Carbon dioxide storage for Scotland

Professor Brian Smart and Dr Robin Westerman, Institute of Petroleum Engineering, Heriot Watt University 24.10.05
This apparently arcane topic is growing in significance: environmentally, politically and economically, [1]. The environmental impacts of carbon and uranium-based power supplies must be addressed. Geological storage is their most appropriate waste management option. Also, they rely on dwindling primary resources. Renewable energy technologies need development time to fill the emerging energy gap between supply and demand. Carbon dioxide storage could buy that time. The Industrial and Power Associations (IPA) conference theme: Powering a sustainable Scottish economy links energy supply, national competitiveness and jobs, [2]. The Executive could link its environmental and enterprise objectives.
The Scottish Parliament Science Information Service is a unique partnership between the Royal Society of Edinburgh, the Royal Society of Chemistry and the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe). Its purpose is to ensure that all Members of rapid the and on and Scottish to impartial science, technologyParliament reliable, information engineering have access

This paper gives examples of carbon dioxide storage, explore the choice between sequestration and storage, looks at underground coal gasification(UCG) and explains how these processes could help us meet the Kyoto targets.

related issues in order to help inform parliamentary activities. The service is provided through a network of Topic Coordinators who are scientists established in their field. Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these briefings is correct at the time of publication. are not Readers should be aware however that briefings necessarily updated or otherwise amended to reflect subsequent changes. For more information please

phone: SPICe on 0131 348 5300 or Willie Rennie from the Royal Society of Chemistry on 0131 220 6779.

Examples First, we showcase an exciting Scottish initiative as an exemplary solution. It is one of several disposal strategies for effluent carbon dioxide (CO2) gas. Those reviewed below may all suit the Scottish sector of the UK Continental Shelf (UKCS). Next, we assess the environmental issues that motivate carbon capture and storage (CCS). Global warming has precedents in the geological record. Note that the present global energy market should be of equal concern. Both points of view support the DTIs recommendation to develop a resilient energy system based on a mix of fuel types and a robust infrastructure [3]. Their Energy White Paper acknowledges the role of local authorities, regional chambers &c. in making vital decisions for energy policy. Regional and national governments are to negotiate targets for sustainable development. Yet EC policy delays have frustrated early-adopting Scottish businesses. Businesses need clear and consistent guidelines from policy makers at all scales of government the vaunted joined-up thinking. In June 2005, Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) with BP, ConocoPhillips and Shell proposed the worlds first industrial scale project to generate carbon free electricity, [4]. They would provide clean energy by reducing CO2 emissions. Three revenue streams could contribute: electricity, enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and tradable (Scottish) Renewables Obligation Certificates ((S)ROCs). The mature Miller oilfield would receive CO2 from Peterhead Power Station. Capturing CO2 from large point sources, such as power stations, steel and cement plants would reduce emissions and sustain infrastructure, [5]. The 240 kilometre offshore pipeline between Peterhead and Miller was already suitable for acid gas. Miller was due to cease production in 2006/7, but the project would extend its life by 15 to 20 years and extract a further 6 million tons of oil. Similar EOR projects could then replicate across the North Sea, [6][7]. The DTIs Energy White Paper claims that EOR could recover an additional 200 Mt hydrocarbons from the UKCS over 20 years, [3]. This compares to current annual oil production of about 130 Mt. But the current rates of field depletion mean that this opportunity only exists in the short term and CO2 injection needs to start by 2006/8 if it is to have an impact on the largest fields before the existing infrastructure is dismantled. Therefore, much urgently depends upon the BP-SSE pilot project. It is vital that it should qualify for SROCs, or carbon tax credits for economic viability and to demonstrate government support. Two other geological disposal strategies for CO2 are worth noting. The European storage capacity for CO2 is around 200 GtC (gigatonne equivalent carbon), most of which is under the North Sea, [3]. The EOR potential cited above is just 3% of that total, yet it could take the UKs current CO2 emissions for up to 15 years. The other 97% is in deep saline (permanently non-potable) aquifers, which could store hundreds of years worth of UK CO2 emissions. Statoil has operated an offshore CO2 storage project in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea since 1996. Their Sleipner Vest field produces gas condensate with 4-9.5% CO2, [5]. A nearby aquifer, the Utsira Formation receives the unwanted CO2 [8]. Time-lapse seismic data clearly show that the injected gas is secure beneath an impermeable cap rock. Secure storage The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982 governs offshore dumping in general, [9]. The storage of CO2 in legacy petroleum reservoirs and non-potable aquifers will require new codes of practice, standards and regulations to ensure the safe and effective capture, transmission and storage of CO2, [5]. Legacy petroleum reservoirs have retained their fluids for millennia and their engineering geology is relatively well known. We have similar case histories for natural CO2 traps, [11]. However, we should not assume that CO2 will be secure in a former petroleum reservoir. CO2 is a reactive gas, so we need to check that the reservoir rocks, cap rock, existing and proposed engineering structures would all retain their integrity, [12]. A typical oil well has a design life of 25 years, but CO2 storage requires longer timescales, possibly thousands of years. The re-engineering must satisfy operational, regulatory and public acceptance criteria, [13]. Fortunately, the many case histories are all encouraging. Since 1989, acid-gas injection has developed into a safe and environmentally friendly technology in Canada and the USA. By the end of 2002, close to 1.5 Mt CO2 and 1 Mt H2S had been successfully injected into deep hydrocarbon reservoirs and saline aquifers in Canada alone, [14].

