- Email: [email protected]
IEA Greenhouse Gas Programme: Continued international collaboration
Energy Cowers. Mgmt Vol. 36, No. 6-9, pp. 865-868, 1995 Elsevier Science Ltd. Printed in Great Britain
0196-8904(95)00140-9
IEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME: CONTINUED INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION Ian C Wehster IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme CRE, Stoke Orchard, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom, CL52 4RZ
Abstract - The first phase of the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme is essentially complete. The initial phase opened the gates to exploration of a wide range of technologies and then developed a comparison based on the whole life chain of a few. From this we have learned that CO2 capture is costly but proven whilst COr disposallutilisation is less expensive but technically challenging. Phase 2 of the Programme will commence in November 1994. The second phase affords the opportunity to delve in more detail into a matrix of important areas; including a) Additional power generation systems and fuels, b) Another greenhouse gas. c) Improving capture technology and d) Reducing risk in disposal and utilisation. 1. INTRODUCTION Recognising the benefits of international co-operation, the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme was established in 1991 under an International Energy Agency Implementing Agreement. Those supporting the Programme were Canada, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Commission of the European Communities. Australiajoined in 1992 and Switzerland in 1993. RWE AG and DMT of Germany are also supporters. The Operating Agent for Task 1 is British Coal Corporation. The control over scope and budget is exercised by the representatives of participants forming an Executive Committee. The total expenditure in Phase 1 will have been f2.3 million. The project life was extended in 1993 from three to three and one half-years so concludes in November 1994. The outline of the initial workplan has been reported elsewhere [l]. It is useful at the conclusion compare the objectives of the framers against the actual achievements of a project.
of a phase to
2. OBJECTIVES The original objectives
were:
0
Evaluation on a full fuel cycle basis the technologies used in the abatement, of greenhouse gas derived from the use of fossil fuels
0
Economic
0
Disseminate
0
Prepare proposals
and environmental
control,
use and disposal
impact studies of application of the technologies
the results of the Programme
activities to participants
for favoured technical options as a result of a research needs assessment 3. PROGRESS
Phase1 A range of technical assessments studies were done, 24 in all. The titles of the technical assessment studies and the authors are listed in table 1. It was intended that these would be analyzed and form the basis for a decision 865
866
WEBSTER: IEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME
on the full fuel cycle studies. Because of timing a decision on the cases for the life cycle studies was made in April 1993, modified by the Executive Committee in June 1993, and formed the basis for work which started in September 1993. At the time of this decision less than one half of the technical assessments had been completed. Contracts were placed with well qualified organisations on a competitive international basis for both the technical assessment and full fuel cycle studies. Reports have been peer reviewed prior to publication by an international panel of experts nominated by the Participants. Economic study has been limited to cost determination and impact of adding capture/disposal to electricity prices. An environmental audit of technologies together with a risk assessment has been carried out. The question of the insurance arrangements for a private sector investor in the capture/transport/disposal business has been examined. Research needs have been identified committee.
