C b C t & St i Vi tCarbon Capture & Storage in Vietnam

Dr. Nguyen Anh Tuan – Vietnam Institute of Energy

Nguyen Hong Minh, Tran Chau Giang, Nguyen Anh Duc –Vietnam Petroleum InstituteVietnam Petroleum Institute

ADB 6th Asia Clean Energy Forum, 22 June 2011

1

Power Sector OverviewInstalled capacity mix by fuel types Install capacity in 2030 

Hydropower

Import4.7%

Diesel2.5%

SPP, Renewable3.2%

15%3% 8%

5%

Hydro and pump storageyd opo e

34.8%

Gas thermal

Gas Turbine, CCGT31.4%

56%

13% Coal

Oil+ Gas

SHPP+ RE

Nuclear

Import

By the end of 2010 

Gas thermal2.2%

Coal thermal18.5%

Oil thermal2.7%

8000

9000

Coal TPPs

Import

1. Install capacity : 21.297 MW2. Available capacity: 19.713 MW

5000

6000

7000

8000Oil/Gas TPPsHydropower

2000

3000

4000

5000MW

0

1000

2000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

800000

Power Sector projection to 2030

500000

600000

700000QH§ 7

QH§ 6

13,4%

200000

300000

400000

GW

h

2,2%

12,0%

0

100000

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

2030

2011‐2015

2016‐2020

2021‐2025

2026‐2030

High case 16.0 11.6 9.2 8.4%

BBBase Base casecase 14.114.1 11.311.3 8.28.2 7.4%7.4%

Is there a potential for CCS in Vietnam?Is there a potential for CCS in Vietnam?

Huge emissions sources in next 20 30 years: Coal firedHuge emissions sources in next 20‐30 years: Coal‐fired power plants, Gas processing plants…

Several storage areas: Depleting gas and oil fields, C i OCBM sites, EOR

Several barriers to be addressed: Regulatory, economic and financial, environment, and social barriersbarriers

Estimate of CO2 emissions from sectors in Vietnam(Unit: 103 tons CO2)

Year 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Industry (w/t power) 24755 35598 48127 64336 70631 91524

Agriculture 1386 1479 1758 2084 2437 2914Agriculture  1386 1479 1758 2084 2437 2914

Transport 18969 30884 43839 62594 86311 124370

Commerce and service 4354 6002 8067 9832 12141 14597

Residential 4861 5767 6414 7823 9285 9943

Total (w/t power plants) 75852 119522 171312 220118 275565 388832

400000

500000Projected CO2 Emissions from power plants 

CO2 emission from power plants in 2030

100000

200000

300000

8%1%

p

Gas turbine

Oil fi d

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

CO2 59463 107162 201491 297237 443802

0

100000

91%

Oil fired

Coal fired

Select a short list of emission sources

• A survey has been carried out including more 180A survey has been carried out including more 180 emissions entities

• Established weighting and scoring systems to select g g g ymost suitable candidates for CCS– MUST: in operation for at least another 20 years; Source variability

– WANTS: CO2 concentration; Presence of SOx, NOx; Amount of CO2; startup date; distance from attractiveAmount of CO2; startup date; distance from attractive storage location; Existing infrastructure; Space availability; Willingness partner;

Short list Short list of of emissionemissionemission emission sources sources in 2011in 2011

Short list 

1 GPP, 1.5 b.m3/y

4 Coal‐fired, subcritical

9 Combined Cycle GT9 Combined Cycle GT

1 Rolling steel

Short list of Short list of emission emission sources in 2015sources in 2015

Short listShort list 

6 GPP, total capacity ≈10 b.m3/y

7 Coal fired (17 Coal‐fired (1subcritical, 6 USC)

2 Combined Cycle GT

Identify CO2 storage capacity

9 identified Cenozoic basins/group of basins/g p1. Song Hong basin2. Phu Khanh basin3 C L b i

