COCO22 balances and mitigation costs balances and mitigation costs of CHP systems with of CHP systems with

COCO22 capture in pulp and paper mills capture in pulp and paper mills

    Kenneth MöllerstenKenneth Möllersten

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)(IIASA)

Overview of talkOverview of talk

Background:Background:

- Opportunities for cost-effective CO- Opportunities for cost-effective CO22 reductions through reductions through energy measuresenergy measures in in Swedish pulp and paper millsSwedish pulp and paper mills

COCO22 capture and storage: capture and storage:

- How far can pulp and paper mills go in - How far can pulp and paper mills go in the direction of low-COthe direction of low-CO22 production? production?

- Economic evaluation of CO- Economic evaluation of CO22 capture capture and storageand storage

Reduction options:Reduction options:

• Emissions from the millsEmissions from the mills– Decreased energy consumptionDecreased energy consumption– Fuel switchFuel switch– COCO22 capture and storage (CCS) capture and storage (CCS)

• Emissions from marginal electricity production Emissions from marginal electricity production reduced in case ofreduced in case of

– Decreased on-site electricity consumptionDecreased on-site electricity consumption– Increased on-site electricity productionIncreased on-site electricity production

Reduction potential in SwedenReduction potential in Sweden

Assuming marginal electricity from natural gas-fired CC power plantsAssuming marginal electricity from natural gas-fired CC power plants

MeasureMeasure PotentialPotential (MtCOMtCO2/yr)

% of 1990% of 1990 SwedishSwedish

emissionsemissions Conventional technologiesConventional technologies - Improved performance of steam Improved performance of steam

power cyclespower cycles - Electricity conservationElectricity conservation - Substitution of oil for biofuelsSubstitution of oil for biofuels

33 5 %5 %

Black liquor gasificationBlack liquor gasification 2.52.5 5 %5 % COCO22 capture and storage capture and storage~90 % of carbon in black liquor 90 % of carbon in black liquor andand barkbark

1010 1616 %%

1515.55 26 %26 %

Source: Möllersten K, (2002). Opportunities for CO2 reductionsand CO2-lean energy systems in pulp and paper mills

Biomass energy with COBiomass energy with CO2 2

capture and storagecapture and storage

Energyproducts

Biofuels

CO2

CO2 to underground storage

CO2

(ForestProducts)

A:Reduced process steam requirements: Utilisation of surplus steam for additional power production, C:Electricity conservation: TMP, D:Electricity conservation: Pumps, fans, mixers, and other motor systems, E:Increased utilisation of installed steam turbine capacity, F:Adjusting steam turbine capacity to present process steam demand, G:Wood powder-fired superheater after Tomlinson boiler, K:Electricity production from waste heat, L:Conversion of lime kilns to biofuels, M:Substituting fuel oil for biofuels in steam production.

100

200

84E A

G D

F

M C

K

L

COR[US$/tCO2]

Reduction potential[MtCO2/y]

A D E C G

F

K M

L

Marginal electricity from coal-fired power plants

100

200

84

EAG

D

M

C

K

L

COR[US$/tCO2]

Reduction potential[MtCO2/y]

F

A

D E C

G

F MK

L

Capitalvaluation:IndustrialSocietal

Marginal electricity from NGCC

Reduction potential and cost of reduction - conventional technologies

Marginal electricity from coal-fired power plants

100

102

COR[US$/tCO2]

Reduction potential[MtCO2/yr]

+H

*H+

*I

I+

*J

J

*

+ N

N

6

Capitalvaluation:* Industrial+ Societal

H:Black liquor integrated gasification combined cycle, I: Black liquor integrated gasification combined cycle with pre-combustion CO2 capture and sequestration, J: Black liquor integrated gasification with pre-combustion CO2 capture and sequestration, methanol production and combined cycle, N:Recovery and bark boilers with flue gas CO2 capture and sequestration.

100

10

COR[US$/tCO2]

Reduction potential[MtCO2/yr]

+H

*H

+

*I

I+

*N

J

+

*J

N

2 6

Marginal electricity from NGCC

Reduction potential and cost of reduction - emerging technologies

COCO22 capture in pulp and paper capture in pulp and paper millsmills

• Energy efficiency of technologiesEnergy efficiency of technologies

• COCO2 2 balancebalance

• Capture cost, transportation and Capture cost, transportation and storage coststorage cost

Focus:Focus:

COCO22 capture technologies capture technologies

CO2

capture

Energy

Fluegas

CO2

Heat & electricity

Boiler and turbines

Air

Black liquor

Biomass

CO2-lean flue gas

Post-combustion capturePost-combustion capture

Compressor

COCO22 capture technologies capture technologies

CO2

Capture CC

H2 orH2 and CO

CO2

Pressurised gasifier

O2

Energy

CO shift(optional)

Fluegas

Heat & electricity

Pre-combustion capturePre-combustion capture

CO-shift:CO-shift:

CO + HCO + H22OOvapvap → CO → CO

22 + H + H22 +44.5 MJ/Mol +44.5 MJ/Mol

coco

Compressor

ASU

Black liquor

Biomass

Storage optionsStorage options

Underground geological formationsUnderground geological formations

• Depleated gas & oil wellsDepleated gas & oil wells

• Deep aquifersDeep aquifers

• Deep coal bedsDeep coal beds

• Enhanced oil recoveryEnhanced oil recovery

The deep oceansThe deep oceans

Studied mills• “Ecocyclic pulp mill” reference mill (STFI, 2000)

• 1550 t pulp/day

• Late 1990’s state-of-the-art technologies in all departments

• Market pulp mill – “MPM”– Process steam is 24% lower than the 1994 Swedish average