but no proposals
for specific
research
efforts are before the Executive
Because of the success of the Programme in producing quality information in a more or less consistent manner discussion leading toward a second phase was initiated resulting in an understanding on the outline of a further project in February 1994. Phase 2 The content of Phase 2 will be discussed but first a few changes in project mission statement should be understood. Where Phase 1 focused on carbon dioxide, the mandate was broadened to other greenhouse gas. Where evaluation was mandated on a full fuel cycle basis, this stipulation has been dropped. Comparision will now be in a variety of ways. This may prove more appropriate. Full fuel cycle analysis does indeed have its place and will form a part of the Phase 2 work. The overall goal of phase 2 is balance. Matching the long term storage potential of the oceans with the immediate opportunity of near to or commercial chemicals utilisation. Would limited resources for greenhouse gas abatement be better directed to methane management than to carbon dioxide focused projects? To insure that the identified priorities from Phase 1 are addressed and the range of technology areas expanded while exploring advanced technology in recovery/separation. Due to limited funding in Phase 1 the emissions from only a short list of power generation options could be studied. This list is being expanded to include fuel cells which represent a high efficiency distributed power generation technology. Hydrogen powered fuel cells should offer scope for efficient pre-combustion capture of CO,. A range of fuel cells will be considered consistent with the present state-of-knowledge. Pressurized fluid bed combustion is an emerging power generation system for coal and a range of biomass and municipal solid waste fuels. System pressure is an advantage in recovery and compression but high temperatures and impurities may cancel any advantages. The emissions and costs will be determined for a complete combustion, power generation and capture system. Air blown gasification is a simpler but less efficient approach than an oxygen fuelled plant. Physical absorbents should still be effective. A comparison will be done comparing the facility against an oxygen fed plant in terms of the combustion character of products, COr quality, cost and efficiency. Although we have talked in terms of all fossil fuels no liquid hydrocarbon study has been done. It is proposed to examine a residual or oil-water emulsion fuel perhaps in an IGCC setting. The highly successful full fuel cycle analysis work will continue with two further studies using the same general methodology developed in Phase 1. As mentioned earlier, methane, the third most important greenhouse gas will be studied. To say that the methane ‘problem’ can be dealt with by rebuilding the Russian trunk pipeline system is perhaps an over simplification. Within the natural gas drilling, production, distribution industry as well as the conventional petroleum sector there are factors which, when addressed in certain countries could reduce emission; some of this is simple maintenance. The aim is to assess those technologies as compound with mine, land fill and other anthropenic sources. This work will be done through contracted studies.
WEBSTER: IEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME
867
The studies to be done in the methane sector includc:Natural gas drilling and production Oil drilling, production and storage Natural gas transmission, distribution and use Coal bed methane Coal mine ventilation Coal stockpile, handling and use Landfill capture Comparison of central mechanisms against other anthropenic Enviromental impact and risk
sources
The approach to further ocean disposal is different. Research work in various disconnected areas is to be encouraged and co-ordinated through a series of subsidized workshops. Two workshops per year will examine ecological/environment, hydrate chemistry, sediment chemistry, algae, dispersion/circulation modelling and legal issues. A small feasibility study will be done to dimension the concept of a pilot ocean disposal scheme. High temperature membrane separation of CO* and H, is attractive at 250°C or the maximum permitted by shift conversion. Alternatively Hz plus CO separation at even higher temperatures would aid the energy budget[*]. The studies and possibly associated work programmes will also consider N, and CO, separation by ceramic membranes. It is real&d that this is a very special&d area. Low temperature membranes evaluated in Phase 1 will also be revisited to search for improved performance on N21COz systems. The final component in the Phase 2 work plan is chemical utilisation. An overview scoping study will lead to the most exciting options in terms net CO, saving, market deployment and economics of the process being evaluated. The disposition of resources is listed over the 3 year life of Phase 2 (expressed in 1993 terms): f Base programme 600,000 Methane 400,000 Ocean disposal 300,ooo Membrane separation 100,000 Chemical Utilisation 100,000 Follow up 300,ooo 1,8OO,OOO Notable is the follow up item shown above. The follow up funding will provide for studies of interesting ideas generated from the work of Phase 1. In reality the planning process for Phase 2 began in 1992 long before work had been completed. The selection of the ‘follow-up’ list is ongoing and should be concluded in February 1995. It is recognised that the science and technology of carbon dioxide recovery, transportation, sequestration and use must move forward. In my view formation of real research based tasks must move forward if this mitigation approach is to progress from an interesting insurance option to an off-the-shelf deployable technology in a lo-15 year time horizon. Phase 1 has shown areas where learning through R, D&D must take place to reduce risk in application. However, given the limited funding available it seems unlikely that hands on research, Phase 2 funds. The conclusions
from Phase 1 of the Programme
will receive support from
are these:-
1.
