atlantic council - darren mollot
DESCRIPTION
Clean Coal – CCS RD&D OverviewTRANSCRIPT
Dr. Darren Mollot
September 2013
Clean Coal – CCS RD&D Overview
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary Office of Clean Coal
2
Office of Fossil Energy Office of Clean Coal Vision & Mission
A SECURE, RELIABLE AND AFFORDABLE ENERGY FUTURE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND USE OF COAL AND FOSSIL FUELS VI
SION
SUPPORT THE RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT & DEMONSTRATION OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES TO ENSURE THE AVAILABILITY OF CLEAN, AFFORDABLE ENERGY FROM COAL AND FOSSIL RESOURCES M
ISSION
3
Office of Fossil Energy Office of Clean Coal -‐ Goals
GOALS
GOAL 1: DEMONSTRATE NEAR-‐ZERO EMISSION FOSSIL-‐BASED TECHNOLOGIES GOAL 2: ACCEPTANCE BY INDUSTRY, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, REGULATORS AND THE PUBLIC THAT
CO2 CAN BE SAFELY INJECTED, MONITORED AND PERMANENTLY STORED IN A VARIETY OF GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS
GOAL 3: CONDUCT HIGH-‐RISK, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ON ADVANCED COAL AND FOSSIL
TECHNOLOGIES INCLUDING CO2 CAPTURE AND NOVEL HIGH EFFICIENCY CYCLES GOAL 4: DRIVE INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION TO ENSURE WIDE-‐SPREAD ACCEPTANCE AND
DEPLOYMENT OF CCS TECHNOLOGIES GOAL 5: SUPPORT POLICY, LEGISLATION, AND REGULATION IMPACTING FOSSIL ENERGY BY PROVIDE
DATA AND EXPERTISE
4
What Role Will Fossil Play
5
World Coal Production China – U.S.A – India – Australia -‐ Indonesia
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Billion
Sho
rt To
ns
World Coal Production
China U.S.A India Australia Indonesia World
Data from U.S. Energy Information Administration
6
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
2010 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Million Short Ton
s
World Coal Consumption
India United States China World total
Data from U.S. Energy Information Administration
World Coal Consumption China – India – United States
7
U.S. Electricity Generation Historical Perspective
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Billion
kWh
U.S. Electricity Generation
Coal Petroleum Natural Gas Nuclear Renwables Total
Data from U.S. Energy Information Administration
8
U.S. Electricity Generation Future Projections
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
Billion
kWh
Electricity Generation
Coal Natural Gas Total U.S. Generation Petroleum Nuclear Renewables
Data from U.S. Energy Information Administration -‐ 2013
9
Meeting global climate mitigation targets will likely require CCS IEA’s Energy Technology Perspectives:
Gigatons of C
O2
Source: International Energy Agency
10
Opportunities for Large Scale Projects
11
Advanced Combustion
CO2 Storage Advanced CO2 Capture and
Compression
Solvents Sorbents Membranes Hybrid Process
Intensification Cryogenic Capture
Pressurized O2 membrane Chemical looping USC Materials
Carbon Utilization (EOR) Infrastructure (RCSPs) Geological Storage Monitoring, Verification and Accounting
Gasification Turbines Supercritical CO2 Direct Power Extraction
Integrated Fossil Energy Solutions
Efficiencies > 45% Capital Cost by 50%
$40 -‐ $10/tonne CO2 Captured Near-‐zero GHGs Near-‐zero criteria pollutants Near-‐zero water usage
Advanced Energy Systems
5 MWE Oxycombustion Pilot Advanced Turbines
12
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%Po
wer Gen
eration Pe
nalty
[% of P
lant Outpu
t]
Capture Technology Progress Performance Drives Cost
Then
(1997)
Now
(2013)
Future
(2020)
~ $150/Tonne
~ $60/Tonne
< $40/Tonne
Energy Penalty Reductions
Enable Cost Reductions
13
Creating a Bridge to Affordable CCS Technology
14
MAJOR DEMONSTRATIONS