Song Hong Basin

3. Cuu Long basin4. Nam Con Son basin5. Phu Quoc basin

Hoang Sa Group of Basins

6. Malay‐ Tho Chu basin7. Tu Chinh‐ Vung May group of 

basins

Bể Phú Khánh

8. Hoang Sa group of basins9. Truong Sa group of basins

Bể Cửu Long

Truong Sa

Bể Phú Quốc

Truong Sa‐Tu Chinh Vung MayGroup of Basins

Geological plays in Cenozoic Basins

Potential storage site: only deep reservoirs (t, p)Average geothermal gradient: 30oC/kmPressure: 10.5 Mpa/kmDepth cut‐off: at least 1000m below MSL

Assumptions: 4% of reservoir pore volume can be filled with CO23% of reservoir volume is in a trapunderground CO2 density: 700kg/m3

Storage capacity of the geological plays in Cenozoic basinsQplay = Vp.ηst.ρCO2

Vp : Total pore volume of the geological play below 1000m (km3)ηst. : Storage efficiency, i.e. fraction of the pore volume that can be filled with

CO2 (2 6 4% f l d k )CO2 (2; 6; 4% for closed trap; open traps; unknown traps)ρCO2 : CO2 density at initial reservoir conditions (kg/m3) applied as 700kg/m3 

by assuming a normal hydrostatic pressure (10.5 MPa/km) and geothermal gradients (30oC/km)g g ( / )

Qplay : Storage capacity of entire play (Mt CO2)

Geological plays in Cenozoic Basins

CO2 storage in coal mines

1. Quang Ninh coal mines: 7 BMT;2 Red River Delta coal basin: prospective2. Red River Delta coal basin: prospective

210 BMT, mainly ~ 350 to 1,500m;3. Coal mines in Thai Nguyen province:

over 600 MMTover 600 MMT;4. Na Duong coal mine in Lang Son

province: 95 MMT5. Nong Son coal mine in Quang Nam

province ~600 MMT (Source: Mike Friederich,2006)

6. UnexploredThanh Nghe Plain7. Unexplored Cuulong Plain

CO2 storage in oil and gas fields

34 hydrocarbon fields are on production and planning for production in near future offshore VietnamSt t ti l f il d fi ld i Vi tStorage potential of oil and gas fields in Vietnam

VUoil = Voil(st)x Bo/1000VUgas = Vgas(st)x 1/GEFQ = (V + V )x ρQCO2 = (VUoil + VUgas)x ρCO2

Vu : Underground volume of oil or gas (milliard m3)V : Recoverable volume of oil at standard conditions (20oC and 0 1 Mpa)Voil(st) : Recoverable volume of oil at standard conditions (20oC and 0.1 Mpa)

(milliard sm3)Vgas(st) : Recoverable volume of gas at standard conditions (milliard sm3)Bo : Oil formation volume factorBo : Oil formation volume factorGEF : Gas expansion factorρCO2 : CO2 density at initial reservoir conditions (kg/m3) applied as 700kg/m3 

assuming a normal hydrostatic pressure (10.5 MPa/km) and geothermal g y p ( / ) ggradients (30oC/km)

QCO2 : Total CO2 storage capacity (Mt)

CO2 storage capacity in oil and gas fieldsNo Offshore Oil and Condensate Gas TOTALNo. Fields Oil and Condensate Gas TOTAL

Name

Recoverable Storage

FVF

Recoverable Storage

GEF

Storage(106 m3) Capacity (109 m3) Capacity Capacity

(MtCO2) (MtCO2) (MtCO2)( 2) ( 2) ( 2)

1 CL01 76 58,52 1,1 3,5 10,65 230 69,172 CL02 30 23,1 1,1 1 2,75 255 23,103 CL03 13 10,01 1,1 22 57,04 270 67,054 CL04 15 11 55 1 1 11 554 CL04 15 11,55 1,1 11,555 CL05 37 28,49 1,1 7 19,60 250 48,096 CL06 2 1,54 1,1 2 5,60 2507 CL07 16 12,32 1,1 4 11,20 250 23,528 CL08 1,23 0,9471 1,1 0,2 0,56 2509 CL09 3 2,31 1,1 0,32 0,90 250