No breakthroughs were achieved - none was expected in an assessment mode nevertheless progress toward a exploitable end product. Do not expect easy solutions.
2.
Capture/disposal is a niche opportunity mitigation challenge.
3.
The IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme has produced valuable information to the climate change community as a whole. It will continue do so.
funders expect
like the others which will make up the matrix to meet the
for its participants
and
WEBSTER: iEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME
868
Tablel.
Technical Assessment Studies: Phase 1
Topic
Author
PF + FGD
British Coal (UK)
CCGT
SINTEF (Norway)
IGCC
ECN (Netherlands)
O,/COz Recycle (PF)
ERC (N Ireland)
Absorption Capture
H&G (UK)
Adsoprtion Capture
Monenco (Canada)
Advanced Capture Systems
MIT (USA)
Cryogenic Capture
Intech (USA)
Membranes Capture
TN0 (Netherlands)
Disposal Review
In House
Fuels Utilisation
CSJ (Japan)
Chemicals Utilisation
Battelle (USA)
Ocean Disposal
Tecnomare (UK/Italy)
Aquifer Disposal
Stanley ICL (Canada)
Depleted Gas Wells
TN0 (Netherlands)
Direct Bio-fixation
CSJ (Japan)
Indirect Bio-Fixation
VTT (Finland)
Enhanced Oil Recovery
ITE Clausthal (Germany)
Environment/Risk
DMT (Germany)/ In House
Transportation
Erdyn (France)
Solid Disposal
Atkins/Air Products (UK)
IGCC (OJCOz Recyle)
ECN (Netherlands)
CCGT (O,/CO, Recyle)
SINTEF (Norway)
CHP with Capture
Elkraft (Demnark)lBCC
REFERENCES 1.
A.R. Jack, H. Audus, P.W.F. Riemer, ‘The 1EA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme’, Energy Convers. and Mgmt., 22 813-818.
2.
J.M. Topper, C.J. Bower, I.R. Summerfield, I.S.C. Hughes ’The British Coal Global Warming R&D Programme’. Energy Convers. and Mgmt. 33, 803-811.
0196-8904(95)00140-9
IEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME: CONTINUED INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION Ian C Wehster IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme CRE, Stoke Orchard, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom, CL52 4RZ
Abstract - The first phase of the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme is essentially complete. The initial phase opened the gates to exploration of a wide range of technologies and then developed a comparison based on the whole life chain of a few. From this we have learned that CO2 capture is costly but proven whilst COr disposallutilisation is less expensive but technically challenging. Phase 2 of the Programme will commence in November 1994. The second phase affords the opportunity to delve in more detail into a matrix of important areas; including a) Additional power generation systems and fuels, b) Another greenhouse gas. c) Improving capture technology and d) Reducing risk in disposal and utilisation. 1. INTRODUCTION Recognising the benefits of international co-operation, the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme was established in 1991 under an International Energy Agency Implementing Agreement. Those supporting the Programme were Canada, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Commission of the European Communities. Australiajoined in 1992 and Switzerland in 1993. RWE AG and DMT of Germany are also supporters. The Operating Agent for Task 1 is British Coal Corporation. The control over scope and budget is exercised by the representatives of participants forming an Executive Committee. The total expenditure in Phase 1 will have been f2.3 million. The project life was extended in 1993 from three to three and one half-years so concludes in November 1994. The outline of the initial workplan has been reported elsewhere [l]. It is useful at the conclusion compare the objectives of the framers against the actual achievements of a project.