In principle, unmineable coal seams could also store CO2, [10]. The USA already produces coal bed methane (CBM) on a large scale, just as the UK produces mine gas from old coal workings, [15]. Coal is over twice as avid an adsorber of CO2 as it is of the methane held naturally. Enhanced coal bed methane (ECBM) operations would exchange CO2 for methane a double benefit. EOR and ECBM provide the greatest opportunity for near term, low net-cost CO2 sequestration, [10]. Although the UK Coal Authority considers ECBM to be an unproven technology, discussions are being held with would-be operators, [16]. Similar injection strategies are theoretically possible for ultra-basic minerals and with power station fly ash, each of which reacts with CO2 to form carbonates, [18][19]. Should economics allow, there is potential in Scotland for each of the above three strategies. However, the CO2 injected into old oil reservoirs or saline aquifers is largely stored and available for reuse, whereas that injected into coal seams or reactive rocks would be sequestered or locked in. We revisit the choice between storage and sequestration when we discuss environmental policies below. Underground coal gasification Having introduced coal as a potential sequestration medium, we mention the emerging technology of underground coal gasification (UCG). Modern directional drilling developed in the mineral and oil industries. It now offers access to the UKs vast offshore coal resources, [21] as well as the substantial remaining onshore resource. UCG has a much higher extraction ratio than conventional deep mining and its mine waste remains underground, [22]. Coal is now a cheaper source of electricity than gas, yet UK coal production continues to decline. The product gas from UCG is similar to the town gas used before North Sea gas became available, [20]. Because UCG product gas is high-pressure and undiluted by nitrogen, CO2 separation is efficient, [23]. A research project at Heriot-Watt University funded by the DTI, SSE and Scottish Enterprise is set to continue into an offshore trial, [24]. As with SSE-BPs Peterhead-Miller project, on-site CO2 disposal would be a particularly attractive feature of an inherently integrated operation, minimising costs and risks, [14]. As with EOR, UCG could extend the future of the North Sea infrastructure. Since Scottish offshore coal resources are so large, the lifetime extension could be much longer than 20 years. World coal resource to current production ratios of about 200 years are by far the largest of any fossils fuel including nuclear (85 years), [25]. The booked ratios for oil and gas are 40 and 60 years respectively, [26]. Unlike most renewable and nuclear energy sources, coal offers security of supply and a quick start-up, load-following capability. The huge US, Chinese and Indian energy markets will continue to be dominated by coal for the foreseeable future. Consequently, the technologies being pioneered in Scotland could contribute to future energy supplies across the world. Compare the way in which U.S. and Scottish engineers adapted petroleum production technologies for the hostile North Sea in the 1970s, thereby accessing deep-water oilfields worldwide. CO2 storage or sequestration Though selective, the previous paragraphs demonstrate Scotlands rapid response to the international political agreement in Kyoto. The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change opened in December 1997. By August 2004, 154 countries had signed up, [27]. Those nations committed to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases. In order of effectiveness in trapping solar energy, those gases are water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen dioxide and ozone, with small but significant amounts of the man-made chemicals sulphur hexafluoride and a range of halocarbons. Weight for weight, methane has 23 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide. However, much methane is from agricultural and land use changes, which are difficult to control even with the best legislative intent. Therefore, CO2 became the next remediation target. Carbon tax credits, i.e. ROCs, are transforming a waste product into a tradable commodity of increasing value. The Kyoto Protocol and the international will to meet its obligations are evident facts. However, the scientific case behind the Kyoto agreement is complex and uncertain. In the next part of our review, we show that there are good grounds for preferring CO2 storage to sequestration. We may yet change our minds!

