CCS and CCU - IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D...
Transcript of CCS and CCU - IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D...
CCS and CCUtheir Role in the Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from
Energy Intensive Industry
Stanley SantosIEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme
Cheltenham, UK
Methanol Technology and Policy CongressFrankfurt, Germany
December 2015
© OECD/IEA 2013
2013 CCS Roadmap: Key Findings CCS is a critical component in a portfolio of low-carbon energy
technologies, contributing 14% of the cumulative emissions reductions between 2015 and 2050 compared with business as usual.
The individual component technologies are generally well understood. The largest challenge is the integration of component technologies into large-scale demonstration projects.
Incentive frameworks are urgently needed to deliver upwards of 30 operating CCS projects by 2020.
CCS is not only about electricity generation: 45% of captured CO2 comes from industrial applications between 2015 and 2050.
The largest deployment of CCS will need to occur in non-OECD countries, 70% by 2050. China alone accounts for 1/3 of the global total of captured CO2 between 2015 and 2050.
The urgency of CCS deployment is only increasing. This decade is critical in developing favourable conditions for long-term CCS deployment.
© OECD/IEA 2013
WEO2015 Special Report on Climate Change
113 Gt CO2 Abatement (Cumulative)
Rationale for CCS:Only large-scale mitigation option for many industriesUpdated from Tracking Clean energy Progress report 2013, industry-CCS annex (IEA)
IEAGHG’s CCS Activities in Process Industries• Iron and Steel Industry
• Techno-economic evaluation of CCS deployment in steel mill – completed 2013• Overview of the current state and future development of CO2 capture technologies in the Iron
Making Process – completed 2013• 1st Steel industry CCS workshop with VDEH and Swerea MEFOS in Germany in November
2011• 2nd Steel industry CCS workshop in Japan November 2013 – collaboration with World Steel
and IETS
• Cement Industry• Techno- economic assessment completed in 2008• Studies on barriers to implementation completed in 2013 (with GCCSI)
• Hydrogen Production for Industrial Applications• State of the art review completed• Techno-economic evaluation for SMR in Merchant Market Scenario now completed – Final
Report due Q1 of 2016• Techno-economic evaluation for SMR in Captive Market Scenario (Methanol, Ammonia/Urea &
Oil Refining) is underway.
• Oil Refining Industry• Techno-economic evaluation is now underway – due Q1 of 2017
• Pulp and Paper Industry• Techno-economic evaluation now underway – due Q3 of 2016
IS CO2 CAPTURE AND USE (CCU) -A PARTNER OR THREAT TO CCS?
Emergence of CCUCO2 as Raw Materials to Different Chemical Industries
• Emergence of utilization of CO2
could be a pros and cons to industrial CCS deployment.• Development of CCU could
provide early demonstration opportunities for novel CO2
capture technologies.• However, use of CO2 as raw
materials doesn’t necessarily reduce CO2 emissions (per se).
• Nonetheless, we should accept the reality that CCU will play a role in the future of industrial CO2
mitigation scenarios.
Figure from US DOE, ADEME and ENEA
Emergence of CCUCO2 Usage in various activities…
Conclusion (No. 1)• CO2 Capture and Use could be a beneficial to
CCS by providing an avenue to early demonstration of CO2 Capture technologies…
Conclusion (No. 2)• CO2 Capture and Use could be an alternative
option to address the cost of CO2 emissions (i.e. EU ETS)…
Blast Furnace (TGR BF)
Raw Top Gas• CO: 46-49%• CO2: 37-38%• H2: 8 - 9%• Balance: N2
Recycled Top Gas• CO: 73-75%• CO2: ~3%• H2: 14-15%• Balance: N2
CO2
removal
• CO2 Removal evaluated by ULCOS consists of:
• PSA, VPSA• VPSA or PSA + Cryogenic Separation• Chemical Absorption
• Concentration of CO2 depends on capture technology used
563 Nm3900oC
Raw Materials
BF Slag
CO2 Capture & Compression Plant
OBF Process Gas Fired Heaters
Hot Metal
Natural Gas
OBF Process Gas
OBF-PG to Steel Works
PCI Coal
Oxygen
OBF Top Gas
1000 kg1470oC
Carbon Dioxide
152 kg
235 kg
Flue Gas
Top Gas Cleaning
352 Nm3
BF Dust
BF Sludge
Air
15 kg
4 kg
253 Nm3
205 Nm341oC
332 Nm3 18 Nm3
938 Nm3
1385 Nm3
867 kg
171 Nm3
Coke 253 kgSinter 1096 kg (70%)Pellets 353 kg (22%)Lump 125 kg (8%)Limestone 6 kgQuartzite 3 kg
Steam2.0 GJ
DRR: 11%FT: 2140oCTGT: 170oCHM Si: 0.5%HM C:4.7%
OBF Screen Undersize21 kg
Nitrogen5 Nm3
Nitrogen5 Nm3
Results from IEAGHG StudyCase 3: OBF with MDEA/Pz CO2 Capture
An Example – How CCU is mutually compatible to the Steel IndustryComposition of the Different Off-Gases from an Integrated Steel Mill
Wet Basis (%vol.)
