

10md

3.65md 1md

1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0

Production rate [sm3/day]

10md

3.65md 1md

2000

4000 6000 Time [day]

8000

2000

4000 Time [day]

6000
58

8000

Production pattern

Methane fraction pattern

Sensitivity analysis

2. Absolute permeability
Cumulative production at breakthrough*
Permeability [md] 1 3.65 10 Time [day] 6648 4017 3178 A: Produced CH4 [m3] 5.03x107 5.59x107 6.62x107 Sequestrated CO2 [m3] 1.35x108 1.15x108 9.43x107 B: Primary recovery[m3] 1.93x107 2.98x107 4.51x107 A/B [-] 2.6 1.9 1.5

*methane fraction < 90%

Low permeability led to Longer(shower) production time High enhancement effect (A/B) Larger CO2 sequestration ECBMR makes reservoirs of low permeability cost-effective.
59

Swelling of Coal by Gas Adsorption

After L. Chikatamarla et. al.

60

Sensitivity analysis

3. Matrix swelling coefficient

Porosity model(Palmer Mansoori et. al.)

K i Am ( p pi ) ( 1) Sm (C Ci ) M Swelling Adsorbed
Effect of pore pressure coefficient volume

Effect of matrix swelling

Am p K M Sm C

Permeability model

3 k ki ( ) i

Porosity Pore compressibility factor Pressure Bulk modulus Constrained axial modulus Matrix swelling coefficient 61 Adsorbed volume

Thank you for your kind attention

62