Carbon Capture and Storage and the Carbon Market CCS as CDM project

1
Carbon Capture and Storage and the Carbon
MarketCCS as CDM project

• IETA side event, COP11/MOP1, Montreal 02.12.2005
• Frede Cappelen, Statoil

2
Background

• First CCS project presented for to CDM Executive
  Board for approval with a proposed new
  methodology
• CDM EB has asked COP/MOP for guidance
• What permanence of the containment of CO2 is
  required?
• Analogy with bio-sequestration
• Can CO2 storage be eligible as CDM when these
  projects is not mentioned in the Marrakech Accord
  
• What should the boundary of a CCS project
• How to handled possible leakage in the distant
  future?

3
Sketch of template project
Before
Gas to market
Oil to market
Oil/gas
Ass. gas
Oil to market
Production stream
CO2
Separation Oil/ass. gas
Separation Oil/ass. gas
Separation NG/CO2
Venting With pilot flame
Production wells
4
Sketch of template project
Top side GHG management Leakage increase
emissions limit the volum of CERs
After
Gas to market
Oil to market
BOUNDARY
Recycled associated gas
Oil/gas
Ass. gas
Oil to market
Production stream
CO2
CO2
CO2
Moto- compressor
Separation Oil/ass. gas
Compression
Separation Oil/ass. gas
Separation NG/CO2
Venting With pilot flame
Injection wells
Production wells
CO2
5
Issues the CDM EB should have answered?

• Requirement for environmental integrity of the
  geological formation as storage for CO2?
• Quality of the storage as container for CO2
• Risk for leakage to the atmosphere and acceptable
  leakage rate
• Mitigation of risk
• Abandonment requirement of the project
• Liability
• Is there a need to establish liabilities for
  leakages after the abandonment of the project?
• Who should have what liability for leakage after
  he life time of CDM and abandonment of the
  project for how long?
• Project proponent benefiting from CERs?
• The host country?

6
Baseline methodology no difference
7
Monitoring methodolgy

• CDM Project
• (max 21 years)
• Geological storage (1000 years ?)
• The CDM demands real, measurable, and long-term
  benefits related to the mitigation of climate
  change.
• The CO2 is generated, but avoided emitted to the
  atmosphere
• The injected GHGs remain in the geological
  formation for a sufficiently long period of time
  related to the purpose of Climate Change
  mitigation.
• How long is long enough? the issue of
  permanence

8
Monitoring methodology

• The monitoring methodology of a CDM project
  usually is designed to monitor the CDM project
  activity during the crediting period
• In the case of permanent geological storage, to
  what extent, if any, is it necessary to monitor
  also after the end of the CDM project, or the
  termination of the EOR project to verify the
  integrity of the storage?
• The scope of the monitoring of the CDM project
  activity, to comprise long-term monitoring of the
  reservoir and the subsurface based on the
  evaluation of the geological formations and the
  projections of the performance the CO2 gas in
  geological formations
• This could be one part of a storage performance
  assessment as a annex to the CDM-PDD.
• The acceptance criteria a policy issue tghat has
  to be taken based on the right understerstanding
  and perception of risk
• CDM-NMSPA New Meth for Storage Performance
  Assessment

9
Monitoring methodology

• Time scope
• The monitoring methodology application period is
  limited to the crediting period of the project
• System scope
• The subsurface-part can be as treated as a
  container for the injected gas comprising the
  reservoir and the overburden including all
  surrounding and overlying geological formations.

10
Storage performance assessment

• Geological storage of GHGs poses two distinct
  kinds of environmental risks
• Global risk arising from leakage of GHGs to the
  atmosphere handle in a speciial Storage
  Performance Assessment (SPA).
• Local health, safety and environmental (HSE)
  risks in EISA

11
Storage performance assessment
12
Storage performance assessment
Based on the Safety Assessment Methodology for
Underground CO2 Storage developed by the TNO and
joint partners, funded via the joint industry
project the CO2 Capture Project (CCP).
Common knowledge to the oil and gas industry

• Part I The storage performance criteria
• Defining a storage effectiveness metric
• Storage effectiveness The fraction of the
  cumulative injection of CO2 that is retained
  underground after 1000 years.
• Geologic Storage Storage of CO2 in underground
  geological formations with storage effectiveness
  greater than 90.

13
Storage performance assessment

• Part II Site Assessment
• Scenario analysis
• The assessment is initiated with a description
  and classification of non-specific features,
  events and processes (FEPs) relevant to CO2
  storage.
• The FEPs are then ranked for probability and
  consequences associated with the specific storage
  site.
• Scenarios are developed by combination of
  critical FEPs.
• Model development
• When the scenarios have been defined they will be
  evaluated through mathematical modelling and
  simulations.
• Consequent analysis
• The results of the modelling and simulations are
  subject to a consequence analysis with respect to
  leakage from the reservoir and eventually to the
  atmosphere.

14
Storage performance assessment

• Part III Monitoring plan
• Confirm and assure that the CO2 storage satisfies
  the storage performance criterion.
• Cover the subsurface-part of the system,
• Durability of the monitoring system and what kind
  of technology that should be applied can be
  answered on the basis of the site assessment and
  the experiences from the monitoring accumulated
  during the operation phase.
• It is assumed that the long term monitoring
  program will be more extensive in the first
  years.
• Experts can be used to increase assurance of the
  appropriateness of establishment of the
  monitoring system.

15
Storage performance assessment

• Part IV a Abandonment procedure
• Catering for plugging, restoration and
  maintenance of the wells is based on standard
  procedures in the oil and gas industry with
  modifications as to the regards of the issue of
  permanency and the results of the storage
  performance analysis.
• What is needed for measurement and possible
  liability transfer can be defined as part of the
  abandonment based on findings of monitoring and
  predictions from model analyses.

16
Storage performance assessment

• Part IV b Remedy actions
• Remedies can be established for each possible
  case that the project does not meet the storage
  performance criteria during the project operation
  period.
• Experts can be included in the design and
  establishment of the remedy action program.

17
Conclusions

• Carbon Capture and Storage projects can be
  considered as CDM project activities given the MA
  requirement to a CDM project is fulfilled
• CCS is recognized by the Kyoto Protocol as an
  mitigation option
• The quality assurance of containment of CO2 in
  geological formation based on knowledge and
  experience in the industry
• The capabilities of geological storage to avoid
  CO2 storage to avoid Gtons of CO2 emissions
  should be more in focus than the possibilities of
  seepage over 1000 years of a fraction of
• Liability is a policy issue and must be dealt
  with based on the appropriate risk perception
  based on available knowledge and not on
  uninformed fear

18
Sleipner experience a CO2 dissolution model
Source Gemini No. 1, 2004 (NTNU and Sintef)