Blast Furnace Gas (BFG)
Basic Oxygen Furnace Gas
(BOFG)
H2 3.63 2.64CO 22.10 56.92CO2 22.34 14.44N2 48.77 13.83
H2O 3.15 12.16
LHV (MJ/Nm3) -wet
3.21 7.47
Wet Basis (%vol.)
Coke Oven Gas(COG)
CH4 23.04H2 59.53CO 3.84CO2 0.96N2 5.76O2 0.19H2O 3.98Other HC 2.69
LHV (MJ/Nm3) - wet 17.33
An Example – How CCU is mutually compatible to the Steel IndustryComposition of the Different Off-Gases from an Integrated Steel Mill
Wet Basis (%vol.)
Coke Oven Gas(COG)
CH4 23.04H2 59.53CO 3.84CO2 0.96N2 5.76O2 0.19H2O 3.98Other HC 2.69
LHV (MJ/Nm3) - wet 17.33
Use of breakthrough technologies such as Top Gas Recycle Blast Furnace (TGR-BF) could also open up options for production of chemicals – and can be more economically favourable than CCS deployment.
Wet Basis (%vol.)
Blast Furnace Gas (BFG)
Basic Oxygen Furnace Gas
(BOFG)
Raw Off-Gas from TGR-BF
to CO2 Capture Plant
Off-Gas of TGR-BF (CO2 lean)from CO2 Capture
Plant Recycled to BF
H2 3.63 2.64 8.56 12.64CO 22.10 56.92 45.69 67.46CO2 22.34 14.44 33.89 3.00N2 48.77 13.83 10.07 14.86
H2O 3.15 12.16 1.79 2.04
LHV (MJ/Nm3) -wet
3.21 7.47 6.69 9.87
Conclusion (No. 3)• We should realise that CCU could play an
important role for the energy intensive industries especially if CO2 storage is not accessible…
• However – there is catch to this process!• Does CCU really contribute to the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions from these industries?o Substitution? or Fossil Fuel Displacement?o Temporary Storage?o LCA analysis is needed.
CCS & CCU – CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES TO THE
METHANOL INDUSTRY
Figure adapted from P. Styring (CO2Chem), MethanexTraditional Market (60%)• Acetic Acid• Formaldehyde• Silicone• Methyl Methacrylate
Emergence of CCUCO2 as Raw Materials to Different Chemical Industries
Emerging Market (40%)• MTO (MTBE & Olefins)• Marine Fuel• DME• Fuel Blending• Biodiesel
MeOH to Ethylene or Propylene
Use of CO2 to produce MeOH could be the early market mover for CCU
Methanol as Fuel
Key Message:Use of CO2 to produce MeOH for fuel – could not reduce CO2 per se.
