![Driving down costs
Sharing infra structure:
simultaneously handling CO2
from multiple parties
Combining CO2 flows lies in the
nature of CCS:
Power generation is responsible for 65%* of all green house gas emissions
OECD/IEA Ref. Scenario
2006 2030
Majority of sources
Total [TWh] 18921 33265 (+76%) are comparable
Coal 41% 44% regarding:
Nuclear 15% 10%
• Flow & conditions
Renewables 18% 23%
• Compositions
• Characteristics
• Demands
*): Reference Scenario in 2005 & 2030: resp. 61% & 68 % in CO2 eq. terms](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/microsoftpowerpoint-decisionscienceforumpresdd18-10-11-111117090521-phpapp01/85/Modeling-the-CO2-hub-terminal-concept-7-320.jpg)
Modeling the CO2 hub terminal concept
- 1. Carbon Capture & Storage Reliable cost effective CO2 shipping through statistical modelling The Hague November 1st, 2011 Cees van der Ben
- 2. Note This document and all information contained herein are the property of CINTRA It may not be copied or used without the written permission of CINTRA 01-11-11 2
- 3. Content 1. CCS & Rotterdam 2. CINTRA logistic concept 3. Rotterdam as a hub location 4. CINTRA current project status 5. The logistic chain’s model 6. Results & Conclusions 01-11-11 3
- 4. Rotterdam Climate Initiative (RCI) city region CO2 reduction targets -50% vs 1990 by 2025 CCS plays a mayor role in the Dutch national reduction targets in general and in the Rotterdam targets in particular. 01-11-11 4
- 5. NW-Europe allows for short links between sources and sinks Several depleted gas fields become available and in due time incl. future aquifers: 50+ years of storage capacity for Europe. 04-10-11 5
- 6. Large scale CCS: when? • Coal CCS: € 75 /ton 2020 -2025 Until then: pilots through subsidies: EERP, NER300 etc. 6
- 7. Driving down costs Sharing infra structure: simultaneously handling CO2 from multiple parties Combining CO2 flows lies in the nature of CCS: Power generation is responsible for 65%* of all green house gas emissions OECD/IEA Ref. Scenario 2006 2030 Majority of sources Total [TWh] 18921 33265 (+76%) are comparable Coal 41% 44% regarding: Nuclear 15% 10% • Flow & conditions Renewables 18% 23% • Compositions • Characteristics • Demands *): Reference Scenario in 2005 & 2030: resp. 61% & 68 % in CO2 eq. terms
- 8. CINTRA CO2 Hub concept • Bulk making/breaking for off shore CO2 storage • Intermediate Storage • Combine and link pipeline systems and barging/shipping routes: 4 routes • Provide independent custody transfer metering for Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) • Network building block (at rivers and coast lines) • Optimum CO2 : -50 ˚C, 7 bara 01-11-11 8
- 9. Rotterdam potential sinks 300 Mton CO2 Other EOR capacity K12B Projects Taqa 40 Mton CO2 capacity CO2 from other ports Rotterdam ideally located for North Sea distribution Enough emitters for a launching scheme and good hinterland connection Dutch sinks are all within the 400 km range (>650 Mton) Rotterdam is Europe’s largest harbour Contacts with various (EOR & non-EOR) sink operators in the North Sea 04-10-11 9
- 10. CINTRA Partners: Providing a one stop shop from Capture flange to Storage well head • On & off shore pipeline transportation • Third part access • Liquefaction at the Emitter’s site or at the CO2 Hub • Temporary Storage of CO2 • (Un)loading vessels • Custody transfer metering • Liquefied CO2 shipping to off shore sink • Connecting to off shore offloading facility (buoy) • On board gas conditioning up to sink requirements 04-10-11 10
- 11. CO2 Hub Concept Advantages • Good scalability: cost effective launching scheme • Reliable: Multiple emitters & sinks in 1 system • Cost reduction: enhanced oil recovery • No NIMBY: no onshore pipelines and storage 04-10-11 11
- 12. CINTRA current project status Dan Field on the Danish sector of the North Sea is operated by Maersk Oil & Gas AS on behalf DUC – Dansk Undergrunds Consortium. Dan CINTRA’s launching scheme: • CO2: 1.5 million tonnes per annum (MTA) • Rotterdam Denmark • Sink: Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) CINTRA 04-10-11 12
- 13. CINTRA’s Launching Scheme Coal fired power plant Coal fired power plant On shore pipeline Terminal Sink -post combustion capture -25km - 2.0 MTA liquefaction - Operating oil field -1.1 MTA -40 bar - 20 kcbm Liquid CO2 storage - Waterflooding ongoing Hydrogen plant - Dense well grid - cryogenic capture Ships - Injectivity tests coming up - 0.4 MTA - 2 X 12kcbm ships - 1 extra platform module - onboard conditioning (p, T) - 2 STL buoys Schedule: – Letter Of Intents (LOI) in place: Q4 2011 – Final Investment Decision (FID): Q4 2012 – Ready For Operation (RFO): Q4 2015 Expected hub 2025 throughput: total 18 MTA of which 7 MTA via barge 01-11-11 13
- 14. CO2 Hub Location 01-11-11 14
- 15. Sink: Maersk’s Dan Field 01-11-11 15
- 16. Logistic chain: options & modelling • Chain requirements: – Upstream: ensure reliable CO2 take off at the emitters – Down stream: ensure reliable CO2 availability at oil well • Cases: – A: 2 ships + 2 buoys -> one ships stays at the buoy for 1 week before the next one comes – B: 1 ship + permanent off shore storage (either a floater or a platform) • Question: which case is favoured when looking at – Chain requirements: • Annual amount of CO2 captured & stored • % of time CO2 is available at oil well – Required tank volumes on shore and off shore – Required ship sizes • Additional points of interest: – Nr. offloading stoppages in winter time – Capture & liquefaction units’ design capacity 01-11-11 16
- 17. The Arena Model Emitters Onshore On shore terminal Shipping Off shore Oil pipeline (liquefier & tanks) off loading well COAL FIRED PWR PLNT (CFPP) Model details: • Tank tier system included • Workability based on real metocean data & vessel design • Component’s operational flexibility has been modelled • Maintenance schemes & unplanned down times of all chain components CFPP 01-11-11 17
- 18. Case differences Case A: CFPP Case B: CFPP 01-11-11 18
- 19. Weather data Workability spread per month: tough winter conditions Workability histogram 01-11-11 19
- 20. Results & Conclusions CINTRA launching scheme: • Case A: – CO2 shipping and off loading in rough wave climate can be performed in a reliable manner: off shore storage is not mandatory. – Two buoys at sea are required to ensure steady operations. – Larger ships improve the uptime but do not significantly decrease the number of oil production interruptions. • Case B: – Off shore storage will only slightly improve the CO2 availability (96 -> 98%) but will reduce number of oil production stoppages from 12 times/year to almost never. – Off shore storage capacity beyond 20,000 m3 is ineffective. – Reserving 15% of the onshore storage for the Air Liquide being the smallest emitter will allow for decreasing its capture unit’s design capacity. General: – Arena is suitable for modelling such a logistic chain. – This model needs to be kept up to date after initial start-up in order to scope any chain debottlenecking as emitters & sinks are added to the system. 01-11-11 20
- 21. THANK YOU QUESTIONS? 04-10-11 21