of a phase to
2. OBJECTIVES The original objectives
were:
0
Evaluation on a full fuel cycle basis the technologies used in the abatement, of greenhouse gas derived from the use of fossil fuels
0
Economic
0
Disseminate
0
Prepare proposals
and environmental
control,
use and disposal
impact studies of application of the technologies
the results of the Programme
activities to participants
for favoured technical options as a result of a research needs assessment 3. PROGRESS
Phase1 A range of technical assessments studies were done, 24 in all. The titles of the technical assessment studies and the authors are listed in table 1. It was intended that these would be analyzed and form the basis for a decision 865
866
WEBSTER: IEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME
on the full fuel cycle studies. Because of timing a decision on the cases for the life cycle studies was made in April 1993, modified by the Executive Committee in June 1993, and formed the basis for work which started in September 1993. At the time of this decision less than one half of the technical assessments had been completed. Contracts were placed with well qualified organisations on a competitive international basis for both the technical assessment and full fuel cycle studies. Reports have been peer reviewed prior to publication by an international panel of experts nominated by the Participants. Economic study has been limited to cost determination and impact of adding capture/disposal to electricity prices. An environmental audit of technologies together with a risk assessment has been carried out. The question of the insurance arrangements for a private sector investor in the capture/transport/disposal business has been examined. Research needs have been identified committee.
but no proposals
for specific
research
efforts are before the Executive
Because of the success of the Programme in producing quality information in a more or less consistent manner discussion leading toward a second phase was initiated resulting in an understanding on the outline of a further project in February 1994. Phase 2 The content of Phase 2 will be discussed but first a few changes in project mission statement should be understood. Where Phase 1 focused on carbon dioxide, the mandate was broadened to other greenhouse gas. Where evaluation was mandated on a full fuel cycle basis, this stipulation has been dropped. Comparision will now be in a variety of ways. This may prove more appropriate. Full fuel cycle analysis does indeed have its place and will form a part of the Phase 2 work. The overall goal of phase 2 is balance. Matching the long term storage potential of the oceans with the immediate opportunity of near to or commercial chemicals utilisation. Would limited resources for greenhouse gas abatement be better directed to methane management than to carbon dioxide focused projects? To insure that the identified priorities from Phase 1 are addressed and the range of technology areas expanded while exploring advanced technology in recovery/separation. Due to limited funding in Phase 1 the emissions from only a short list of power generation options could be studied. This list is being expanded to include fuel cells which represent a high efficiency distributed power generation technology. Hydrogen powered fuel cells should offer scope for efficient pre-combustion capture of CO,. A range of fuel cells will be considered consistent with the present state-of-knowledge. Pressurized fluid bed combustion is an emerging power generation system for coal and a range of biomass and municipal solid waste fuels. System pressure is an advantage in recovery and compression but high temperatures and impurities may cancel any advantages. The emissions and costs will be determined for a complete combustion, power generation and capture system. Air blown gasification is a simpler but less efficient approach than an oxygen fuelled plant. Physical absorbents should still be effective. A comparison will be done comparing the facility against an oxygen fed plant in terms of the combustion character of products, COr quality, cost and efficiency. Although we have talked in terms of all fossil fuels no liquid hydrocarbon study has been done. It is proposed to examine a residual or oil-water emulsion fuel perhaps in an IGCC setting. The highly successful full fuel cycle analysis work will continue with two further studies using the same general methodology developed in Phase 1. As mentioned earlier, methane, the third most important greenhouse gas will be studied. To say that the methane ‘problem’ can be dealt with by rebuilding the Russian trunk pipeline system is perhaps an over simplification. Within the natural gas drilling, production, distribution industry as well as the conventional petroleum sector there are factors which, when addressed in certain countries could reduce emission; some of this is simple maintenance. The aim is to assess those technologies as compound with mine, land fill and other anthropenic sources. This work will be done through contracted studies.