15
Major CCS Demonstration Projects
Project Locations & Cost Share
CCPI ICCS Area 1 FutureGen 2.0
Southern Company Kemper County IGCC Project
Transport Gasifier w/ Carbon Capture ~$2.01B – Total, $270M – -‐DOE EOR – ~3.0 MM TPY 2014 start
NRG
W.A. Parish Generating Station Post Combustion CO2 Capture
$775 M – Total $167M – DOE
EOR – ~1.4 MM TPY 2016 start
Summit TX Clean Energy Commercial Demo of Advanced IGCC w/ Full Carbon Capture ~$1.7B – Total, $450M – DOE EOR – ~2.2 MMTPY 2017 start
HECA Commercial Demo of Advanced IGCC w/ Full Carbon Capture ~$4B – Total, $408M – DOE
EOR – ~2.6 MM TPY 2019 start
Leucadia Energy
CO2 Capture from Methanol Plant EOR in Eastern TX Oilfields $436M -‐ Total, $261M – DOE EOR – ~4.5 MM TPY 2017 start
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
CO2 Capture from Steam Methane Reformers EOR in Eastern TX Oilfields
$431M – Total, $284M – DOE EOR – ~0.93 MM TPY 2012 start
FutureGen 2.0 Large-‐scale Testing of Oxy-‐Combustion w/ CO2 Capture
and Sequestration in Saline Formation Project: ~$1.77B – Total; ~$1.05B – DOE
SALINE – 1 MM TPY 2017 start
Archer Daniels Midland
CO2 Capture from Ethanol Plant CO2 Stored in Saline Reservoir $208M – Total, $141M – DOE
SALINE – ~0.9 MM TPY 2014 start
16
8 active projects 1 in operation, 2 under construction, 5 in engineering/finance 5 electricity generation, 3 industrial 3 IGCC, 4 post-‐processing, 1 oxycombustion Feedstock: 4 coal, 1 petroleum coke, 1 coal/coke, 1 natural gas, 1 ethanol 2 polygeneration Storage: 6 EOR, 2 saline formations
Major CCS Demonstration Projects
17
8 active projects 1 in operation, 2 under construction, 5 in engineering/finance 5 electricity generation, 3 industrial 3 IGCC, 4 post-‐processing, 1 oxycombustion Feedstock: 4 coal, 1 petroleum coke, 1 coal/coke, 1 natural gas, 1 ethanol 2 polygeneration Storage: 6 EOR, 2 saline formations
Major CCS Demonstration Projects
18
Projects
CCPI ICCS Area 1 FutureGen 2.0
Major CCS Demonstration Projects Project Locations & Cost Share
Southern Company Kemper County IGCC Project
IGCC-‐Transport Gasifier w/Carbon Capture
~$2.0B – Total CCPI project $270M – DOE
EOR – ~3M MTPY 2014 start
NRG
W.A. Parish Generating Station
Post Combustion CO2 Capture $775 M (est.) – Total
$167M – DOE EOR – ~1.4M MTPY 2016 start
Summit TX Clean Energy Commercial Demo of Advanced IGCC w/ Full Carbon Capture
~$1.7B – Total $450M – DOE
EOR – ~2.2M MTPY 2017 start
HECA Commercial Demo of Advanced IGCC w/ Full Carbon Capture ~$4B – Total, $408M – DOE
EOR – ~2.6M MTPY 2019 start
Leucadia Energy
CO2 Capture from Methanol/H2 Plant EOR in TX & LA Oilfields
$436M -‐ Total, $261M – DOE EOR – ~4.5M MTPY 2017 start
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
CO2 Capture from Steam Methane Reformers EOR in Eastern TX Oilfields
$431M – Total, $284M – DOE EOR – ~0.93M MTPY 2012 start
FutureGen 2.0 Large-‐scale Testing of Oxy-‐Combustion w/ CO2 Capture
and Sequestration in Saline Formation Project: ~$1.77B – Total; ~$1.05B – DOE
SALINE – 1M MTPY 2017 start
Archer Daniels Midland
CO2 Capture from Ethanol Plant CO2 Stored in Saline Reservoir $208M – Total, $141M – DOE
SALINE – ~0.9M MTPY 2014 start
19
Southern Company Services, Inc. CCPI-‐2 Advanced IGCC with CO
2 Capture
Status Plant construction >60% complete; >5,400 construction personnel on site
CO2 off-‐take agreements signed Lignite mine under development Subsystems (water treatment, cooling towers) to begin pre-‐commissioning Combustion turbine startup: Sep 2013 Gasifier heat-‐up: Dec 2013
Key Dates Project Awarded: Jan 30, 2006 Project moved to MS: Dec 5, 2008 NEPA Record of Decision: Aug 19, 2010 Initiate excavation work: Sep 27, 2010 Operations: May 2014
Kemper County, MS 582 MWe (net) with duct firing; 2 TRIGTM gasifiers, 2 Siemens combustion turbines, 1 Toshiba steam turbine Fuel: Mississippi lignite 67+% CO2 capture (Selexol® process); 3,000,000 tons CO2/year EOR: Denbury Onshore LLC, Treetop Midstream Services LLC
20
Lessons Learned
21
BIG SKY
WESTCARB
SWP
PCOR
MGSC
SECARB
MRCSP
Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships Developing the Infrastructure for Wide Scale Deployment
Seven Regional Partnerships 400+ distinct organizations, 43 states, 4 Canadian Provinces
Engage regional, state, and local governments Determine regional sequestration benefits Baseline region for sources and sinks Establish monitoring and verification protocols Address regulatory, environmental, and outreach issues Validate sequestration technology and infrastructure
Development Phase (2008-‐2018+) 9 large scale
injections (over 1 million tons each)
Commercial scale understanding
Regulatory, liability, ownership issues
Validation Phase (2005-‐2011)
20 injection tests in saline formations, depleted oil, unmineable coal seams, and basalt
Characterization Phase (2003-‐2005)
Search of potential storage locations and CO2 sources
Found potential for 100’s of years of storage
22
Large-‐Scale CO2 Storage Tests
8 large scale tests ongoing/planned for 6 of 7 Regional Partnerships Tests based on strong core R&D program and 20 smaller field tests. Injection schedule: 3 currently injecting, 3 starting 2013, 2 during 2014-‐2015 Storage: 5 EOR, 3 saline formations 7 of the 8 will inject between 1 – 2.9 million tonnes CO2
CO2 sources: NG processing plants, coal power plants, ethanol production plant, natural CO2 source All tests have extensive MVA Results will inform Best Practice Manuals
23
8
7
3
1
2
4
6
5
9
RCSP Geologic Province Injection Volume (metric tons)
BIG SKY Kevin Dome- Duperow Formation TBD
MGSC Illinois Basin- Mt. Simon Sandstone >380,000
MRCSP Michigan Basin- Niagaran Reef March 2013
PCOR
Powder River Basin- Muddy Sandstone April 2013
Horn River Basin- Carbonates TBD
SECARB
Gulf Coast - Tuscaloosa Formation >3,000,000
Gulf Coast – Paluxy Formation >30,000
SWP Anadarko Basin- Morrow Sandstone Sept 2013
WESTCARB Regional Characterization
Injection Ongoing
2013 Injection Scheduled
Injection Scheduled 2014-‐2015
1
2
3
4
7
8
6
9
5
Three projects currently injecting CO2 Three Additional Scheduled for 2013 Remaining injections scheduled 2014-‐2015
Injection Began Nov 2011
Injection Began April 2009
Core Sampling Taken
Note: Some locations presented on map may differ from final injection location
Injection Began August 2012
RCSP Phase III: Development Phase Large-‐Scale Geologic Tests
Injection began February 2013
Injection began June 2013 Seismic Survey Completed
24
Best Practices Manual Version 1 (Phase II)
Version 2 (Phase III)
Final Guidelines
(Post Injection)
Monitoring, Verification
and Accounting 2009/2012 2016 2020
Public Outreach and
Education 2009 2016 2020
Site Characterization 2010 2016 2020
Geologic Storage
Formation Classification 2010 2016 2020
**Simulation and Risk
Assessment 2010 2016 2020
**Carbon Storage Systems
and Well Management
Activities 2011 2016 2020
Terrestrial 2010 2016 – Post MVA Phase III
CCS Best Practices Manuals Critical Requirement For Significant Wide Scale Deployment -‐
Capturing Lessons Learned
25
EXTRA SLIDES
26
…And Broad Potential for CO2-‐EOR
27
World Coal Consumption China – India – United States
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
2010 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Qua
drillion BT
U
World Coal Consumption
India United States China World total
Data from U.S. Energy Information Administration
28
Drivers: EPA Regulations Impacting Coal Issue Federal Regulation/Compliance
Air SOx & NOx crossing state lines Cross-‐State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) finalized 7.7.2011; amendments proposed 10.2011; supplemental rule expected early 2012; 12.30.2011, DC Circuit stay of CSAPR; 8.21.2012, DC Circuit decision vacating CSAPR (subject to possible EPA challenge)
Compliance: Unknown
Mercury and Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) Rule for Electric Generation Units Finalized effective: 4.16.2012
Compliance: ~2015
GHG emissions
GHG New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) Proposed rule comments currently under review (new baseload and intermediate load units potentially impacted as of proposal date)
Compliance: Unknown
Water Cooling Water Intake Structures – impact on aquatic life
CWA §316(b) final rule expected 11.2013
Compliance: Within 8 Years
Surface water discharges; Surface impoundments
Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guidelines proposed rule went out for public comment 4.2013
Compliance: Unknown
Waste
Coal Combustion Residuals (e.g., coal ash, boiler slag)
Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) Rule proposed rule comments currently under review
Compliance: Unknown
Near-‐term (through 2015-‐2016) Compliance Horizon for EPA regulations may create potential localized reliability issues
Local reliability issues can be managed with timely notice and coordination on retirement and retrofit decisions
States and regions will play a valuable role in addressing EPA regulation impacts
Non-‐transmission alternatives can help alleviate reliability impacts when/where available
EPA regulations are only one aspect impacting the future of our electricity system
29
CCS Specific Regulations CO2 Injection
Safe Drinking Water Act Two “classes” of injection, pertain to CO2, Class II covers EOR and Class VI covers long-‐term CO2 storage Class II has been governing CO2 EOR for decades Class VI was finalized in December 2010, and has been accompanied by a series of guidance documents pertaining to various aspects of compliance – Site Characterization – Area of Review and Corrective Action – Testing and Monitoring – Project Plan Development – Well Construction – Financial Responsibility – Well Plugging, Post-‐Injection Site Care and Site
Closure (draft)
Clean Air Act Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, EPA collects and disseminates data on economy of CO2 emissions through its Mandatory Reporting Rule – Two sub-‐parts, RR & UU, apply to CO2 injection – RR applies to geologic sequestration of CO2, Class
VI wells and Class II wells that “opt-‐in” to reporting
– RR uses a mass balance approach to calculate stored CO2
– UU applies to other injection of CO2, typically business as usual EOR, and only requires reporting of quantities of delivered CO2
30
Addressing Challenges of Carbon Management Creating knowledge today … for building a better tomorrow
Then -‐ Recognition of the Problem
Very little was known about carbon storage strategies CO2 capture technologies were very expensive and energy intensive 1997, FE/NETL initiated CCS R&D responding to international GHG initiatives By 2007, DOE R&D Program exhibited global leadership in CCS development
Now -‐ Focusing Resources
Broad capture and storage R&D program underway Capture costs have been reduced Significant insights into storage developed
Regional Partnerships -‐ building CCS infrastructure Seven Best Practice Manuals -‐ spreading knowledge Carbon Sequestration Atlas -‐ clarify storage potential
Future -‐ Transforming
Complete large-‐scale storage tests and integrated CCS demonstration projects U.S. leadership in developing advanced power systems with CCS -‐ providing affordable options needed to power the economies of the world