Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
1
The EU GeoCapacity Project
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
Presented by prof. Niels Peter Christensen
Chief Geologist Vattenfall Nordic
ZEP Government Group Meeting Brussels 12 March 2009
Based on a slides provided byThomas Vangkilde-Pedersen, GEUSVit Hladik, Czech Geological Survey
forCO2
Capture and Storage –
Response to Climate Change2nd
CO2
net east Regional Workshop for CE and EE CountriesBratislava, Slovakia, 3-4 March 2009
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
2
The work in GeoCapacity comprised:
• Full assessment of countries not previously covered
• Update of GESTCO and CASTOR countries
• Inventory of major CO2 emission point sources and infrastructure
• Assessment of regional and local potential for geological storage of CO2 in:• deep saline aquifers• hydrocarbon fields (incl. EOR/EGR)• coal fields (incl. ECBM)
• Technical site selection criteria and methodology for ranking
• Contribution to guidelines for assessment of geological storage capacity
• Analysis of source – transport – sink scenarios and economical evaluations
• Further development of mapping and analysis methodologies (GIS/DSS)
• Collaboration with China and other CSLF countries e.g. India and Russia
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
3
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
4
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
5
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
6
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
7
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
8
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
9
• Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland
• University of Sofia
• University of Zagreb
• Czech Geological Survey
• Institute of Geology at Tallinn University of Technology
• Bureau de Recherce de Geologie et Miniere
• Institute Francais du Petrole
• Bundesanstalt für Geologie und Rohstoffen
• Institute for Geology and Mining Engineering
• Eötvös Loránd Geophysical Institute of Hungary
• Isituto Nazionale Oceanografie e Geofisica Sperimentale
• Latvian Environment, Geology & Meteorology Agency
• Institute of Geology and Geography
• Geological Survey of the Netherlands
• Ecofys
• Academy of Science (MEERI)
• Geophysical Exploration Company
• GeoEcoMar
• Dionyz Stur State Geological Institute
• GEOINZENIRING
• Instituto Geologico y Minero de Espana
• British Geological Survey
• EniTecnologie (Industry Partner)
• ENDESA Generacion (Industry Partner)
• Vattenfall Utveckling AB (Industry Partner)
• Tsinghua University
26 Project partners from 20 countries
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
10
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
11
Steering Committee
One representative from each partnerThe SC meets twice per year
Steering CommitteeSteering Committee
One representative from each partnerOne representative from each partnerThe SC meets twice per yearThe SC meets twice per year
GeoCapacity Project Organisational Structure
Project ManagementGEUS
assisted by 2 WP leadersand a financial officer
Project ManagementProject ManagementGEUSGEUS
assisted by 2 WP leadersassisted by 2 WP leadersand a financial officerand a financial officer
WP 1BGS leader
WP 1BGS leader
WP 2GEUS leader
WP 2GEUS leader
WP 3IFP leader
WP 3IFP leader
WP 4GEUS leader
WP 4GEUS leader
WP 7GEUS leader
WP 7GEUS leader
WP 6BRGM leader
WP 6BRGM leader
WP 5TNO leader
WP 5TNO leader
EndEnd--User Advisory GroupUser Advisory Group
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
12
Work Package 1
InventoriesAnd GIS
Lead: BGS
Work Package 1
InventoriesAnd GIS
Lead: BGS
