Ccs - Report For Print

A seminar Report on CO2 Capture and Storage System
Abstract
Approximately one third of all CO
2
emissions due to human activity come from
fossil fuels used for generating electricity, with each power plant capable of emitting
several million tones of CO
2
annually. A variety of other industrial processes also emit
large amounts of CO
2
from each plant, for example oil refineries, cement works, and iron
and steel production. These emissions could be reduced substantially, without maor
changes to the basic process, by capturing and storing the CO
2
. Other sources of
emissions, such as transport and domestic buildings, cannot be tackled in the same way
because of the large number of small sources of CO
2
.
Carbon capture and storage !CC"# is an approach to minimi$e global warming
by capturing carbon dioxide !CO
2
# from large point sources such as fossil fuel power
plants and storing it instead of releasing it into the atmosphere CC" applied to a modern
conventional power plant could reduce CO
2
emissions to the atmosphere by
approximately %&'(&) compared to a plant without CC".
*
th
"emester +ept. of ,echanical -ngineering .C-T .alasore
/
1. INTRODUCTION
Carbon dioxide !CO
2
# is a greenhouse gas that occurs naturally in the atmosphere.
0uman activities are increasing the concentration of CO
2
in the atmosphere thus
contributing to -arth1s global warming. CO
2
is emitted when fuel is burnt 2 be it in large
power plants, in car engines, or in heating systems. 3t can also be emitted by some other
industrial processes, for instance when resources are extracted and processed, or when
forests are burnt.Currently, 4& 5t per year of CO
2
is emitted due to human activities.The
increase in concentration of carbon in the past two hundred years is shown in the 6ig /./
6ig /./ 3ncrease in concentration of CO2 in past two centuries

6ig /.2 3ncrease in global temperature in past 2&& years.
*
th
2
One possible option for reducing CO
2
is to store it underground. This techni7ue is
called Carbon dioxide Capture and "torage !CC"#.
3n Carbon capture and storage !CC"#, carbon dioxide !CO
2
# is capured from large
point sources !A point source of pollution is a single identifiable locali$ed source of air,
water, thermal, noise or light pollution#.such as fossil fuel power plants and storing it
instead of releasing it into the atmosphere. Although CO
2
has been inected into
geological formations for various purposes, the long term storage of CO
2
is a relatively
untried.
CC" applied to a modern conventional power plant could reduce CO
2
emissions to
the atmosphere by approximately %&'(&) compared to a plant without CC".
6ig /.4 8ower plants with and with out CC".
The section2 presents the general framework for the assessment together with a brief
overview of CC" systems. "ection 4 then describes the maor sources of CO
2
, a step
needed to assess the feasibility of CC" on a global scale. Technological options for CO
2
capture are then discussed in "ection 9, while "ection : focuses on methods of CO
2
transport. 6ollowing this, each of the storage options is addressed on section ;. "ection
;./ focuses on geological storage, "ection ;.2 on ocean storage, and "ection ;.4 on
mineral carbonation of CO
2
section * discus the risk of CO
2
leakage, The overall costs
and economic potential of CC" are then discussed in "ection %, followed by the
conclusion in "ection (.
*
th
4
2. CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE AND STORAGE
One techni7ue that could limit CO
2
emissions from human activities into the
atmosphere is Carbon dioxide Capture and "torage !CC"#. 3t involves collecting, at its
source, the CO
2
that is produced by power plants or industrial facilities and storing it away
for a long time in underground layers, in the oceans, or in other materials
The process involves three main steps<
/. capturing CO
2
, at its source, by separating it from other gases produced by an
industrial process
2. transporting the captured CO
2
to a suitable storage location !typically in
compressed form#
4. storing the CO
2
away from the atmosphere for a long period of time, for instance
in underground geological formations, in the deep ocean, or within certain mineral
compounds.
6ig 2./ The three main components of the CC" process
6ig 2.2 The -sberg 8ower "tation, a CO
2
capture site in +enmark
*
th
9
3. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF CCS
Capture of CO2 can be applied to large point sources. The CO2 would then be
compressed and transported for storage in geological formations, in the ocean, in mineral
carbonates2, or for use in industrial processes. =arge point sources of CO2 include large
fossil fuel or biomass energy facilities, maor CO2'emitting industries, natural gas
production, synthetic fuel plants and fossil fuel'based hydrogen production plants !see
Table 4./#.
8otential technical storage methods are< geological storage !in geological formations,
such as oil and gas fields, unminable coal beds and deep saline formations4#, ocean
storage !direct release into the ocean water column or onto the deep seafloor# and
industrial fixation of CO2 into inorganic carbonates. This report also discusses industrial
uses of CO2, but this is not expected to contribute much to the reduction of
CO2emissions.