The Global Warming Theory has a long and distinguished pedigree, commencing with Fouriers paper of 1824, [29]. Seventy years later, Arrhenius calculated that a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would lead to an average temperature increase of five to six degrees Celsius. In his paper to the Swedish Academy, he presented global warming as benign, particularly for those in northern latitudes, where agriculture could expand. Anticipate Scottish vineyards, [30]! Arrhenius thought it would take at least three millennia for atmospheric carbon dioxide to double. However, although atmospheric carbon dioxide levels were about 280 parts per million (ppm) in his 1890s, they have since risen to about 370 ppm. Each successive decade from 1960 to 2000 has been warmer than the last and 1998 was the warmest in recorded history hence the alarm. Still, there is room for doubt, since changes in solar activity, the earths orbit and the orientation of its axis of rotation, volcanic gas and dust all dwarf our efforts. Climatologists recently admitted that natural climate variations over the past millennium were greater than their previous comparisons recognised. Their revised view is that only the past 15 warm years are best explained if one includes human influence in the simulations, [31]. So what has climate change been like over the past ten thousand, two million or six hundred million years? Should we hedge our bets and keep our carbon dioxide blanket at the ready? We live in an interglacial period, the Holocene, which has lasted about 11,600 years. The previous, Ipswichian interglacial had much warmer episodes than ours. The bone caves of Yorkshire record 125,000 year-old hippopotami, [32] from a time when the present Scottish flora was in northern Norway. Even so, an 114,000 year-long glacial event followed, [33]. The Antarctic ice records CO2 levels over the past 417,000 years. Atmospheric CO2 and methane levels both fluctuate, increasing during interglacial and decreasing during glacial events by 30% and 50% respectively, [34]. However, CO2 levels have been reducing overall, [33]. Before we learned to worry about global warming, we fully expected the next glaciation. Some climate changes have been abrupt within a human lifespan. Therefore there is cause for caution. Reversible storage would be more prudent than irreversible sequestration. Longer-term geological data suggest that humankinds two million year experience of the earths climate is atypical, [35]. There has historically been much more CO2 in our atmosphere than exists today. For example, during the Jurassic Period (200 mya), average CO2 concentrations were about 1800 ppm or about 4.8 times higher than today. The Carboniferous Period and the Ordovician Period were the only geological periods when global temperatures were as low as they are today. To the consternation of global warming proponents, the Late Ordovician Period was also an Ice Age while at the same time CO2 concentrations then were nearly 12 times higher than today-- 4400 ppm. According to greenhouse theory, Earth should have been exceedingly hot. Instead, global temperatures were no warmer than today. Clearly, other factors besides atmospheric carbon influence earth temperatures and global warming. One factor could be that warmer seas dissociate worldwide deposits of methane hydrate on the continental shelves, resulting in a very much warmer climate, [28]. We must therefore face up to the reality that we simply do not understand how it is that the Earths climate is capable of achieving its glacial state, [34]. Meeting Kyoto targets Nevertheless, another almost entirely independent, though no less contentious theory supports the DTI strategy for a mix of fuel types. The Peak Oil Theory dates back to Arrhenius, who thought that humanity would exhaust fossil fuels before his predicted rise in global temperatures. Oil prices recently rose to record highs. This market is demand-led, unlike previous, supply-led market instabilities. Oil discovery rates have been dropping since the 1960s, [37]. Yet world demand increases inexorably. We will deplete economically recoverable conventional crude oil and gas resources by the end of the 21st century. Sustainable world energy supply will then depend on solar, coal, and nuclear energy, [36]. Edwards originally forecast peak oil in 2050, but some analysts think that current Chinese and Indian demand is long-term and that we have just reached the point at which demand outstrips supply, at least from low-production-cost, giant oil fields. In the long term, only renewable energy such as solar, wind, wave, tide and geothermal sources can fill the looming gap between demand and supply. Sustained high prices would drive that transition. Clean coal and carbon abatement technologies will make a significant contribution, if not in the UK, then certainly internationally.