WP 1.1
CO2 EmissionInventory
Point sourcesPipelines
InfrastructureLicense areas
Lead:BGS
WP 1.1
CO2 EmissionInventory
Point sourcesPipelines
InfrastructureLicense areas
Lead:BGS
WP 1.2
Project GIS
Data formatSpecificationBuilding GIS
Web GIS
Lead:BGS, GEUS
WP 1.2
Project GIS
Data formatSpecificationBuilding GIS
Web GIS
Lead:BGS, GEUS
WP 1.3
Maps ofemissions andstorage sites
Lead:GEUS, BGS
WP 1.3
Maps ofemissions andstorage sites
Lead:GEUS, BGS
Work Package 2
Storage Capacity
Lead: GEUS
Work Package 2
Storage Capacity
Lead: GEUS
WP 2.1
North East
Group
EstoniaLatvia
LithuaniaPolandCzech RSlovakia
Lead:SGUDS
WP 2.1
North East
Group
EstoniaLatvia
LithuaniaPolandCzech RSlovakia
Lead:SGUDS
Work Package 3
Economic usesof CO2
Lead: IFP
Work Package 3
Economic usesof CO2
Lead: IFP
WP 2.2
Central EastGroup
RomaniaBulgariaHungary(Albania)(FYROM)
Lead:ELGI
WP 2.2
Central EastGroup
RomaniaBulgariaHungary(Albania)(FYROM)
Lead:ELGI
WP 2.3
South Group
SpainItaly
SloveniaCroatia
Lead:U.Zagreb
WP 2.3
South Group
SpainItaly
SloveniaCroatia
Lead:U.Zagreb
Regional potential assessmentsRegional potential assessments
Geological information of sitesGeological information of sites
Work Package 4
Standards & SiteSelection Criteria
Lead: GEUS
Work Package 4
Standards & SiteSelection Criteria
Lead: GEUS
Work Package 5
EconomicEvaluations
Lead: TNO
Work Package 5
EconomicEvaluations
Lead: TNO
WP 3.1
Storage capacityin hydrocarbon
fields
Assessment ofEOR potentialCalculation of
storage capacityModelling of EOR
Input to DSSand GIS
Lead:IFP
WP 3.1
Storage capacityin hydrocarbon
fields
Assessment ofEOR potentialCalculation of
storage capacityModelling of EOR
Input to DSSand GIS
Lead:IFP
WP 3.2
Storage capacityin coal beds
Assessment ofECBM potentialCalculation of
storage capacityInput to DSS
and GIS
Lead:PBG
WP 3.2
Storage capacityin coal beds
Assessment ofECBM potentialCalculation of
storage capacityInput to DSS
and GIS
Lead:PBG
Work Package 6
InternationalCooporation
Lead: BRGM
Work Package 6
InternationalCooporation
Lead: BRGM
Work Package 7
Pr. Managementand Reporting
Lead: GEUS
Work Package 7
Pr. Managementand Reporting
Lead: GEUS
WP 4.1
Siteselection
criteria
Basis siteselection criteria
Methodologyfor ranking
Lead:BGS
WP 4.1
Siteselectioncriteria
Basis siteselection criteria
Methodologyfor ranking
Lead:BGS
WP 4.2
Storagecapacity
standards
Methodologyfor calculating
storage capacityApplication ofstandards to
test area
Lead:GEUS
WP 4.2
Storagecapacity
standards
Methodologyfor calculating
storage capacityApplication ofstandards to
test area
Lead:GEUS
WP 2.4
Country updates forGESTCO countries
Lead:BGR
WP 2.4
Country updates forGESTCO countries
Lead:BGR
WP 5.1
DSSdevelopment
Feedback fromDSS usersDetailed
instructionsCollection of
economic dataSystem
development
Lead:TNO
WP 5.1
DSSdevelopment
Feedback fromDSS usersDetailed
instructionsCollection of
economic dataSystem
development
Lead:TNO
WP 5.2
Economicevaluations
Economicevaluations in
the new membercountries
Lead:Ecofys
WP 5.2
Economicevaluations
Economicevaluations in
the new membercountries
Lead:Ecofys
WP 6.1
Initiation oftechnology
transfer in China
Training of Chineseexperts incl. GISCollection of data
and addition to GISDSS, economicsEvaluation anddissemination
Lead:BRGM
WP 6.1
Initiation oftechnology
transfer in China
Training of Chineseexperts incl. GISCollection of data
and addition to GISDSS, economicsEvaluation anddissemination
Lead:BRGM
WP 6.2
Framework forinternationalcoorporation
Communicationwith CSLF
Framework forcooperation withIndia, Russia etc.
Lead:BRGM
WP 6.2
Framework forinternationalcoorporation
Communicationwith CSLF
Framework forcooperation withIndia, Russia etc.
Lead:BRGM
WP 7.1
Overall projectmanagement
Project planningOrganise project
meetingsChair management
boardCreate and inform
advisory boardManagement ofnon-personnel
budget
Lead:GEUS, CGS,
ELGI, SGUDS
WP 7.1
Overall projectmanagement
Project planningOrganise project
meetingsChair management
boardCreate and inform
advisory boardManagement ofnon-personnel
budget
Lead:GEUS, CGS,
ELGI, SGUDS
WP 7.2
Reporting to EU
Reporting to EUWebsite
Reporting to CSLFInterim andfinal report
Final report CDContribute to
conference papers
Lead:GEUS, CGS,
OGS, U.Sofia
WP 7.2
Reporting to EU
Reporting to EUWebsite
Reporting to CSLFInterim andfinal report
Final report CDContribute to
conference papers
Lead:GEUS, CGS,
OGS, U.Sofia
Calculations of storage capacityCalculations of storage capacity
Input and formatting of dataInput and formatting of data
Work package structureWork package structure
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
13
Mapping of emission sources
and infrastructure
Stationary sources exceeding 100 kt CO2
/ yearData sources:
–annual reports for the EU ETS
–national allocation plans
–qualified estimations where data not available
Existing pipelines
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
14
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
15
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
16
Pipelines
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
17
Mapping of storage sites
Initial screening
for
sedimentary formations
3
main types of storage considered– aquifers– hydrocarbon fields– unmineable
coal seams
Application of site selection criteria
Storage capacity estimations
Collection of
data for GIS
and project
DSS
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
18
Basic site
selection criteria
• Sufficient depth and storage capacity• supercritical CO2 below 700-800 m (rule of thumb)
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
19
Variation in density with depth assuming hydrostatic pressure, geothermal gradient of 25°C/km and surface temperature of 15°C
Great change in density / volume at ~ 800 m
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
20
Basic site
selection criteria
• Sufficient depth and storage capacity• supercritical CO2 below 700-800 m (rule of thumb)• porosity may deteriorate below 2500-3000 m
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
21
One of the regional Danish reservoir sandstones
Decreasing porosity with depth
Decreasing permeability with decreasing porosity
In practise this means a depth window of 800-2500 m
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
22
Basic site
selection criteria
• Sufficient depth and storage capacity• supercritical CO2 below 700-800 m (rule of thumb)• porosity may deteriorate below 2500-3000 m• trap type / areal extent / thickness
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
23
Stratigraphical trapping; porous layer
bounded by tight seal
Structural trapping; porous layer topped by tight seal
Structural trapping; porous layer in fault contact with seal
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
24
Basic site
selection criteria
• Sufficient depth and storage capacity• supercritical CO2 below 700-800 m (rule of thumb)• porosity may deteriorate below 2500-3000 m• trap type / areal extent / thickness• storage capacity
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
25
Reservoir rock
A
h
Areal distribution and thickness of reservoir
Pore space in the reservoir
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
26
Basic site
selection criteria
• Sufficient depth and storage capacity• supercritical CO2 below 700-800 m (rule of thumb)• porosity may deteriorate below 2500-3000 m• trap type / areal extent / thickness• storage capacity
• Sufficient injectivity to be economically viable• permeability (as a rule of thumb > 200 mD)• reservoir lithology• heterogeneity of reservoir
• Integrity of seal• seal lithology and permeability• seal capillary pressure and pore entry pressure• faulting / tectonic activity / fracture pressure
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
27
Aquifers
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
28
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
29
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
30
Hydrocarbon fields
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
31
Coal measures
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
32
Capacity calculations
Methodological resources:
• CSLF
Task Force
on CO2
Storage Capacity Estimation
• Modeling
work
by TNO
• US DOE
methodology
by
the Geologic Working Group of the
US
Regional Carbon Sequestration
Partnership
Program
Uncertainties
for
aquifers
!
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
33
Distinguish between estimates for bulk volume of regional aquifers and estimatesfor individual structural or stratigraphic traps
For estimates based on the bulk volume of regional aquifers we suggest a storageefficiency factor of 2 % based on work by US DOE
For trap estimates the choice of storage efficiency factor depends on whether theaquifer system is open, semi-closed or closed
For traps in open or semi-closed aquifer systems we suggest a rule-of-thumb approach with values for the storage efficiency factor in the range between 3 % and 40 % for semi-closed low quality and open high quality reservoirs, respectively
For traps in closed aquifer systems we suggest an approach based on trap to aquifer volume ratio, pore and water compressibility and allowable average pressure increase with typical values for the storage efficiency factor in the range between 1 % and 20 %
Storage capacity estimates should always be accompanied with information onassumptions and approach for storage efficiency factor
General considerations for saline aquifers
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
34
Conceptual model for open aquifers
• Storage space is generated by displacing existing fluids and distributingpressure increase in surrounding aquifer system
• Storage volume = A · height · N/G · φ
· Seff
• Seff depends on connectivity to surrounding aquifer
• Seff = Used space/Available space• From
Filip Neele, TNO
Brine
Free CO2
Used SpaceAvailable Space
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
35
Storage efficiency factor for open and semi-closed aquifers
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
36
• Affected space is full! (rock and water for aquifers)
• More space only via pressure increase and compressibility
• Storage volume = A · height · N/G · φ
· (Cw + Cp ) · Δpavg
• Δpavg = allowed average pressure increase in affected area• From
Filip Neele, TNO
BrineAffected Space
Unaffected Space
Free CO2
Used SpaceAvailable Space
Conceptual model for open aquifers
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
37
Top: Practical
capacity with economic and regulatory
barriers applied to effective capacity and with matching of sources and sinks: Case studies
Middle:Effective
capacity with
technical/geological cut-off limits applied to theoretical capacity: site specific/regional estimates in GIS
Bottom: Theoretical
capacity including
large uneconomic/unrealisticvolumes: regional estimateswithout storage efficiency
Techno-Economic Resource-Reserve pyramid
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
38
Preliminary
pan-European storage capacity estimate
Effective capacityCons ervative
es timate Effective capacityCons ervative
es timate Effective capacityCons ervative
es timate
2 350 100 30 25 1.5 1.0
S torage capac ity (Gt CO2)Emis s ions from big s tationary
s o urces (Gt CO2)
Aquifers Hydrocarbon fie lds Coal meas ures
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
39
North West Europe
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
40
North EastEurope
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
41
Central EastEurope
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
42
South EastEurope
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
43
South WestEurope
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
44
Case studies
Geological part
• selected structures with potential for pilot / demonstration projects
Economic part
• utilisation of Decision Support System (DSS)
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
45
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
46
international cooperation for matching sources and sinks WP6
WP 6.1Initiation of technology
transfer to China
Focusing on one province with large CO2 point
sources and investigate the storage potential
地质 埋存 潜力
WP 6.2Framework for international cooperation
Establish communication links between GeoCapacity and CSLF countries to
initiate the technology transfer
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
47
Main project achievements:
• CCS inventory of Europe incl. GIS (base for future CO2 storage atlas of Europe ?)
• Contribution to guidelines for assessment of geological storage capacity, site selection criteria and methodology for ranking
• Pioneering CCS work in many countries
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
48
Project website:
http://www.geocapacity.eu
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
49
US DOE estimation of storage efficiency factor
P15 : Seff. = 1 %
P50 : Seff. = 2 %
P85 : Seff. = 4 %
Assessing European Capacity for Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide
www.geocapacity.eu
50
• Storage efficiency-As function of Vaquifer / Vtrap (between 1 and 100)-As function of depth-In table: percentage of trap pore space filled with CO2
• Pressure increase 10%• Compressibility
-Pore: typical value 6·10-5 bar-1
-Water: 4·10-5 bar-1
-Total: pore + water = 10·10-5 bar-1
Depth (m) 1 5 10 50 100
1000 0.10 0.5 1.0 5 10
1500 0.15 0.8 1.5 8 15
2000 0.20 1.0 2.0 10 20
2500 0.25 1.3 2.5 13 25
3000 0.30 1.5 3.0 15 30
3500 0.36 1.8 3.6 18 36
Small capacityof enclosed traps!
Higher capacities only when large aquifer volume can be used to accommodate pressure increase.NOTE:
numbers refer totrap, but depend on entireaquifer volume!
Vaquifer
/ Vtrap
Key parameter,site specific
• From
Filip Neele, TNO
Seff
= VCO2
/ (φ
· Vtrap
)
VCO2
= c · ∆p · φ
· VaquiferSeff
= (c · ∆p · φ
· Vaquifer) / (φ
· Vtrap
) = c · ∆p (Vaquifer
/ Vtrap
)
Storage efficiency factor for closed aquifers