Table 3.1. Profle by process or industrial activity of worldwide large stationary CO2 sources
with emissions of more than 0.1 million tonnes of CO2 (tCO2! per year.
*
th
:
4. SOURCES OF CO
2
EMISSIONS SUITABLE FOR CAPTURE AND
STORAGE
"everal factors determine whether carbon dioxide capture is a viable option for a
particular emission source<
The si$e of the emission source,
>hether it is stationary or mobile,
0ow near it is to potential storage sites, and
0ow concentrated its co
2
emissions are.
Carbon dioxide could be captured from a large stationary emission sources such as
a power plants or industrial facilities that produce large amounts of carbon dioxide. 3f
such facilities are located near potential storage sites, for example suitable geological
formations, they are possible candidates for the early implementation of CO
2
capture and
storage !CC"#.
"mall or mobile emission sources in homes, businesses or transportation are not
being considered at this stage because they are not suitable for capture and storage.

6ig 9./ The 5ibson coal power plant, a good example of a large stationary source.
Prc!ss N"#b!r $ s"rc!s E#%ss%&s 'MtCO
2
(r
)1
*
6ossil fuels 8ower 9,(92 /&,:4(
Cement production /,/*: (42
?efineries ;4% *(%
3ron and steel industry 2;( ;9;
8etrochemical industry 9*& 4*(
Oil and gas processing @AA :&
Other sources (& 44
.iomass
.ioethanol and bioenergy 4&4 (/
Total *,%%* /4,9;;
Table 9./ 8rofile by process or industrial activity of worldwide large stationary CO
2
sources
with emissions of more than &./ ,tCO
2
per year.
3n 2&&&, close to ;&) of the CO
2
emissions due to the use of $ss%+ $"!+s were
produced by large stationary emission sources, such as power plants and oil and gas
extraction or processing industries !see Table 4./#.
*
th
;
6our maor clusters of emissions from such stationary emission sources are< the
,idwest and eastern B"A, the northwestern part of -urope, the eastern coast of China
and the 3ndian subcontinent !see 6igure 9.2#.
6ig 9.2 5lobal +istribution of large CO2 sources
,any stationary emission sources lie either directly above, or within reasonable distance
!less than 4&&km# from areas with potential for geological storage !see 6ig 9.2 C 6ig 9.4#
6ig 9.4 8ossible storage sites
,. CO
2
CAPTURE
*
th
*
The purpose of CO
2
capture is to produce a concentrated stream of CO
2
at high
pressure that can readily be transported to a storage site. Although, in principle, the entire
gas stream containing low concentrations of CO
2
could be transported and inected
underground, energy costs and other associated costs generally make this approach
impractical. 3t is therefore necessary to produce a nearly pure CO
2
stream for transport
and storage. Applications separating CO
2
in large industrial plants, including natural gas
treatment plants and ammonia production facilities, are already in operation today.
Currently, CO
2
is typically removed to purify other industrial gas streams. ?emoval has
been used for storage purposes in only a few casesD in most cases, the CO
2
is emitted to
the atmosphere. Capture processes also have been used to obtain commercially useful
amounts of CO
2
from flue gas streams generated by the combustion of coal or natural gas.
0owever, there have been no applications of CO
2
capture at large !e.g., :&& ,># power
plants.
Three systems are available for power plants< post'combustion, pre'combustion, and
oxy fuel combustion systems. The captured CO
2
must then be purified and compressed
for transport and storage.
6ig :./ CO2 capture process.

,.1 Pst)C#b"st%& S(st!#s
*
th
%
This system separate CO
2
from the flue gases produced by the combustion of the
primary fuel in air. These systems normally use a li7uid solvent to capture the small
fraction of CO
2
!typically 42/:) by volume# present in a flue gas stream in which the
main constituent is nitrogen !from air#. 6or a modern pulveri$ed coal !8C# power plant or
a natural gas combined cycle !@5CC# power plant, current post'combustion capture
systems would typically employ an organic solvent such as monoethanolamine !,-A#.
6ig :.2 5as turbine combine cycle with post'combustion
,.2 Pr!)C#b"st%& S(st!#s
3n this process the primary fuel in a reactor with steam and air or oxygen to produce a
mixture consisting mainly of carbon monoxide and hydrogen !Esynthesis gasF#.
Additional hydrogen, together with CO
2
, is produced by reacting the carbon monoxide
with steam in a second reactor !a Eshift reactorF#. The resulting mixture of hydrogen and
CO
2
can then be separated into a CO
2
gas stream, and a stream of hydrogen. 3f the CO
2
is
stored, the hydrogen is a carbon'free energy carrier that can be combusted to generate
power andAor heat. Although it is costly than post'combustion systems, the high
concentrations of CO
2
produced by the shift reactor !typically /: to ;&) by volume on a
dry basis# and the high pressures often encountered in these applications are more
favorable for CO
2
separation.