10 CL10 10 7,7 1,1 2 5,60 25011 CL11 14 24,5 2,5 6,3 17,64 250 42,1412 CL12 10 10,85 1,55 1,2 3,36 250 10,8513 CL13 6 5,46 1,314 CL14 3 2,73 1,3 0,4 1,12 25015 CL15 3 2,73 1,3, ,16 CL16 240 268,8 1,6 29 88,26 230 357,0617 CL17 26 29,12 1,6 1,5 4,57 230 29,1218 CL18 12 10,92 1,3 2 6,09 230 10,92

CO2 storage capacity in oil and gas fieldsNo. Offshore Fields Oil and Condensate Gas TOTALNo. Offshore Fields Oil and Condensate Gas TOTAL

Name

Recoverable Storage

FVF

Recoverable Storage

GEF

Storage(106 m3) Capacity (109 m3) Capacity Capacity

(MtCO2) (MtCO2) (MtCO2)

19 ML01 3,5 3,185 1,3 17 51,74 230 51,7420 ML02 1 0,91 1,3 0,01 0,03 23021 ML03 3 2,73 1,3 3,5 10,65 230 10,6522 ML04 0 4 1 22 23022 ML04 0,4 1,22 23023 ML05 4 3,64 1,3 16 48,70 230 48,7024 NCS01 5 4,55 1,3 1 3,04 23025 NCS02 1 0,91 1,3 0,23 0,70 23026 NCS03 11 10,01 1,3 3 7,95 264 10,0127 NCS04 15,3 46,57 230 46,5728 ML06 3 2,94 1,4 1 3,04 23029 NCS05 2 1 82 1 3 46 107 33 300 107 3329 NCS05 2 1,82 1,3 46 107,33 300 107,3330 NCS06 0,1 0,091 1,3 12 28,00 300 28,0031 NCS09 3,5 3,185 1,3 25 74,47 235 74,4732 NCS07 7 6,37 1,3 21 49,00 300 55,3733 NCS08 1 0,91 1,3 13 30,33 300 31,2434 SH01 0,72 2,02 300

TOTAL 1.156,65

Ranking of CO2 storage site in oil and gas fieldsMusts

Capacity: >10 megatonnes storage capacityI j ti it 100 t /d / llInjectivity: > 100 tonnes/day/wellConfinement: > 20 feet thick seal with no active faultsDepth:> 3000 ft

W t SWants Scores

Capacity: CO2 storage  21 = full score down to 50 Mt; linear; linear to 10 MtInjectivity: Created CO2 storage/day/well 11; linear between high & lowI j ti it # i ti d ti ll 11 li b t hi h & lInjectivity: # existing production wells 11; linear between high & lowConfinement: seal thickness 17 = full score to 100 ft., linear between 100 & 20 ft.Confinement: # abandoned wells 4 = full score for zero abandoned wellsContamination of other resources 4 = full score if no contamination by CO2E i EOR th $$ ff t 17 EOR f ll th ff t dEconomics: EOR or other $$ offset 17 = EOR full score; other offset as assessedEconomics; Infrastructure 4 = full score for full useable infrastructureEconomics: Monitoring opportunity 4 = full score onshore, 0 if offshoreAvail. for commercial: Depletion date 5 if 2015, 0 if 2025, linear in betweenI d t Willi t 5 dIndustry: Willing partner 5 as assessed

Total = 100

Ranking of CO2 storage site in oil and gas fields

Offshore Year of  No Injectivity (Well No. Offshore 

Fields First oil/gas

No. wells basis)

Mt/day/wellRanking

1 CL01 2003 23 0,000357 12 CL02 2008 4 0,000411 63 CL03 2011 74 CL04 2013 115 CL05 1998 43 0,000127 26 CL07 1998 24 7,99E‐05 97 CL11 2008 3 0,000228 58 CL12 na 129 CL16 1986 200 0,00011 110 CL17 1994 35 6,73E‐05 8,11 CL18 2009 0 1212 ML01 2003 33 2,49E‐05 na13 ML03 2003 36 2,28E‐05 na14 ML05 2008 32 2,57E‐05 na14 ML05 2008 32 2,57E 05 na15 NCS03 1994 7 0,000117 1016 NCS04 2012 na17 NCS05 2002 5 0,001918 418 NCS06 2012 0 na18 NCS06 2012 0 na19 NCS09 2006 7 0,000274 320 NCS07 2013 na21 NCS08 2013 na