This could be a potential form of “Technical Carbon Leakage”
In Europe – Due to SECA regulation – potential new market for Methanol or DME in the Marine Fuel Business
Overview of IEAGHG Study:
5000 MTPD Methanol (Grade AA) Production (without CO2 Capture) – New Build Case
0.3553 t CO2/t MeOH
Overview of IEAGHG Study:
5000 MTPD Methanol (Grade AA) Production (with CO2 Capture) – New Build Case
0.0353 t CO2/t MeOH
0.3178 t CO2/t MeOH
Overview of IEAGHG Study:
5000 MTPD Methanol (Grade AA) Production (without & with CO2 Capture) – Performance of the Plant
Methanol Plant Performance DataBase Case with CO2 Capture
INLET STREAMSNatural Gas Feedstock t/h 119.098 119.098Natural Gas Fuel t/h 17.119 17.119
OUTLET STREAMSMethanol Product to BL TPD 5,000 5,000
t/h 208.36 208.36POWER BALANCE
Methanol Plant Power Consumption MWe 11.15 20.30Steam and BFW Consumption MWe 2.92 2.92Utilities + BoP Consumption MWe 4.4 6.25CO2 capture plant MWe - 1.66CO2 Compressor MWe - 5.2Power Import from the Grid MWe 18.47 36.32
SPECIFIC DIRECT EMISSIONSSpecific CO2 Emission t/t MeOH 0.3533 0.0353Equivalent CO2 in MeOH Product % 79.30% 79.30%Captured CO2 % NA 18.40%Overall CO2 Capture Rate % 79.30% 97.70%
SPECIFIC INDIRECT EMISSIONSSpecific CO2 Emission (Coal Based) t/t MeOH 0.0661 0.1300Specific CO2 Emission (NGCC Based) t/t MeOH 0.0308 0.0606
SPECIFIC EMISSIONS (TOTAL)Specific CO2 Emission t/t MeOH 0.3841 - 0.4194 0.0959 - 0.1653% CO2 Avoided % - 60.6 – 71.1%
Options for Captured CO2
• Full CCS option
• Partial CCS and CCU (CO2 is for own use)• For 5000 MTPD MeOH plant - up to 1000 MTPD
of CO2 could be used as additional feedstock to increase the production of methanol
• Rest are transported and stored
• Sell the CO2 to other users
Challenges to CO2 Recycle• Excess CO2 could be recycled back to the
Reformer or to the Synthesis Loop.• But there are limitations:
• Syngas composition will be more carbon rich. As a consequence, MW of the syngas increases therefore reducing the circulation flow rate.
• There is an optimum amount of CO2 could be added. More than that would reduce Carbon Efficiency of the Synloop. (Need to balance with the Recycle Ratio).
o Limitation due to the H2 availability within the Recycle Loop
Example – Use of CO2 in MeOH Plant Addition of Purge Converter
Methanol Synthesis Reactor
Crude Methanol Separator
Flash Drum
Make Up Gas (MUG)
Crude Methanolto Distillation Unit
Purge Gas
Flash Gas to Burner
Rec
ycle
d G
as
HP SteamMP Steam
BFW
LP Steam
Syngas Compressor
CWS
CWR
Crude Cooler
Recycled Water from Purge Scrubber Bottom
CO2
Purge Converter
Crude Methanol Separator
CWS
CWR
CWS
CWR
Example – Use of CO2 in MeOH Plant Addition of Parallel Converter
Methanol Synthesis Reactor
Crude Methanol Separator
Flash Drum
Make Up Gas (MUG)
Crude Methanolto Distillation Unit
Purge Gas
Flash Gas to Burner
Rec
ycle
d G
as
HP SteamMP Steam
BFW
LP Steam
Syngas Compressor
CWS
CWR
Crude Cooler
Recycled Water from Purge Scrubber Bottom
CO2
Parallel Converter
Impact of CO2 Addition to the Operation of the Plant(Figure Courtesy of GBH Enterprise)
0 200 400 600
0.50
1.00
0.00
2.00
2.50
1.50
3.00R
ecycle Ratio
Rel
ativ
e P
rodu
ctio
n R
ate
1.04
1.08
1.00
1.16
1.20
1.12
1.24
CO2 Addition Rate (kmol/h)
Concluding Remarks
• Use of CO2 as raw materials is emerging due to current policy and regulatory framework.
• Recognising the Pros and Cons of CCU to CCS is important.• In the short term, CCU has positive economic
effect to any early CCS demonstration projects which could help accelerate CCS deployment –even it involves “temporary” storage.
Concluding Remarks• We need to understand on how to quantify the
reduction potential of CO2 usage in the overall scheme of GHG reduction.• LCA is an important tool – We need transparent (unbiased)
data to fully understand CCU’s potential.• Market driver should be recognised.• Fill in various gaps – technical, economics (including
market), policy, regulatory development
• In the long term – CCU with potential to reduce CO2 Emissions should be the main focus.
• CCU presents a challenge as well as opportunities to the Methanol Industry.
Thank You, Any Questions?Contact me at: [email protected]