*
th
(
6ig :.4 8re'combustion capture of CO
2

,.3 O-($"!+ C#b"st%& S(st!#s
This system use oxygen instead of air for combustion of the primary fuel to
produce a flue gas that is mainly water vapour and CO
2
. This results in a flue gas with
high CO
2
concentrations !greater than %&) by volume#. The water vapour is then
removed by cooling and compressing the gas stream. Oxyfuel combustion re7uires the
upstream separation of oxygen from air, with a purity of (:2(() oxygen assumed in
most current designs. 6urther treatment of the flue gas may be needed to remove air
pollutants and non' condensed gases !such as nitrogen# from the flue gas before the CO
2
is sent to storage. As a method of CO
2
capture in boilers, oxyfuel combustion systems are
in the demonstration phase. Oxyfuel systems are also being studied in gas turbine
Current post'combustion and pre'combustion systems for power plants could capture
%:2(:) of the CO
2
that is produced. 0igher capture efficiencies are possible, although
separation devices become considerably larger, more energy intensive and more costly.
Capture and compression need roughly /&29&) more energy than the e7uivalent plant
without capture, depending on the type of system. +ue to the associated CO
2
emissions,
the net amount of CO
2
captured is approximately %&2(&). Oxyfuel combustion systems
are, in principle, able to capture nearly all of the CO
2
produced. 0owever, the need for
additional gas treatment systems to remove pollutants such as sulphur and nitrogen oxides
lowers the level of CO
2
captured to slightly more than (&).
*
th
/&
.. CO
2
TRANSPORTATION
After capture, the CO
2
must be transported to suitable storage sites. Today 8ipelines
operate as a mature market technology and are the most common method for transporting
CO
2
. 5aseous CO
2
is typically compressed to a pressure above % ,8a in order to avoid
two'phase flow regimes and increase the density of the CO
2
, thereby making it easier and
less costly to transport. CO
2
also can be transported as a li7uid in ships, road or rail
tankers that carry CO
2
in insulated tanks at a temperature well below ambient, and at
much lower pressures.
The first long'distance CO
2
pipeline came into operation in the early /(*&s. 3n the
Bnited "tates, over 2,:&& km of pipeline transports more than 9& ,tCO
2
per year from
natural and anthropogenic sources, and it is mainly used for -O?. These pipelines operate
in the Gdense phase1 mode !in which there is a continuous progression from gas to li7uid,
without a distinct phase change#, and at ambient temperature and high pressure. 3n most
of these pipelines, the flow is driven by compressors at the upstream end, although some
pipelines have intermediate !booster# compressor stations.
3n some situations or locations, transport of CO
2
by ship may be economically more
attractive, particularly when the CO
2
has to be moved over large distances or overseas.
=i7uefied petroleum gases !=85, principally propane and butane# are transported on a
large commercial scale by marine tankers. CO
2
can be transported by ship in much the
same way !typically at &.* ,8a pressure#, but this currently takes place on a small scale
because of limited demand. The properties of li7uefied CO
2
are similar to those of =85,
and the technology could be scaled up to large CO
2
carriers if a demand for such systems
were to materiali$e.
?oad and rail tankers also are technically feasible options. These systems transport
CO
2
at a temperature of '2&HC and at 2 ,8a pressure. 0owever, they are uneconomical
compared to pipelines and ships, except on a very small scale, and are unlikely to be
relevant to large'scale CC".
6ig ;./ An =85 tanker'CO
2
can be transported in the similar way.
*
th
//
/. CO
2
STORAGE 'SE0UESTRATION*
Iarious forms have been conceived for permanent storage of CO
2
. These forms
include gaseous storage in various deep geological formations !including saline
formations and exhausted gas fields#, li7uid storage in the ocean, and solid storage by
reaction of CO
2
with metal oxides to produce stable carbonates.
/.1 G!+1%ca+ Stra1!.
Also known as geo'se7uestration, this method involves inecting carbon dioxide,
directly into underground geological formations. 5eological formations are currently
considered the most promising se7uestration sites, and these are estimated to have a
storage capacity of at least 2&&& 5t CO
2
!currently, 4& 5t per year of CO2 is emitted due
to human activities#. Oil fields, gas fields, saline formations, unminable coal seams, and
saline'filled basalt formations have been suggested as storage sites. Iarious physical !e.g.,
highly impermeable caprock# and geochemical trapping mechanisms would prevent the
CO
2
from escaping to the surface. CO
2
is sometimes inected into declining oil fields to
increase oil recovery !enhanced oil recovery#.CO
2
storage in hydrocarbon reservoirs or
deep saline formations is generally expected to take place at depths below %&& m, where
the ambient pressures and temperatures will usually result in CO
2
being in a li7uid or
supercritical state. Bnder these conditions, the density of CO
2
will range from :& to %&)
of the density of water. This is close to the density of some crude oils, resulting in
buoyant forces that tend to drive CO
2
upwards. 6ig*././ shows some of the methods used
in geological storage.
