Energy Convers. Mgmt Vol. 34, No. 9-11, pp. 1095-1103, 1993 Printed in Gleat Britain.

All rights reserved

0196-8904/93 $6.00+0.00 Copyright 1993 Pergamon Press Lid

CO2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

Otto Skovholt Statoil R&D Centre, Postuttak, 7004 Trondheim, N - Norway

ABSTRACT

The results of the performed screening study indicates that it is possible to transport CO2 over large distances within a reasonable unit cost. It is evident that the effect of large scale solutions to reduce unit costs are substantial. The transportation unit cost for a fully utilized large diameter pipeline over 1500 kilometers is estimated at approximately 65 per tonne, while transportation through a 16 inch pipeline, corresponding to CO2 from a single 1000 MW gas fu'ed power station, over the same distance, is approximately 42 $ per tonne. The transportation cost should be compared with carbon tax of 505 per tonne CO2 in force in Norway and the proposed EC energy / carbon tax of 10 $ per barrel of oil, which is equivalent to approximately 24 $ per tonne CO2. Large diameter pipelines require large investments and multilateral agreement. Therefore, the possibilities to establish an integrated large scale CO2 transportation system across country borders and continents is a possibility, but the perspective is long term. Although an integrated large scale CO2 transportation system is not likely to appear in our decade or even in the next two or three, it may turn out to be the chosen solution for the mid 21th Century if we axe entering a greenhouse driven future.

BACKGROUND

Removal of CO2 from flue gases require a solution to transport the CO2 from the location of the emission to a disposal site where the CO2 can be kept permanently and safely. Exceptions are few where emission units are located just above an aquifer or close to deep seawater. This paper deals with the transportation challenge only. The battery limits are set after capture and drying of almost pure CO2 and before any special installation to provide storage. CO2 removal will produce large quantifies to be disposed. A normal gas fired 1000 MW power station will emit approximately 3 mill. tonnes, or as liquid, approximately 3 mill. m3 per year. In liquid form this corresponds to the size of a building with a base like an international football square and a height of 750 m. In perspective, the total CO2 emissions in Western Europe are estimated to be approximately 1000 times this volume per year.

1095

1096

SKOVHOLT: CO, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

When thinking about a liquid volume of 3 mill. m3 C02 per year, transportation by road or rail is unthinkable. Transportation of this quantity by ship will require approximately 30 calls by an average LNG-type vessel per year. These are, however, very costly vessels and will result in high unit cost of transport.

The most viable solution for transportation of such quantities is, however, assumed to be by pipeline. In general all these possible transportation solutions are costly, and the cost increase by distance.The costs will, however, be consierably reduced by application of large scale solutions like very large diameter pipelines.
This paper focus on pipeline transportation as in most cases will be the least expensive solution for large volumes of gases or liquids. For the base, case ocean deposition is selected. Technical possibilities and limitations as well as capacities and costs are illustrated and the advantage of large scale solutions are indicated. The presented results are based on a screening study and the connected uncertainties are +/- 10% for transportation capacitiy calculations and +/- 40% for investments.

P I P E L I N E T R A N S P O R T A T I O N CONDITIONS

CO2 is today only in exceptional cases transported by pipeline. Only a few cases are reported. One case refered to, is a 30 inch pipeline from Colorado to Texas, USA, the Cortez Pipeline (Shell Oil Co.), which conveys CO2 over a distance of 480 miles for the purpose of using CO2 in oil wells to enhance the oil recovery. This pipeline is operated at high pressure and at high densities. (1) It is possible to transport CO2 in several different ways: as as as as agas a liquids a mixture of gas and liquid a high density gas at high pressure

Figure 1 presentes the phase diagram, i.e. temperature and pressure diagram, where these conditions occur.
It is likely that the transportation temperature in a CO2-pipeline has to be ambient, i.e. be at the same temperature as the soil where the pipelines are buried. In nordic countries soil temperatures varies between a few degrees minus in winter and up to 6-8 degr. C in summer. In warmer countries the temperatures may be approximately 20 degr. C. In the ocean, however, the temperature below the suface layer is very stable and will typically be between 5 - 7 degr. C year around at medium depths and approach 0 degr. C in the deep sea in waters surrounding most of the industrialized world. In general, an efficient transportation solution require a high density of the medium to be transported. The highest densities are achieved by transporting the CO2 as liquid or as high density gas.