• Integrated pulp & paper mill – “IPPM”– Process steam is 5% lower than the 1994 Swedish average

• Same pulp wood input. IPPM has higher heat and electricity demand

Blackliquor

Bark /woody biomass ST

Condensatefrom mill

CO2

ST

MP

to mill

LP to m

illand

reboile

r

Recoveryboiler

Biomassboiler

Feedwaterpump

Absorptioncolumn

CO2-leanflue gas

Desorptioncolumn

HP

Flue gas

Reboiler

CO2compressor

System for detailed studySystem for detailed study-recovery boiler caserecovery boiler case

SSiimmuullaattiioonnss wwiitthh AAssppeenn++

BL Gasifier

Acid gasremoval

HRSG

Blackliquor

Biomass Gasifier

Bark /woody biomass

GT

ASU

AirCO shiftreactor

LP

MP

ASU

Air Quench bath

MP LP

CO2physical

absorptionCO2

compressor

MP LP

ST

Feed water

Air

CO

2

LP to mill

HP to mill

Weak wash

System for detailed studySystem for detailed study- gasification case- gasification case

Performance MPMPerformance MPM

0

33

0

27

0

74

0 0

5346

106

71

MPM RB MPM RBCCS

MPM Gasif MPM GasifCCS

CO2 (kg/s)

Biomass (MW)

Net power (MW)

0

52

0

4520

289

114

184

5872

113 115

IPPM RB IPPM RBCCS

IPPM Gasif IPPM GasifCCS

CO2 (kg/s)

Biomass (MW)

Net power (MW)

Performance IPPMPerformance IPPM

Conclusion:Conclusion:In addition to pulp and paper, the mills could potentiallyIn addition to pulp and paper, the mills could potentially- Export electricity, Export electricity, ANDAND- Remove substantial amounts of CORemove substantial amounts of CO22 from the atmosphere from the atmosphere

on a net basison a net basis

  COCO22

captured captured and storedand stored(tCO(tCO

22/ADt)/ADt)

Net electricity Net electricity exportexport(MWh/ADt)(MWh/ADt)

CO2 emissionsCO2 emissions(tCO(tCO

22/ADt)/ADt) 

Market pulp Market pulp millmill

1.51.5 0.50.5(ref. case 1.0)(ref. case 1.0)

-1.3-1.3

Integrated millIntegrated mill 2.22.2 0.50.5(ref. case 0.5)(ref. case 0.5)

-2.2-2.2

““Global” COGlobal” CO22 emissions compared to reference emissions compared to reference

(NGCC marginal power production)(NGCC marginal power production)

Cost of COCost of CO22 capture and storage (USD/tCO capture and storage (USD/tCO22)=)=

Annual incremental cost / Annually captured COAnnual incremental cost / Annually captured CO22

Where: Where:

Economic evaluationEconomic evaluation

Annual incremental cost =Annual incremental cost =+ Delta capital cost+ Delta capital cost+ Delta O&M+ Delta O&M+ Delta electricity * Price electricity+ Delta electricity * Price electricity+ Delta biomass * Price biomass+ Delta biomass * Price biomass+ Cost of CO2 transportation and storage+ Cost of CO2 transportation and storage

• 11% Discount rate11% Discount rate

Estimated capital costsEstimated capital costs- - example:example: pre-combustion CO pre-combustion CO22

capturecapture

Economic evaluationEconomic evaluation

Incremental capital cost Incremental capital cost relative to base case [MUSD]relative to base case [MUSD]

MPM4MPM4 IPPM5IPPM5

Biomass Biomass gasification gasification island (with island (with ASU)ASU)

-- 7474

Biomass boiler

-- -11-11

Shift reactor 1414 2020

CO2 absorber 1414 2020

Gas turbine 44 1818

HRSG 00 77

Steam turbine -2-2 -2-2

CO2 compressor

88 1111

Total 3838 137137

Scale issues in COScale issues in CO2 2 transportationtransportation• PipelinePipeline

- results from IEA model:- results from IEA model:

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

0 200 400 600 800

Distance [km]

Cos

t {U

SD

/tCO

2]

5 [kg/s]

20

40

60

100

200

• TankerTanker

~ 15-20 USD/t CO~ 15-20 USD/t CO22

Cost of capture and storage:Cost of capture and storage:Dependence on technologyDependence on technologyand transportation distanceand transportation distance

05

101520253035404550

100 200 400 600 800 1000

Transportation distance [km]

CO

2 ca

ptu

re a

nd

sto

rag

e co

st

[US

D/t

CO

2] MPM2

MPM4

IPPM2

IPPM5

ConclusionsConclusions1.1. Evaluated energy efficiency, COEvaluated energy efficiency, CO22

balances, and cost-effectiveness of balances, and cost-effectiveness of biomass-based CHP systems with biomass-based CHP systems with CCS in pulp and paper millsCCS in pulp and paper mills

2. Steep CO2. Steep CO22 reductions can be reductions can be

achieved through CCSachieved through CCS

3. Systems based on black liquor and 3. Systems based on black liquor and biomass gasification have several biomass gasification have several advantages:advantages:- energy efficiency - energy efficiency - self-sufficiency in electricity and biomass - self-sufficiency in electricity and biomass - a lower cost of CO- a lower cost of CO22 capture capture

Last conclusion confirmed by Last conclusion confirmed by economic assessment using price economic assessment using price scenarios for CO2, biomass, and scenarios for CO2, biomass, and electricity (2020 –2070)electricity (2020 –2070)