This option is attractive because the storage costs may be partly offset by the sale of
additional oil that is recovered
Bnminable coal seams can be used to store CO
2
because CO
2
adsorbs to the surface
of coal. 0owever, the technical feasibility depends on the permeability of the coal bed. 3n
the process of absorption the coal releases previously absorbed methane, and the methane
can be recovered !!&2a&c!3 ca+ b!3 #!t2a&! r!c4!r(#. The sale of the methane can
be used to offset a portion of the cost of the CO
2
storage.
"aline formations contain highly minerali$ed brines, and have so far been considered
of no benefit to humans. "aline a7uifers have been used for storage of chemical waste in a
few cases. The main advantage of saline a7uifers is their large potential storage volume
and their common occurrence. This will reduce the distances over which CO
2
has to be
transported. The maor disadvantage of saline a7uifers is that relatively little is known
about them, compared to oil fields.
6or well'selected, designed and managed geological storage sites, 38CC estimates
that CO
2
could be trapped for millions of years, and the sites are likely to retain over (()
of the inected CO
2
over /,&&& years.
*
th
/2
6ig *././ 5eological storage options.
R!s!r4%r t(5!

L6!r !st%#at! $
stra1! ca5ac%t( 'GtCO
2
*
U55!r !st%#at! $
stra1! ca5ac%t( 'GtCO
2
*
Oil and gas fields ;*:
a
(&&
a
Bnminable coal
seams !-C.,#
4'/: 2&&
+eep saline
formations
/,&&& Bncertain, but
possibly /&
9
Table *././ "torage capacity for several geological storage options.
*
th
/4
7. METHODOLOGICAL FRAME8OR9 FOR CO2 CAPTURE AND STORAGE
S:STEMS
7.1 Gr!!&2"s! Gas I&4!&tr%!s
The two main options for including CC" in national greenhouse gas inventories have
been identified and analysed using the current methodological framework for total chain
from capture to storage !geological and ocean storage#. These options are< J "ource
reduction< To evaluate the CC" systems as mitigation options to reduce emissions to the
atmosphereD
Figure 8. 1 "implifed #ow diagram of possible CO2 emission sources during CC"
"ink enhancement< To evaluate the CC" systems using an analogy with the treatment
made to CO2 removals by sinks in the sector =and Bse, =and'Bse Change and 6orestry.
A balance is made of the CO2 emissions and removals to obtain the net emission or
removal. 3n this option, removals by sinks are related to CO2 storage. 3n both options,
estimation methodologies could be developed to cover most of the emissions in the CC"
system !see 6igure (./#, and reporting could use the current framework for preparation of
national greenhouse gas inventories. 3n the first option, reduced emissions could be
reported in the category where capture takes place. 6or instance, capture in power plants
could be reported using lower emission factors than for plants without CC". .ut this
could reduce transparency of reporting and make review of the overall impact on
emissions more difficult, especially if the capture process and emissions from
transportation and storage are not linked. This would be emphasi$ed where transportation
and storage includes captured CO2 from many sources, or when these take place across
national borders. An alternative would be to track CO2 flows through the entire capture
and storage system making transparent how much CO2 was produced, how much was
emitted to the atmosphere at each process stage, and how much CO2 was transferred to
storage.
*
th
/9
The second option is to report the impact of the CC" system as a sink. 6or instance,
reporting of capture in power plants would not alter the emissions from the combustion
process but the stored amount of CO2 would be reported as a removal in the inventory.
Application of the second option would re7uire adoption of new definitions not available
in the B@6CCC or in the current methodological framework for the preparation of
inventories. B@6CCC !/((2# defines a sink as Gany process, activity or mechanism which
removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol, or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the
atmosphere1. Although Gremoval1 was not included explicitly in the B@6CCC definitions,
it appears associated with the Gsink1 concept. CC"// systems do not meet the B@6CCC
definition for a sink, but given that the definition was agreed without having CC" systems
in mind, it is likely that this obstacle could be solved !Torvanger et al., 2&& #. 5eneral
issues of relevance to CC" systems include system boundaries !sectoral, spatial and
temporal# and these will vary in importance with the specific system and phases of the
system. The basic methodological approaches for system components, together with the
status of the methods and availability of data for these are discussed below. ,ineral
carbonation and industrial use of CO2 are addressed separately.