SKOVHOLT: C02 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

PrlBsl~lre

1097

bars 3OO

250

2OO

150

100 Pc = 73.8 bar Tc = 31 *C 50

50

Temperature *C

Figure I

C02 phasediagram

The properties of CO2 differ from many other types of media: At athmospheric pressure and at ambient soil temperatures we know that CO2 is a gas. When compressing, followed by removal of compression heat, the gas turns into a liquid, ref. Figure 1. Within actual soil temperatures the transformation into a liquid occurs between 30 and 50 bars. The density of the CO2-liquid increases when subjected to increased pressure. Above a certain pressure level, namely the critical pressure which is 73.8 bars for CO2, there exist only one condition for CO2, the socalled dense phase condition. The dense phase can also be achieved without passing the liquid area. Above the critical temperature for CO2, which is 31 degr. C, the CO2 turns gradually into dense phase through compression, ref. Figure 1.

The dense phase is a very peculiar condition. On the one hand it is not a liquid, but on the other hand it has higher density than a liquid and has many of the same flow conditions as that of a liquid. For these reasons there are also problems related to calculation of flow capasities. For trunk pipeline transportation purposes, transportation as pure CO2 gas is possible, but not optimal. When being restricted to operate below 30 - 50 bars, the densities and capacities will be too small. However, for a smaller CO2 producers CO2 as pure gas phase can he applied on gathering lines for connection to larger trunk pipelines. The liquid phase could be applied for onshore pipelines if the pressure could be kept above the vaporazation level. However, a pipeline crossing hilly terrain will give low pressure points at the top of the hills and the liquid will turn into gas, i e. it will result in a two phase flow. Two phase flow is more complicated to handle, in particular in connection with compressing/pumping. Consequently, both liquid and two phase flow conditions are in general not recommended for onshore pipelines. - For offshore pipelines liquid phase flow is possible. The temperature, as mentioned, is stable and low and the pressure will normally be kept high sufficiently to prevent two phase flow.

1098

SKOVHOLT: CO2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

However, the most practical way for pipeline CO2 transportation is in the supercritical condition, i.e.above 73.8 bars. The density increases with increased pressure and exceeds seawater when passing approx. 300 bars or at 3000 m water depth. In the screening study, which is the basis for this paper, the supercritical phase or the dense phase condition is overall practical to apply for all types of pipelines, onshore and offshore, and is chosen as the basis for the flow capasities calculations presented in this paper.

FLOW CAPACITY CALCULATIONS

Flow capacities expressed in weight per time unit are dependant on several factors, mainly: selected phase condition (i.e. the density of the medium) internal pipe diameter section length between pump or compressor stations differencial pressure over the section length temperature of the transported CO2, both initial temperature after compression and the ambient temperature Other factors are the viscosity of the medium, the internal pipe wail roughness and the sloping of the terrain. Basis for the calculations are the following simplified assumptions: onshore pipelines are burried and the terrain is flat "normal" pipes applied for gas transportation Early it was revealed that internationally accepted and available flow simulation programs were not particlarly suited for CO2 flow calculations. Tree alternative calculation tools have been applied, and the resulting differences in flow rates can not be logically explained. However, the differences discovered are within +/- 10% of the calculated figures. It can be concluded that if more detailed studies should be made, one has to investigate more thoroughly the properties of CO2 and also modify or tailormake a new simulation tool. - Further to this, it must be emphazised that no effort has been made to optimize the parameters before the flow calculations. All parameters are chosen based on rule of thumbs from the gas transportation industry. The early flow simulations demonstrated clearly the advantages of transporting at high density phases, either liquid phase or dense phase (supercritical phase). The differences is illustrated for a 30 inch onshore pipeline appying the same pipeline parameters:

Flow capacities for a 30 inch (750 mm) pipeline:

C02 gas phase: C02 liquid or dense phase: approx. 5 mill. tonnes per year approx. 20 mill. tonnes per year

SKOVHOLT: CO2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

1099

The simulation tools are not sufficiently accurate to distinguish between liquid and dense phase, although dense phase should according to what is outlined in preceding chapter have slightly higher capasity. From this and other practical reasons dense phase is applied in the further flow capacities. Applied flow calculation assumtions: * * * * * * * * * transportation condition: pipeline section lengths between compr, stations: ambient temperature onshore (soil): ambient temperature offshore: maximum temperature after compression: maximum pressure onshore: maximum pressure offshore: minimum pressure: operational time: dense 250 12 6 30 110 300 90 365 phase km degr. C degr. C degr. C bars bars bars days/yr