WEBSTER: IEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME
867
The studies to be done in the methane sector includc:Natural gas drilling and production Oil drilling, production and storage Natural gas transmission, distribution and use Coal bed methane Coal mine ventilation Coal stockpile, handling and use Landfill capture Comparison of central mechanisms against other anthropenic Enviromental impact and risk
sources
The approach to further ocean disposal is different. Research work in various disconnected areas is to be encouraged and co-ordinated through a series of subsidized workshops. Two workshops per year will examine ecological/environment, hydrate chemistry, sediment chemistry, algae, dispersion/circulation modelling and legal issues. A small feasibility study will be done to dimension the concept of a pilot ocean disposal scheme. High temperature membrane separation of CO* and H, is attractive at 250°C or the maximum permitted by shift conversion. Alternatively Hz plus CO separation at even higher temperatures would aid the energy budget[*]. The studies and possibly associated work programmes will also consider N, and CO, separation by ceramic membranes. It is real&d that this is a very special&d area. Low temperature membranes evaluated in Phase 1 will also be revisited to search for improved performance on N21COz systems. The final component in the Phase 2 work plan is chemical utilisation. An overview scoping study will lead to the most exciting options in terms net CO, saving, market deployment and economics of the process being evaluated. The disposition of resources is listed over the 3 year life of Phase 2 (expressed in 1993 terms): f Base programme 600,000 Methane 400,000 Ocean disposal 300,ooo Membrane separation 100,000 Chemical Utilisation 100,000 Follow up 300,ooo 1,8OO,OOO Notable is the follow up item shown above. The follow up funding will provide for studies of interesting ideas generated from the work of Phase 1. In reality the planning process for Phase 2 began in 1992 long before work had been completed. The selection of the ‘follow-up’ list is ongoing and should be concluded in February 1995. It is recognised that the science and technology of carbon dioxide recovery, transportation, sequestration and use must move forward. In my view formation of real research based tasks must move forward if this mitigation approach is to progress from an interesting insurance option to an off-the-shelf deployable technology in a lo-15 year time horizon. Phase 1 has shown areas where learning through R, D&D must take place to reduce risk in application. However, given the limited funding available it seems unlikely that hands on research, Phase 2 funds. The conclusions
from Phase 1 of the Programme
will receive support from
are these:-
1.
No breakthroughs were achieved - none was expected in an assessment mode nevertheless progress toward a exploitable end product. Do not expect easy solutions.
2.
Capture/disposal is a niche opportunity mitigation challenge.
3.
The IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme has produced valuable information to the climate change community as a whole. It will continue do so.
funders expect
like the others which will make up the matrix to meet the
for its participants
and
WEBSTER: iEA GREENHOUSE GAS PROGRAMME
868
Tablel.
Technical Assessment Studies: Phase 1
Topic
Author
PF + FGD
British Coal (UK)
CCGT
SINTEF (Norway)
IGCC
ECN (Netherlands)
O,/COz Recycle (PF)
ERC (N Ireland)
Absorption Capture
H&G (UK)
Adsoprtion Capture
Monenco (Canada)
Advanced Capture Systems
MIT (USA)
Cryogenic Capture
Intech (USA)
Membranes Capture
TN0 (Netherlands)
Disposal Review
In House
Fuels Utilisation
CSJ (Japan)
Chemicals Utilisation
Battelle (USA)
Ocean Disposal
Tecnomare (UK/Italy)
Aquifer Disposal
Stanley ICL (Canada)
Depleted Gas Wells
TN0 (Netherlands)
Direct Bio-fixation
CSJ (Japan)
Indirect Bio-Fixation
VTT (Finland)
Enhanced Oil Recovery
ITE Clausthal (Germany)
Environment/Risk
DMT (Germany)/ In House
Transportation
Erdyn (France)
Solid Disposal
Atkins/Air Products (UK)
IGCC (OJCOz Recyle)
ECN (Netherlands)
CCGT (O,/CO, Recyle)
SINTEF (Norway)
CHP with Capture
Elkraft (Demnark)lBCC
REFERENCES 1.
A.R. Jack, H. Audus, P.W.F. Riemer, ‘The 1EA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme’, Energy Convers. and Mgmt., 22 813-818.
2.
J.M. Topper, C.J. Bower, I.R. Summerfield, I.S.C. Hughes ’The British Coal Global Warming R&D Programme’. Energy Convers. and Mgmt. 33, 803-811.