7.2 Oc!a& Stra1!
A potential CO
2
storage option is to inect captured CO
2
directly into the
deep ocean !at depths greater than /,&&& m#, where most of it would be isolated from the
atmosphere for centuries. This can be achieved by transporting CO
2
via pipelines or ships
to an ocean storage site, where it is inected into the water column of the ocean or at the
sea floor. The dissolved and dispersed CO
2
would subse7uently become part of the global
carbon cycle. 6ig %.2 shows some of the main methods that could be employed. Ocean
storage has not yet been deployed or demonstrated at a pilot scale, and is still in the
research phase. 0owever, there have been small' scale field experiments and 2: years of
theoretical, laboratory and modeling studies of intentional ocean storage of CO
2
.
*
th
/:
6ig %.2 Ocean storage methods.
CO2 inection, however, can harm marine organisms near the inection point. 3t is
furthermore expected that inecting large amounts would gradually affect the whole
ocean. .ecause of its environmental implications, CO2 storage in oceans is generally no
longer considered as an acceptable option
7.3 M%&!ra+ Stra1!
Through chemical reactions with some naturally occurring minerals, CO
2
is
converted into a solid form through a process called mineral carbonation and stored
virtually permanently. This is a process which occurs naturally, although very slowly.
These chemical reactions can be accelerated and used industrially to artificially store
CO
2
in minerals. 0owever, the large amounts of energy and mined minerals needed
makes this option less cost effective.
Eart2!& O-%3! P!rc!&t $ Cr"st Carb&at! E&t2a+5( c2a&1!
';<=#+*
"iO
2
:(.*/
Al
2
O
4
/:.9/
CaO 9.(& CaCO
4
'/*(
,gO 9.4; ,gCO
4
'//*
@a
2
O 4.:: @a
2
CO
4
6eO 4.:2 6eCO
4
K
2
O 2.%& K
2
CO
4
6e
2
O
4
2.;4 6eCO
4
2/.*; All Carbonates
Table %./ 8rincipal metal oxides of -arthLs Crust. Theoretically up to 22) of this
mineral mass is able to form carbonates.
*
th
/;
>. RIS9 OF LEA9AGE
The risks due to leakage from storage of CO
2
in geological reservoirs fall into two
broad categories< global risks and local risks. 5lobal risks involve the release of CO
2
that
may contribute significantly to climate change if some fraction leaks from the storage
formation to the atmosphere. 3n addition, if CO
2
leaks out of a storage formation, local
ha$ards may exist for humans, ecosystems and groundwater. These are the local risks.
6ig (./ 5eological leakage routes
1? THE CURRENT STATUS OF CCS TECHNOLOG:
There are different types of CO2 capture systems< postcombustion, pre'combustion
and oxyfuel combustion. The concentration of CO2 in the gas stream, the pressure of the
gas stream and the fuel type !solid or gas# are important factors in selecting the capture
system. 8ost'combustion capture of CO2 in power plants is economically feasible under
specific conditions:. 3t is used to capture CO2 from part of the flue gases from a number
of existing power plants. "eparation of CO2 in the natural gas processing industry, which
uses similar technology, operates in a mature market;.
The technology re7uired for pre'combustion capture is widely applied in fertili$er
manufacturing and in hydrogen production. Although the initial fuel conversion steps of
pre'combustion are more elaborate and costly, the higher concentrations of CO2 in the
*
th
/*
gas stream and the higher pressure make the separation easier. Oxyfuel combustion is in
the demonstration phase* and uses high purity oxygen.
This results in high CO2 concentrations in the gas stream and, hence, in easier
separation of CO2 and in increased energy re7uirements in the separation of oxygen from
air.
8ipelines are preferred for transporting large amounts of CO2 for distances up to
around /,&&& km. 6or amounts smaller than a few million tones of CO2 per year or for
larger distances overseas, the use of ships, where applicable, could be economically more
attractive. 8ipeline transport of CO2 operates as a mature market technology !in the B"A,
over 2,:&& km of pipelines transport more than 9& ,tCO2 per year#. 3n most gas
pipelines, compressors at the upstream end drive the flow, but some pipelines need
intermediate compressor stations.
+ry CO2 is not corrosive to pipelines, even if the CO2 contains contaminants. >here
the CO2 contains moisture, it is removed from the CO2 stream to prevent corrosion and
to avoid the costs of constructing pipelines of corrosion'
6igure /&./ "chematic representations of capture systems.
*
th
/%
11. THE LOCAL HEALTH@ SAFET: AND ENAIRONMENT RIS9S OF CCS
The local risks29 associated with CO2 pipeline transport could be similar to or lower
than those posed by hydrocarbon pipelines already in operation. 6or existing CO2
pipelines, mostly in areas of low population density, accident numbers reported per
kilometre pipeline are very low and are comparable to those for hydrocarbon pipelines. A
sudden and large release of CO2 would pose immediate dangers to human life and health,
if there were exposure to concentrations of CO2 greater than *2/&) by volume in air.