It must be emphazied that section lengths of 250 km, i.e. distance between compression, are not likely to be applied for small diameters, in particular diameters smaller than 16 inches. Such lines will be feeding lines for larger pipelines, trunklines. The capacities increases with shorter lengths. The maximum selected onshore pipe diameter are based on the largest available diameter (64" or 1600 mm) which can be ordered from excisting pipemill. The other presented diameters are randomly chosen in order to demonstrate differences. Flow capacities for onshore pipelines are presented in Figure 2. Flow capacities for offshore pipelines are depedent on the same factors as the onshore pipelines, but in addition, also dependent on the pipeline outlet depth. We have looked at two ocan disposal options; A Bring dense phase CO2 down to a water depth where the density of the CO2 exceeds the seawater density and where the CO2 is assumed to accumulate as a heavy medium, a "lake", at the deep sea bottom, i.e. deeper than 3000m. Dissolving CO2 gas into seawater at approximately 300 m water depth. This creates a CO2-rich seawater which according to the theories of the Nansen Center (2), will flow like "a subsea river" down to the deep ocean.

In this paper, alternative A, pipeline outlet at 3000 m water depth, has been chosen as the case to be presented. Offshore CO2 pipelines are likely to be trunklines, and diameters less than 16 inches have therefore not been included in the pipeline flow calculations. The offshore pipeline is assumed to be 250 km long. The flow capacities for offshore pipelines are presented in Figure 2. As it can be seen from figure 2, the flow capacities for the offshore pipelines are approximately twice the corresponding onshore pipelines diameters. The reasons for this difference are partly lower ambient temperature and higher average pressure which both gives higher densities. In addition, due to the sloping of the sea bottom, the weight of the CO2 gives a driving force in the flow direction which helps increasing the flow capacity.

!100

SKOVHOLT: CO2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

Mill. tonnes pe year

0 16" (4oomm)

o oO
(750ram) (1000ram) 116oomm)
210

2O0

Onshore
pipeline

150

Ul'~'~ln~: +/- 10% 110

IO0
i=i

60

50
2O

35

35

i?i!i~i:!!i

3
16"

5.5

F7 i ilillili!~
3O" l~pelined ~

40"

64"

PIPELINE DESIGN

Figure 2

Pipeline flow capacities

Basis for the pipeline design is the common practice for onshore and offshore pipelines for gas transportation. A particular design has not been carried out, but all cost elements required for gas pipelines are included in the basis for the cost calculations. The pipeline system comprises the following installations in adddition to the pipe:
I, , ,

initial compression of CO2 at the source from athmospheric to 110 bar pressure pumping stations including aftercoolers each 250 km sectioning valves each 30 km catodic protection system corrosion control points

The pipes are assumed to be high quality carbon steel, coated to protect against external corrosion and damage. It has been assumed that the CO2 entering the pipeline system will already have been treated to a very low content of water (ppm range) in order to prevent internal corrosion and hydrate formation.

PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION METHODS

For onshore CO2 pipelines, normal gas pipeline construction methods can be applied. For offshore pipelines the largest pipeline diameter which can be installed with the todays lay barges, is 42 inches (1060 mm) and maximum depths less than 400 m. The next generation lay barges can install 60 inch (1500 mm) diameter pipelines, but still to a limited water depths. Large diameters and 3000 meters depth represent a big challenge and

SKOVHOLT: CO2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

1101

solutions have yet to be developed. In this screening study, installation to a depth of 3000 m has been assumed possible by some not yet identified methode.

P I P E L I N E COSTS

The pipeline investment cost is depedant on the terrain, both the topography and the ground conditions. The basis for the presented costs is medium difficult conditions. The complete investment costs, i.e. both pipeline and compression installations are included. For offshore pipelines the cost for initial compression ( from athmospheric pressure to 90 bars) is not included while this is assumed already performed before the CO2 enters into the offshore pipeline. The total cost, pipeline and installations, for onshore and offshore pipelines turns out to be approximately equal. The cost calculation method applied is a simplified screening level approach. The assumed cost accuracy is less than +/- 40%. The investment cost figures are presented in Figure 3. PIPELINE
5OOO 4500 4000 3500 [ ] High case [ ] Base case [ ] Low case

COST PER METER

ONSHORE AND OFFSHORE PIPELINE

3000 250O
2ooo

1500 1000 5OO 0

16
I " [

30

40

64

Figure 3
7

Pipeline diameter in inches

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N COSTS - SCALING E F F E C T

Transportation unit costs or transportation rates, are here expressed as costs per tonnes CO2 over a defined distance. The units applied are dollars per tonnes per 250 km for different pipe diameters. Transportation costs include both investment and operational costs. The transportation unit costs for selected pipeline diameters onshore and offshore are presented in Figure 4. From Figure 4 it is seen that large diameter pipelines serving high capacities, gives subtantially lower transportation costs than smaller pipelines with lower capacities. One can conclude that it is much to gain by establishing large scale integrated solutions. As a reference, the former Soviet Union, who are the masters of large scale pipelines for natural gas transport, have built a total of 54000 km of 58 inch (1500 mm) pipelines, equal to 1.4 times the distance around the equator.