Therefore the geological storage of CO2 should become an increasingly important activity this century. If the global target of 60% CO2 reduction for coal-fired power alone is to be achieved by 2050, the estimated market will be worth 1000 billion, [38]. Resource and innovation-rich Scotland is very well placed and active in the new market. Scottish manufacturers have substantial power plant and CO2 capture capabilities. Continued success will depend upon effective collaboration between engineers, legislators and businesses. There is good evidence that Scottish institutions are preparing for the challenge, [2][39].
Acknowledgements Thanks to Ian Wilson at the Coal Authority, David Lee and David Sigsworth of SSE, Dr John Rippon and Dr Fatosh Gozalpour at Heriot-Watt University, Charles Shields and Anne Bruce at the IPA and Dr Mike Farley in his capacity as IPA Chairman. References and links [1] Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST), 2005. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). Postnote number 238, March 2005: www.parliament.uk/post/home.htm [2] Industrial and Power Association (IPA) conference, Edinburgh, 26-27 October 2005. Powering A Sustainable Scottish Economy: http://www.ipa-scotland.org.uk/custom_downloads/IPA.pdf [3] DTI, 2005. Energy White Paper: Our energy future - creating a low carbon economy: www.dti.gov.uk/energy/whitepaper/ourenergyfuture.pdf [4] BP Press Release, 30 June 2005: http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7006999 [5] Gale, J. 2004. Why do we need to consider geological storage of CO2? In: Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. (eds) 2004. Geological storage of carbon dioxide. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Number 223, pages 7-15. [6] Gozalpour, F., Ren, S.R. and Tohidi, B., 2005. CO2 EOR and Storage in Oil Reservoirs. Oil and Gas Science and Technology - Rev. IFP, volume 60, number 3, pages 537-546. [7] North Sea infrastructure map: http://www.rigzone.com/store/product.asp?p_id=911 [8] Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. 2004. Geological storage of carbon dioxide. In: Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. (eds) 2004. Geological storage of carbon dioxide. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Number 223, pages 1-6. [9] Purdy, R. and Macrory, R. 2003. Geological carbon sequestration: critical legal issues. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Working Paper 45 www.tyndall.ac.uk/publications/working_papers/wp45.pdf [10] Reeves, S., (undated). Geologic Sequestration of CO2 in Deep, Unmineable Coalbeds: An Integrated Research and Commercial-Scale Field Demonstration Project: www.netl.doe.gov/publications/ proceedings/01/carbon_seq/3a1.pdf [11] Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. 2004. The long-term fate of CO2 in the subsurface: natural analogues for CO2 storage. In: Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. (eds) 2004. Geological storage of carbon dioxide. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Number 223, pages 87-106. [12] Worden, R.H. and Smith, L.K. 2004. Geological sequestration of CO2 in the subsurface: lessons from CO2 injection enhanced oil recovery projects in oilfields. In: Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. (eds) 2004. Geological storage of carbon dioxide. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Number 223, pages 211-224. [13] Rochelle, C.A., Czernichowski-Lauriol, I. and Milodowski, A.E., 2004. The impact of chemical reactions on CO2 storage in geological formations: a brief review. In: Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. (eds) 2004. Geological storage of carbon dioxide. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Number 223, pages 87-106. [14] Bachu, S. and Gunter, D., 2005. Acid-gas injection in the Alberta Basin, Canada: a CO2 storage experience. In: Baines, S.J. and Worden R.H. (eds) 2004. Geological storage of carbon dioxide. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, Number 223, pages 225-234. [15] Mine gas described by the Coal Authority: www.coal.gov.uk/media/44434/ Pages15and16fromCorporate%20Plan.pdf [16] Ian Wilson, The Coal Authority, personal communication, 2005. [17] Eiken, O., Brevik, I., Arts, R., Lindeberg, E. and Fagervik, K. (undated). Seismic monitoring of CO2 injected into a marine acquifer: www.iku.sintef.no/projects/IK23430000/Publications/Eiken_et_al_2000_GHGT5.pdf [18] Cipolli, F., Gambardella, B., Marini, L., Ottonello, G. and Zuccolini, M.V., 2004. Geochemistry of high-pH waters from serpentinites of the Gruppo di Voltri (Genova, Italy) and reaction path modelling of CO2 sequestration in serpentinite aquifers. Applied Geochemistry, volume 19, pages 787802. [19] NETL, 2001. Carbon Sequestration Science. Online presentation, see Slide 10: http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/ proceedings/01/minecarb/white.pdf [20] Town gas description: http://www.psigate.ac.uk/newsite/reference/plambeck/chem1/p01264a.htm [21] Armitage, M and Burnard, K., 2005. Underground Coal Gasification in the United Kingdom. Pittsburgh paper, The Coal Authority: http://www.coal.gov.uk/media//44435/ucgintroductiondti.pdf [22] Dr Michael Green, UCG Engineering website: http://www.coal-ucg.com/index.html [23] Gupta, M., Coyle, I. and Thambimuthu, K., 2003. CO2 Capture Technologies and opportunities in Canada: Strawman st Document for CO2 capture and storage (CC&S) Technology Roadmap. 1 Canadian CC&S Technology Roadmap Workshop, 18-19 September 2003, Calgary, Alberta, Canada: www.nrcan.gc.ca/es/etb/cetc/combustion/CO2trm/pdfs/CO2_capture_strawman_feb2004.pdf [24] Heriot-Watt University UCG Project: http://www.pet.hw.ac.uk/research/ucg/introduction.htm [25] BP, 2004. Statistical review of world energy, full report: http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_english/publications/ener gy_reviews/STAGING/local_assets/downloads/pdf/statistical_review_of_world_energy_full _report_2004.pdf [26] ABS Energy Research, 2005. World Coal Report - The Resurgence of Coal Ed 1 2005.