8ipeline transport of CO2 through populated areas re7uires attention to route selection,
overpressure protection, leak detection and other design factors. @o maor obstacles to
pipeline design for CC" are foreseen.
>ith appropriate site selection based on available subsurface information, a
monitoring programme to detect problems, a regulatory system and the appropriate use of
remediation methods to stop or control CO2 releases if they arise, the local health, safety
and environment risks of geological storage would be comparable to the risks of current
activities such as natural gas storage, -O? and deep underground disposal of acid gas.
@atural CO2 reservoirs contribute to the understanding of the behaviour of CO2
underground. 6eatures of storage sites with a low probability of leakage include highly
impermeable caprocks, geological stability, absence of leakage paths and effective
trapping mechanisms. There are two different types of leakage scenarios< !/# abrupt
leakage, through inection well failure or leakage up an abandoned well, and !2# gradual
leakage, through undetected faults, fractures or wells. 3mpacts of elevated CO2
concentrations in the shallow subsurface could include lethal effects on plants and subsoil
animals and the contamination of groundwater. 0igh fluxes in conunction with stable
atmospheric conditions could lead to local high CO2 concentrations in the air that could
harm animals or people. 8ressure build'up caused by CO2 inection could trigger small
seismic events.
12. THE LEGAL AND REGULATOR: ISSUES FOR IMPLEMENTING CO
STORAGE
1. Some regulations for operations in the subsurface do exist that may be releant or!
in some cases! directly applicable to geological storage! but fe" countries hae
specifically deeloped legal or regulatory frame"or#s for long$term CO2 storage.
-xisting laws and regulations regarding inter alia mining, oil and gas operations, pollution
control, waste disposal, drinking water, treatment of high'pressure gases and subsurface
property rights may be relevant to geological CO2 storage. =ong'term liability issues
associated with the leakage of CO2 to the atmosphere and local environmental impacts
are generally unresolved. "ome "tates take on longterm responsibility in situations
comparable to CO2 storage, such as underground mining operations.

2. %o formal interpretations so far hae been agreed upon "ith respect to "hether or
under "hat conditions CO2 in&ection into the geological sub$seabed or the ocean is
compatible. There are currently several treaties !notably the =ondon2; and O"8A?2*
*
th
/(
Conventions# that potentially apply to the inection of CO2 into the geological sub'seabed
or the ocean. All of these treaties have been drafted without specific consideration
of CO2 storage.
13. THE IMPLICATIONS OF CCS FOR EMISSION INAENTORIES AND
ACCOUNTING
The current 38CC 5uidelines2 do not include methods specific to estimating
emissions associated with CC". The general guidance provided by the 38CC can be
applied to CC". A few countries currently do so, in combination with their national
methods for estimating emissions. The 38CC guidelines themselves do not yet provide
specific methods for estimating emissions associated with CC". These are expected to be
provided in the 2&&; 38CC 5uidelines for @ational 5reenhouse 5as 3nventories. "pecific
methods may be re7uired for the net capture and storage of CO2, physical leakage,
fugitive emissions and negative emissions associated with biomass applications of CC"
systems.
The few current CC" proects all involve geological storage, and there is therefore
limited experience with the monitoring, verification and reporting of actual physical
leakage rates and associated uncertainties. "everal techni7ues are available or under
development for monitoring and verification of CO2 emissions from CC", but these vary
in applicability, site specificity, detection limits and uncertainties.
CO2 might be captured in one country and stored in another with different
commitments. 3ssues associated with accounting for cross'border storage are not uni7ue
to CC". ?ules and methods for accounting may have to be adusted accordingly. 8ossible
physical leakage from a storage site in the future would have to be accounted.
14 THE GAPS IN 9NO8LEDGE
There are gaps in currently available knowledge regarding some aspects of CC".
3ncreasing knowledge and experience would reduce uncertainties and thus facilitate
decision'making with respect to the deployment of CC" for climate change mitigation.
1, APPROACHES AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR MONITORING
ENAIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Techni7ues now being used for field experiments could be used to monitor some near
field conse7uences of direct CO2 inection. 6or example, researchers !.arry et al., 2&&9,
2&&:D Carman et al., 2&&9D Thistle et al., 2&&:# have been developing experimental means
for observing the conse7uences of elevated CO2 on organisms in the deep ocean.
