Plans for Widescale Deployment and Barriers to Implementation

Plans for Widescale Deployment and Barriers to Implementation John Gale IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme www. ieagreen. org. uk

Introduction • Review plans in countries to deploy CCS • Before we can move to wide scale implementation need to demonstrate and build confidence in the technology • Plans for CCS Demonstration plants • • European Commission Member States USA Australia • Review barriers to implementation www. ieagreen. org. uk

Proposed Integrated CCS Projects in Europe Halten Mongstad DF 1 Karsto E. ON Centrica Scottish & Southern Energy Nuon Powerfuel RWE Port of Rotterdam Vattenfall RWE Siemens Key Pre-Combustion IGCC Post-Combustion Oxy-Combustion www. ieagreen. org. uk GE/Polish Utility

European Commission Plans • COM(2006)843, 10. 01. 07, Sustainable power generation from fossil fuels: aiming for nearzero emissions from coal by 2020 • Key actions included: • Make demonstration of sustainable fossil fuel technologies a priority research topic for 2007 -2013 • Substantial increase in EC R&D funding • Member states to make an equal commitment • Options to support up to 12 large scale demonstrations • All plants will need to be ‘capture ready’ www. ieagreen. org. uk

What is ‘Capture Ready’ • IEA GHG has produced a headline summary of Capture Ready considerations • Carry out a study of capture retrofit options • Leave space and access for capture plant • Identify a reasonable route to storage of CO 2 • Major pre-investment is unlikely to be worthwhile unless capture is going to be retrofitted soon after plant start-up www. ieagreen. org. uk

CO 2 Capture Ready Plant ‘Capture Ready’ area (Site of existing power plant) Proposed ‘capture ready’ power plant at Tilbury www. ieagreen. org. uk Courtesy RWE Npower

United Kingdom • UK currently has proposals for 8 demonstration projects • UK Government has announced plans to support one demonstration project • Competition to be held in early 2007 with decision by end of 2007 • Details not announced yet • Guidelines • Project in UK and have a comprehensive engineering design • Will cover full CCS chain • At least 300 MWe • Store at least 0. 25 m. T/y CO 2 • UK Government will support capture and storage component not full plant • Plant to be operational between 2011 and 2017 • UK will announce regulatory framework in Late 2007 for off-shore projects www. ieagreen. org. uk

Netherlands • Dutch Government expressed their intent to host at least 1 CCS demonstration project • Mining Act adpated to allow for CCS • Two tenders approved • Storage tender € 60 M to develop a project to store 0. 4 Mt/y CO 2 • Capture tender (20 M€), aimed at demonstrating capture at larger scale • Reviewed storage possibilities in Netherlands • Offshore main opportunity in depleted oil and gas fields www. ieagreen. org. uk

Rotterdam Energy Port and CO 2 Hub Port has existing and planned power generation capacity 300 Mton CO 2 Existing oil and gas pipeline infrastructure as an energy import hub Collect CO 2 from Netherlands and export through existing infrastructure to depleted gas fields www. ieagreen. org. uk

Norway • In July 2006 Statoil announces plan to build the Mongstad CHP plant • Gas fired power plant providing 350 MWh heat and 280 MWe • Due to be built in 2008 at a cost of $450 M • Norwegian Government imposed need for CCS • Project pushed out to 2014 • Norwegian Government will meet $594 M for CCS plant • It is also planned to create a European CO 2 Test Centre at Mongstad funded by Norwegian Government, DONG Energy, Statoil, Hydro and Vattenfall www. ieagreen. org. uk

Halten-Tjelbergodden CCS-EOR Project www. ieagreen. org. uk

Proposed Integrated CCS Demonstration Projects Sask. Power Future. Gen HALTEN DF 1 Mongstad Centrica E. ON RWE Hypo. Gen DF 2 n. ZEC Key Stanwell LNG DF 3 Callide Pre-Combustion Capture Hazelwood IGCC Oxy-Fuel Post-Combustion www. ieagreen. org. uk

Future. Gen • • • USDOE initiative Project budget $954 M Public Private sector partnership 12 industrial partners contributing $400 M, Government support from United States, China, India, South Korea, and Japan • Current status • 7 States bid to host Future. Gen • Reduced to Texas & Illinois • Final decision on siting by the end of 2007 • EIS completed in mid 2007 www. ieagreen. org. uk

Australia • Australia Government is developing a Framework to support CCS demonstrations and commercial projects • Coal 21/Low Emission Technology fund (A$500 M) established in June 2004 • Supporting pilot low emission technology projects • Regulatory development • Commercial projects • Gorgon – Chevron. Texaco • Natural gas production/CCS • Zero. Gen – Stanwell Corporation • Coal fired IGCC with power generation/CCS • Monash Energy Project – Anglo. Amercian and Shell • Synthetic Liquid Fuels from coal with CCS www. ieagreen. org. uk

Other Industrial Initiatives • BP very active in developing new CCS demonstration projects • Proposed Hydrogen based power plant in Scotland, UK (DF 1) • Proposed DF 2 project at Carson City Refinery in USA • In June 2007 BP and Rio. Tinto announced a new company called Hydrogen Energy • Develop new CO 2 free power plants • New A$2 billion (US$1. 7 billion) clean coal power generation project in western Australia planned • 500 MWe with CCS www. ieagreen. org. uk

Barriers to Wide Scale Implementation (1) • Going from tens to thousands of plant worldwide will set a number of Challenges • Suitability of large geological resource • Have to rely on deep saline aquifers but these are under researched • Development of regulatory regimes • In hand in some countries but not all • For OSPAR slowest country will set the timescale • Development of CO 2 pipeline infrastructures • Establishment/reuse of rights of way • Cost - € 19 Bn in Europe alone • Co-ordinated action to build and finance needed www. ieagreen. org. uk

Barriers to Wide Scale Implementation (1) • There is a need to create a long term market for CO 2 • Current long terms trades on European Trading System only € 12 -15/t CO 2 • Need to reduce costs for CCS • Will reduce naturally through replication but not enough to bridge financial gap at present • Need to introduce technology into developing countries • Current route through Clean Development Mechanism • Need concerted international action to get CCS into the CDM www. ieagreen. org. uk

THANK YOU ANY QUESTIONS? www. ieagreen. org. uk