1102

SKOVHOLT: CO2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

$; ~onnes

16"

30"

40"

64"

(400ram)
8

(750ram)

(lO00mm) D

(1600ram) Onshore

7.0

BE o,.o., p,l~ne

II
3.8

Uncertainty: +/- 40%

2.1 1.6 1.0

16"

30" Pipeline diameter

40"

64"

Figure 4 Transportation rates for onshore and offshore pipelines in $ per ton across a 250 km pipeline section. DCF = 10% 8 SAFETY ASPECTS

CO2 is slightly heavier than air and may accumulate at low areas in the landscape. The risk to animals and people are lack of oxygen for breathing. CO2 is not toxic, but major leakage of CO2 may represent mortal risks for animals and people due to displacement of air by the heavier carbon dioxide gas. Such events may occur due to material or construction failures or corrosion, but in most cases, the damage will be due to external force caused by unauthorized human activities close to the pipeline Statistics for failures of natural gas pipelines in the OECD countries are excellent, but the damage frequencies are higher for the smallest diameter pipelines.

There are several measures which are normally taken to prevent accidents: safety zones on both sides of the pipelines, i.e. distance to buildings increased pipe wall thickness near populated areas sectioning valves to reduce the quantity of gas which can leak out and shorter distances between valves near populated areas proper marking of the pipeline above the ground and in the trench proper surveilance of the pipeline route during operation In addition, it seems likely that a CO2 pipeline would be routed to avoid low and sheltered areas and rather follow ridges or other wind exposed areas to minimize concentration of CO2 in the unlikely event of a large leak.

SKOVHOLT: CO 2 T R A N S P O R T A T I O N SYSTEM

1103

THEORETICAL CASE EXAMPLES - FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

Based on the information presented in this paper, it is possible to create theoretical cases in order to demonstrate relations between emission quantities and pipeline dimentions. The following case examples are uses to draw some future perspectives. In Norway, the total CO2 emission is approximately 35 mill. tonnes per year. From the capcity calculations, this total amount of CO2 can be transported in one 40 inch (1000 mm) pipeline, or if 1/3 could be captured, a 24 inch pipeline would be sufficient. However, the population in Norway is scattered and so are the CO2 emission sources. It is therefore not likely, even in the future, that a CO2 collection grid and a trunkline will be a convenient solution for Norway. (Except possibly for some selected larger emission sources.) However, if measures to reduce future CO2 emissions are needed, the very large scale pipelines outlined in this paper should be considered in the planning stage. One conclusion could be that a future power station or other large point sources, should be located close to shore and in a region where the distance to the deep ocean is short. For the European Continent the situation is quite different from that of Norway. Regions with a high density of large CO2-emitters indicates the possibilities to fill up trunklines with captured CO2. The total Western European emissions are estimated to be approximately 3000 mill. tonnes CO2 per year. Assuming that a limited amount of gathering pipelines can gather 20% of this amount, the volume to be transported would be approximately 600 mill. tonnes per year. This volume can be transported through 6 pipelines with a diameter of 64 inches (1600 mm) or approximately 18 pipelines of 40 inches (1000 mm). Offshore, appoximately half these numbers are sufficient. Such large quantities need a real huge disposal site. The most likely alternative then, is ocean disposal. Looking at subsea maps, the key corner of Europe for ocean deposition is the bottom of Biscaya. Fairly close to the coastline we find depths of approximately 5000 m connected to the deep Atlantic. One may then imagine large pipelines ending up in Southern France and spreading out to different regions of Europe. The conclusion is that such solutions may be possible in the long term, but that the technology for large diameter pipelines at deep sea remains to be developed. An alternative or supplementary development could be the same as mentioned for Norway; heavy emission industry and fossil fuel power stations would in such a scenario tend to be relocated to areas where CO2 transportation and disposal costs would be low.