0owever, such experiments and studies typically look for evidence of acute toxicity in a
narrow range of species !"ato, 2&&9D Caulfield et al., /((*D Adams et al., /((*D Tamburri
et al., 2&&&#. "ub'lethal effects have been studied by Kurihara et al. !2&&9#. 8rocess
studies, surveys of biogeochemical tracers, and ocean bottom studies could be used to
evaluate changes in ecosystem structure and dynamics both before and after an inection.
3t is less clear how best to monitor the health of broad reaches of the ocean interior
*
th
2&
Ongoing long'term surveys of biogeochemical tracers and deep'sea biota could help to
detect long'term changes in deep'sea ecology.
1. ENAIRONMENTAL IMPACTS@ RIS9S@ AND RIS9 MANAGEMENT
Overall, there is limited knowledge of deep'sea population and community structure
and of deep'sea ecological interactions. Thus the sensitivities of deep ocean ecosystems to
intentional carbon storage and the effects on possibly unidentified goods and services that
they may provide remain largely unknown. ,ost ocean storage proposals seek to
minimi$e the volume of water with high CO2 concentrations either by diluting the CO2 in
a large volume of water or by isolating the CO2 in a small volume !e.g., in CO2 lakes#.
@evertheless, if deployed widely, CO2 inection strategies ultimately will produce large
volumes of water with somewhat elevated CO2 concentrations !6igure ;./:#. .ecause
large amounts of relatively pure CO2 have never been introduced to the deep ocean in a
controlled experiment, conclusions about environmental risk must be based primarily on
laboratory and small'scale in'situ experiments and extrapolation from these experiments
using conceptual and mathematical models. @atural analogues !.ox ;.:# can be relevant,
but differ significantly from proposed ocean engineering proects. Compared to the
surface, most of the deep sea is stable and varies little in its physiochemical factors over
time. The process of evolutionary selection has probably eliminated individuals apt to
endure environmental perturbation. As a result, deep'sea organisms may be more
sensitive to environmental disturbance than their shallow water cousins !"hirayama,
/((*#. Ocean storage would occur deep in the ocean where there is virtually no light and
photosynthesi$ing organisms are lacking, thus the following discussion primarily
addresses CO2 effects on heterotrophic organisms, mostly animals. The diverse fauna that
lives in the waters and sediments of the deep ocean can be affected by ocean CO2 storage,
leading to change in ecosystem composition and functioning. Thus, the effects of CO2
need to be identified at the level of both the individual !physiological# and the ecosystem.
3ntroduction of CO2 into the ocean either directly into sea water or as a lake on the
sea floor would result in changes in dissolved CO2 near to and down current from a
discharge point. +issolving CO2 in sea water increases the partial pressure of CO2
!pCO2, expressed as a ppm fraction of atmospheric pressure, e7uivalent to Matm#, causes
decreased p0 !more acidic# and decreased CO4 22 concentrations !less saturated#. This
can lead to dissolution of CaCO4 in sediments or in shells of organisms. .icarbonate
!0CO4 2# is then produced from carbonate !CO4 22#. The spatial extent of the waters
with increased CO2 content and decreased p0 will depend on the amount of CO2
released and the technology and approach used to introduce that CO2 into the ocean.
Table shows the amount of sea water needed to dilute each tonne of CO2 to a specified
.p0 reduction. 6urther dilution would reduce the fraction of ocean at one .p0
8hotosynthesis produces organic matter in the ocean almost exclusively in the upper 2&&
m where there is both light and nutrients !e.g., 8O9, @O4, @09 N, 6e#. 8hotosynthesis
forms the base of a marine food chain that recycles much of the carbon and nutrients in
the upper ocean. "ome of this organic matter ultimately sinks to the deep ocean as
particles and some of it is mixed into the deep ocean as dissolved organic matter. The flux
of organic matter from the surface ocean provides most of the energy and nutrients to
support the heterotrophic ecosystems of the deep ocean !5age and Tyler, /((/#. >ith the
exception of the oxygen minimum $one and near volcanic CO2 vents, most organisms
living in the deep ocean live in low and more or less constant CO2 levels.
*
th
2/
table : $elationships between .p%& changes in pCO2& and dissolved inorganic carbon
concentration calculated for mean deep'sea conditions.
1/. COST OF CO2 CAPTURE AND STOREGE OPERATIONS
CC" applied to a modern conventional power plant could reduce CO
2
emissions to
the atmosphere by approximately %&'(&) compared to a plant without CC". Capturing
and compressing CO
2
re7uires much energy and would increase the fuel needs of a coal'
fired plant with CC" by about 2:). These and other system costs are estimated to
increase the cost of energy from a new power plant with CC" by 2/'(/).
Nat"ra+
1as c#b%&!3
c(c+!
P"+4!
r%B!3 ca+
I&t!1rat!3
1as%$%cat%& c#b%&!3
c(c+!