[27] [28] [29] [30] [31]

[32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39]

http://www.mindbranch.com/catalog/print_product_page.jsp?code=R374-0082 Kyoto Protocol: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol Centre for gas hydrate research: http://www.pet.hw.ac.uk/research/hydrate/projects.html#warning Christianson, G. (undated). An historians biography of global warming: http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/library/earthmatters/spring2000/pages/page11.html Selley, R.C. 2004. The Winelands of Britain: Past present & prospective. Petravin, P.O. Box 425, Dorking, Surrey, RH5 4WA. ISBN 0-9547419-0-0 paperback: www.petravin.co.uk. Moberg, A., Sonechkin, D.M., Holmgren, K., Datsenko, N.M. and Karln, W., 2005. Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data. Letters to Nature, 433, 613-617 (10 February 2005): http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050207/pf/433562a_pf.html see also: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-05p.html Gascoyne, M., Currant, A. P., and Lord, T. C. (1981). Ipswichian fauna of Victoria Cave and the marine palaeoclimatic record. Nature 294, 652654. Barnola, J.-M., Raynaud, D., Lorius C. and Barkov N.I., 2003. Historical carbon dioxide record from the Vostok ice core. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/CO2/vostok.htm Broecker, W.S, 2000. Abrupt climate change: causal constraints provided by the palaeoclimate record. Earth-Science Reviews, volume 51, pages 137-154. Monte Hieb, 2003. Climate and the Carboniferous Period, based upon Scotese and Berner, R.A., 2001: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html Edwards, J.C., 1997. Crude Oil and Alternative Energy Production Forecasts for the Twenty-first Century: The End of the Petroleum Era. AAPG Bulletin, volume 81, number 8, pages 1292-1305. Laherrre, J.H., February 1996. OPEC Bulletin, pages 7-11. http://www.oilcrisis.com/laherrere/disctrnd.htm Dr Mike Farley, IPA Chairman, personal communication, 2005. Scottish Enterprise, September 2005. Carbon Capture and Storage Market Opportunities 2005. http://www.scottishenterprise.com/sig-energy.htm