Regulatory barriers

Existing policies not enough strong and lack of regulations for supporting  and promotion  for CCS

h l d f h “ ”There are no regulation to define CO2 as the “waste”

Vietnam currently has no laws , no institution  that specifically governs the CCS, y , p y g ,

There are no regulation for land‐use and monitoring that long time enough for CCS

Several consultation meeting have been held and to be held in the 26th week June; A road map on regulatory framework to be finalized by end ofA road map on regulatory framework to be finalized by end of JUNE 2011

Financing barriers

Incentive provided by the Vietnam EnvironmentalIncentive provided by the Vietnam Environmental Protection Fund is not strong enough Lending from Commercial Banks is limited and requires g qstringent financial conditions CCS projects require relatively high investment capital, p j q y g pwhich cannot compete with traditional energy sources; only feasible with financial assistanceLack of financial policy mechanism and encouragement for CCS project investment implementation in Vietnam

19

Economic barriers200

300

400

• High cost of CCS  Who pay for INCREAMENTAL COST ? -100

0

100

200

15 20 36.5 40 45 50 60

NPV

(Mill

.USD

)

NPV

COST ? • How to balance income 

from selling CO2: – Existing: 20 US$/ton

-400

-300

-200

Price CO2 (USD/T)

Existing: 20 US$/ton CO2  (about 1 UScent/kWh)

– Incremental cost for CCS 

NPV of a typical Coal‐Fired Power Plant in Vietnam with CCS as function of CO2 price (figure above) and as function of CCS investment costs with CO2 price =20$/t (figure below)

(3‐5 UScent/kWh)

• Our simulations show that 

0

50

100

150

– CFPP without CCS is NPV = 318 Mill.USD, 

– With CCS,  NPV = ‐250 Mill USD (CO 20 $/t) 200

-150

-100

-501600 1700 1800 1850 1906 2300 2500

NPV(

Mill

.USD

)

NPV

Mill USD  (CO2 = 20 $/t)

-300

-250

-200

Capital Cost (USD/KW)

Social  barriersm • High community relationship;

• Strong influences of village conventions, customs and the elders ;• Strong effect of informal information;in

Vie

tnam

g ;• Discreet attitude on new technologies;• People are worried about impacts on land recovery, land‐using value,

health & lives;feat

ures

i

health & lives;• Influenced by local authorities.

Soc

iety

• Most of people have not known anything about CCS and low‐carbontechnologies

• Some of them have heard about CCS but they do not know clearly• Some of them have heard about CCS but they do not know clearlyabout this technology and its effect and application;

• Some people working in fields related to CCS think it is difficult to applyCCS i Vi t d t l k f li i hi h i t t & tiCCS in Vietnam due to lack of policies, high investment & operationcost, environmental impacts, risks and low public understanding.

Enabling measures to address those barriersDevelop national policies and regulations, where they do not exist or exist but not enough strong to support and promote CCS projects in VN• CO2 could be classified as “waste”

N d t d l d t il d l ti f t i t t t d it i t• Need to develop detailed regulations for containment structures, and monitoring, measurement and verification requirements.  

• Conduct further training and capacity building,  regulatory working group,• At the time an actual CCS project is identified in Viet Nam, provide support to Viet Nam’s p j , p pp

regulatory authorities to develop appropriate regulations for such project, especially in the area of measurement, monitoring and verification.

Incentives for CCS • CCS requires price subsidies and support from other sources• Reduced corporate income tax rates and exemptions, and reduced VAT for a CCS project• Carbon prices or taxesProvide clear and reliable information about CCSProvide clear and reliable information about CCS• Role in global emissions reduction;• The costs and benefits of a proposed project for the local community.• Provide information about the technology available• Provide information about the technology available.• Information about pilot CCS projects in Vietnam and over the world.

For more informationo o e o at oDr. Nguyen Anh Tuan

Institute of Energy6 Ton That Tung street, Hanoi, Vietnam

Email: tuannguyen.icd@gmail.comTel: +84-4-3852 9310

W b it iWebsite: www.ievn.com.vn

Industrial Carbon capture process 240t/d at Phu My Fertilizer complex