>ithout capture
!reference plant#
&.&4 ' &.&: &.&9 '
&.&:
&.&9 ' &.&;
>ith capture
and geological storage
&.&9 ' &.&% &.&; '
&./&
&.&; ' &.&(
>ith capture
and -nhanced oil
recovery
&.&9 ' &.&* &.&: '
&.&%
&.&9 ' &.&%
Table /*./ Costs of energy with and without CC" !2&&2 B"O per k>h#
*
th
22
17 THE FUTURE OF CO
2
CAPTURE AND STORAGE
CO2 capture and storage is technologically feasible and could play a significant
role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions over the course of this century. .ut
many issues still need to be resolved before it can be deployed on a large scale.
6ull'scale proects in the electricity sector are needed to build knowledge and
experience. ,ore studies are re7uired to analyse and reduce the costs and to
evaluate the suitability of potential geological storage sites. Also, pilot scale
experiments on mineral carbonation are needed.
An ade7uate legal and regulatory environment also needs to be created, and
barriers to deployment in developing countries need to be addressed.
3f knowledge gaps are filled and various conditions are met, CO2 capture and
storage systems could be deployed on a large scale within a few decades, as long
as policies substantially limiting greenhouse gas emissions are put into place.
The scientific consensus views carbon capture and storage as one of the important
options for reducing CO2 emissions. 3f it were deployed, the cost of stabili$ing the
concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would be reduced by 4&) or
more.
*
th
24

1> CONCLUSION
=arge reductions in emissions of CO
2
to the atmosphere are likely to be needed
to avoid maor climate change. Capture and storage ofCO
2
, in combination with other
CO
2
abatement techni7ues, could enable these large reductions to be achieved with least
impact on the global energy infrastructure and the economy. Capture and storage is
particularly well suited to use in central power generation and many energy'intensive
industrial processes. CO
2
capture and storage technology also provides a means of
introducing hydrogen as an energy carrier for distributed and mobile energy users.

6or power stations, the cost of capture and storage is about O:&At ofCO
2
avoided.
This compares favorably with the cost of many other options considered for achieving
large reductions in emissions. Bse of this techni7ue would allow continued provision of
large'scale energy supplies using the established energy infrastructure. There is
considerable scope for new ideas to reduce energy consumption and costs of CO
2
capture
and storage which would accelerate the development and introduction of this technology
*
th
29
REFERENCES
/. +epartment of Trade and 3ndustry !BK#, 5asification of "olid and =i7uid 6uels
for 8ower 5eneration, report T"? &&%, D!c. 1>>7
2. +epartment of Trade and 3ndustry !BK#, "upercritical "team Cycles for 8ower
5eneration Applications, report T"? &&(, <a&. 1>>>
4. +urie ?, 8aulson C, "mith A and >illiams +, 8roceedings of the :th3nternational
Conference on 5reenhouse 5as Control Technologies, C"3?O!Australia#
publications, 2???
9. -liasson ., ?iemer 8 > 6 and >okaun A !editors#, 5reenhouse 5as Control
Technologies, 8roceedings of the 9th 3nternational Conference, -lsevier "cience
=td., Oxford 1>>>
:. 0er$og 0, -liasson . and Kaarstad O, Capturing 5reenhouse 5ases, "cientific
American, F!b. 2???, :9';/
;. 3ntergovernmental 8anel on Climate Change !38CC#, Climate Change /((: 'The
"cience of Climate Change, Cambridge Bniversity 8ress, 1>>.
*. 3nternational -nergy Agency, Key >orld -nergy "tatistics, /((( edition.3-A
5reenhouse 5as ?C+ 8rogramme, Transport C-nvironmental Aspects of Carbon
+ioxide "e7uestration, 1>>,, 3".@ / %(%4*4 22 /
%. 3-A 5reenhouse 5as ?C+ 8rogramme, Abatement of ,ethane -missions,
<"&!1>>7, 3".@ / %(% 4*4 /; *
(. 3-A 5reenhouse 5as ?C+ 8rogramme, Ocean "torage of CO2, F!b. 1>>>, 3".@
/ %(% 4*4 2: ;
/&. 3-A 5reenhouse 5as ?C+ 8rogramme, The ?eduction of 5reenhouse 5as
-missions from the Cement 3ndustry, report 804A*, Ma( 1>>>
//. 3-A 5reenhouse 5as ?C+ 8rogramme, The ?eduction of 5reenhouse 5as
-missions from the Oil ?efining and 8etrochemical 3ndustry, report 804A%, <"&!
1>>>
/2. www.ipcc.ch
/4. www.5reenfacts.org
/9. www.ieagreen.org.uk
*
th
2:

Ccs - Report For Print

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Ccs - Report For Print

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A seminar Report on CO2 Capture and Storage System

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi