Greenhouse Issues Number 67, May 2003
By Ted Morris
On 3rd March 2003, the International Test Centre
for Carbon Dioxide Capture (ITC) was formally launched in Regina,
Canada (Greenhouse Issues number 65). Opening remarks were made
by the Honourable Ralph Goodale, the Minister of Public Works
and Government Services Canada, the Honourable Eric Cline Q.C.,
the Minister of Industry and Resources for Saskatchewan, Dr David
Barnard, the President of the University of Regina and John Barrie,
from Fluor Canada.
The ITC is an integrated research and demonstration
facility comprising extensive research and analytic facilities,
a one-tonne per day test facility in Regina and a pre-commercial
demonstration unit, with a capacity of four or more tonnes per
day, attached to a coal-fired electrical generating station in
southern Saskatchewan. This combination enables a comprehensive
research and testing program to be undertaken.
The four tonne per day unit has been operational
for some time, and has been providing baseline data using monoethanolamine
as the base chemical solvent. The new pilot plant at the University
of Regina is designed with three absorber columns to allow the
testing of different packings and to allow for change-out of a
column without shutting down the facility. The unit is entirely
stainless steel, to allow for the testing of potentially more
corrosive chemicals or chemical concentrations. Flue gases are
provided by a 30 KW micro-turbine and a 250 KW industrial steam
boiler, which also provides the steam for the stripper column.
Output from the unit, as well as the pre-commercial unit, is available
to consortium members on the web.
The formal opening of the ITC was well attended
by people from the University, the community and from outside
Regina. The speakers noted the foresight of the province and the
University in creating the facility to look at technology for
the capture of carbon dioxide from the flue gases of various types
of utility boilers. The ITC is part of the University of Regina’s
commitment to research excellence in Energy and Environment, one
of its five research focus areas.
Back to Top
The Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF)
is an international climate change initiative that will focus
on development of carbon capture and storage technologies as a
means of accomplishing long-term stabilisation of greenhouse gas
levels in the atmosphere. This initiative is designed to improve
these technologies through coordinated research and development
with international partners and private industry.
Three types of cooperation are currently envisioned
within the framework of the Forum: data gathering, information
exchange, and joint projects. Data gathered from participating
countries will be aggregated, summarised, and distributed to all
of the Forum’s participants. Joint projects will be identified
by member nations with the Forum serving as a mechanism for bringing
together government and private sector representatives from member
countries.
The Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum will
be a ministerial-level organisation. Current plans call for government
officials to convene formally twice a year. The United States
will assume responsibility for staffing and administering the
Forum with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) serving as the
lead U.S. agency. DOE will coordinate with the Department of State
in identifying international partners. Meeting sites will likely
be rotated among member nations.
What does DOE expect the Forum to do?
According to the press release, DOE expects that, whilst many
countries continue to make substantial efforts to enhance the
deployment of renewable energy sources and to developing energy
efficient technologies, fossil energy use for power generation
worldwide will double by 2030. Many nations are also advancing
new technologies for nuclear energy, which emits no greenhouse
gases. These measures will help in reducing emissions of greenhouse
gases, but most scientists believe that they alone will not be
sufficient to meet the goal of stabilising atmospheric concentrations
of greenhouse gases at acceptable levels.
DOE indicates that global emissions of anthropogenic
CO2 are projected to increase 60% by
2020 as many nations continue to rely on coal, oil and natural
gas to fuel economic growth. Fossil energy is thought to be too
large a part of the global economy and too inherently cost-effective
to be eliminated from the world’s energy mix. Carbon sequestration,
however, offers the potential for countries to achieve large-scale
reductions of greenhouse gases without necessitating massive and
economically disruptive changes to their energy infrastructures.
Examples of carbon sequestration technologies includes those which
separate carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plant emissions
and store it in deep underground geological formations. These
types of technologies will be the primary focus of the Carbon
Sequestration Leadership Forum.
If costs can be reduced and technologies verified
as being both practical and safe, carbon sequestration could represent
a key pathway for economically stabilising atmospheric concentrations
of greenhouse gas and for securing a sustainable energy future.
The Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum aims to provide a mechanism
for cooperative efforts to develop and deploy this carbon management
approach around the world.
Joint Projects
Studies of various approaches to carbon sequestration
cross a number of disciplines – from the physical mechanisms
of CO2 capture, to the geology of deep
reservoir injection, to the biology of agricultural practices,
to the chemistry of carbon reactions. Expertise in these disciplines
exists throughout the world’s technical community, and the
Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum will offer a way for nations
to collaborate in a manner that focuses the world’s best
minds on the most challenging problems. Global cooperation is
already underway in some areas of carbon sequestration. One of
the most notable projects is the Weyburn oil recovery project
in Saskatchewan, Canada, where CO2 from
the Great Plains Coal Gasification Plant in North Dakota is being
injected into an active oil field. Scientists from 18 nations
are monitoring the project (Greenhouse Issues number 61), to determine
if the CO2 remains entrapped in the field.
A similar monitoring effort is taking place in connection with
the Sleipner Project in the North Sea off the coast of Norway
(Greenhouse Issues numbers 48 and 54).
In addition to these activities, other carbon
sequestration technologies are emerging from the world’s
research laboratories. For several of these technologies, a key
technical hurdle will be to demonstrate them on a scale large
enough to verify their future commercial practicality. International
collaboration will be important in leveraging resources for many
of these large-scale sequestration projects. One such project
could be the new hydrogen production and sequestration prototype
power plant announced by Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham on
February 27, 2003. This project, estimated to cost $1 billion
over the next 10 years, would combine electricity and hydrogen
production with the virtual total elimination of harmful emissions,
including greenhouse gases. International support for this project
could be considered by the member countries of the Carbon Sequestration
Leadership Forum.
The Inaugural Meeting
Almost 400 people attended the inaugural meeting
which was held 23rd–25th June 2003, in Washington. The meeting
lasted two and a half days. Delegations had been invited from
15 states. The objective of the meetings was to sign a “Charter”
to carry forward, by international co-operation, the declared
aims of the CSLF.
Two parallel sessions were held to start the meeting, on policy/regulation/finance
and technology. Bob Kane (US DOE) and Kelly Thambimuthu (NRCan,
and Chairman of IEA GHG), co-chaired the technology session. Later
“stakeholder” sessions considered issues such as IPR,
international treaty constraints, labour and commercial risks.
During the latter part of the day a restricted session involved
national delegates discussed the draft charter proposed by the
USA.
On day two, a single forum in the morning saw
a number of speeches from the USA, consideration of challenges
and goals, and a review of two major projects in the field - Sleipner
and Weyburn.
Claude Mandil, Executive Director of the IEA
made a speech supportive of CO2 capture
and storage as a policy objective. In it, he revealed for the
first time, the results of some of the modelling by the IEA, which
used data supplied by IEA GHG. At a value of 50$/tonne of CO2
up to 20% of the world’s power stations could be operating
with CO2 capture and storage by 2040.
He also gave a range of costs for producing hydrogen from fossil
fuels with CO2 capture versus renewables:
the results came out at 8-10$/GJ using natural gas, 10-13$/GJ
using coal followed by a variety of renewables (costs ranging
from 15-25$/GJ) but the underlying assumptions were not declared.
He also used the opportunity to highlight the work of IEA GHG
and the recent ZETs initiative of the IEA’s Working Party
on Fossil Fuels. He concluded by emphasising that the IEA is supportive
of the aims of the CSLF and willing to enter a dialogue on how
the IEA might help.
He was followed by Dr Pachauri, chairman of the
IPCC, who endorsed the aims of the CSLF, gave a broad background
to the work of the IPCC and highlighted the report currently being
produced on CO2 capture and storage in
which work IEA GHG staff and Executive Committee members are very
prominent.
In the afternoon national delegates returned
to consider an up-dated draft of the charter and various activities
such as further “stakeholder” debates, this time on
communications issues. Following a series of national statements,
John Topper (representing the Operating Agent for IEA GHG) was
invited to make a statement on the way in which an IEA Implementing
Agreement might be used as an umbrella for international co-operative
projects.
On the third day there was a formal signing session
of the first international charter in support of the CSLF, followed
by another restricted session to consider the way forward.
Organisation will be via two groups: a policy
group and a technical group with the latter reporting to the former.
The policy group will be chaired by USA with Australia and Italy
providing the vice chairs. The technical group will be chaired
by USA with Canada and Norway as vice chairs. There are no legally
binding commitments; Intellectual Property rights will be defined
as the arrangements develop.
Signatories were Australia, Brazil, Canada, China,
Columbia, European Commission, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Norway,
Russia, UK, and USA; altogether 14 nations. Only South Africa
declined, at least until they had given the issues further consideration.
Hence, it was a considerable achievement on which the USA is to
be congratulated. Countries not attending may still join and the
secretariat is open to dialogue and requests of this nature.
Secretariat duties will be fulfilled by US DoE,
supported by the US Energy Association. All available presentations
are on the US Energy Association web site (www.usea.org).
For additional information write to: Robert Card,
Under Secretary of Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington,
DC 20585, USA. Or contact: Robert Kane, Sequestration Issue Manager,
Office of Fossil Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington,
DC 20585. (202) 586-4753 Robert.Kane@hq.doe.gov
Back to Top
Part II: Mitigation Costs and Markets
By Karl Schultz, U.S. EPA
In this two part series, we examine the potential
for reducing methane emissions from coal mine ventilation air.
In part one of this series (Greenhouse Issues number 66), we examined
ventilation air methane emissions and the technologies that are
available or under development to reduce these emissions. Part
two summarizes the findings of EPA’s marginal abatement
cost analyses and considers the size of the potential mitigation
market. It concludes the series by considering some of the key
issues that need to be addressed in order to develop the VAM market.
Mitigation Costs, Markets and Steps Towards Market
Development
EPA published a report in July 2003 that evaluates the global
VAM market. The Assessment of the Worldwide Market Potential for
Oxidizing Coal Mine Ventilation Air Methane (available on EPA’s
website at www.epa.gov/coalbed) estimates VAM emissions for the
major underground coal-producing countries and the methane concentrations
of these emissions (the most critical factor in technology choice
and cost). It uses these data and cost estimates for the most
universally applicable technology, flow reversal reaction, at
prevailing country-level power prices to determine the size of
the market based on varying price signals for power and CO2
equivalent emission reductions. Other technologies may reduce
the mitigation costs but there are not yet sufficient costing
data on other technologies, and no other known technology can
oxidize nearly the entire amount of available VAM without the
use of supplemental fuel.
EPA’s report developed marginal abatement
costs curves (MAC curves) to better understand the price signals
required to reduce VAM emissions economically. EPA’s MACs
estimate how much it costs to oxidize and produce power for a
certain quantity of VAM in a given national or global market.
Curves were prepared for 12 key countries, and a composite global
MAC depicted the marginal costs for the entire VAM resource base.
The single largest factor influencing the mitigation costs is
the concentration of methane in the ventilation air. The greater
the average concentration, the lower the average costs.
Of the total of 237 million metric tons of CO2e
VAM emissions (16.6 billion cubic meters of methane), with a net
project cost of $3.00 per tonne of CO2e
at average industrial power prices, approximately 172 million
tonnes of CO2e could be oxidized. The
analysis shows that the quantity of emissions that may be mitigated
at lower costs is much less: at $2.00 per tonne approximately
60 million tonnes of CO2e could be mitigated.
Translating these costs to market size, at $3.00/tonne
CO2e, nearly 3 000 MW of net electric
capacity could be developed, and annual revenue could approach
$900 million. Table 1 also shows that the largest VAM emitters
are also the largest markets for VAM projects. China has the potential
to reduce nearly 5.5 billion cubic meters/year of VAM for less
than $3.00/tonne CO2e, which may lead
to $3.8 billion worth of equipment sales and $430 million in annual
revenues. The U.S. is the second largest market, with nearly $1.5
billion in equipment sales potential and $150 million in annual
revenue at $3.00 per tonne of CO2e. While
these two countries represent more than half of the global market,
there are significant market potentials in most of the important
underground coal mining nations.
EPA’s analyses demonstrate that there is
a large global supply of ventilation air methane, which can become
a valuable energy and environmental resource. In order to develop
this market, however, a number of coordinated steps must be undertaken:
VAM technologies require demonstration at commercial
scale. Currently, demonstration efforts are planned or are already
underway at mines in both Australia and the U.S. Field demonstrations
in other countries would be useful to better understand the practical
issues involved in adapting the technologies to the national conditions
and markets.
A reasonable price for both the extracted energy,
and the greenhouse gas emission reductions is necessary. At prevailing
power prices, over two thirds of global VAM could be avoided for
less than $3/tonne CO2e.
For those projects seeking revenues from the
avoided emissions, accurate quantification of the emissions baseline,
and monitoring, verification, and third party certification may
be necessary.
All interconnections between the mine ventilation
airshaft and the oxidation unit must be designed and, where required,
approved to remove any safety concerns for mining operations.
The experiences of demonstration project developers in Australia
and the U.S. in obtaining safety approval will be useful elsewhere.
Information on the VAM abatement technologies,
markets and other issues related to project development must be
compiled, assessed and disseminated. EPA already has a web site
(www.epa.gov/coalbed, visit the “ventilation air methane”
section) that provides a significant amount of technical and market
data, and EPA will continue its efforts to develop and provide
unbiased information to industry and to partner with other organizations
world wide.
Developing the global ventilation air methane
market is likely to be a challenging effort on the part of all
involved. However, the technical and market fundamentals are strong
and the demand for low cost, high quality greenhouse gas emission
reductions appears great, so relatively prompt adoption of these
technologies is both possible and economically and environmentally
beneficial.
Back to Top
By Stefan Bachu and Bill Gunter
Geological storage of CO2
is a mitigation option for significantly reducing CO2
emissions into the atmosphere that is immediately available and
technologically feasible, as a result of the experience gained
in CO2-flood enhanced oil recovery and
in lesser-known acid-gas injection operations in Rocky Mountain
foreland basins such as Alberta in western Canada. Over the past
decade, oil and gas producers in Alberta and British Columbia
have been faced with a growing challenge to reduce atmospheric
emissions of hydrogen sulphide (H2S), which is produced from “sour”
hydrocarbon pools that contain H2S and CO2.
These gases have to be removed before the produced oil or gas
is sent to markets. Because surface desulphurization is costly
and the surface storage of the produced sulphur constitutes a
liability, increasingly more operators are turning to acid gas
disposal by injection into deep geological formations. Acid gas
is a mixture of H2S and CO2, with minor
traces of hydrocarbons, that is the byproduct of “sweetening”
sour hydrocarbons. In addition to providing a cost-effective alternative
to sulphur recovery, the deep injection of acid gas reduces atmospheric
emissions of noxious substances and alleviates public concerns
resulting from sour gas production and flaring.
Since 1989, 42 acid-gas injection operations
have been approved in western Canada (35 in Alberta and 7 in British
Columbia) for acid gas injection at 48 sites (at a few operations
injection takes place at several locations or into 2 different
formations). Of these, one operation, although approved, was never
implemented, another one has been rescinded by the operator because
the gas plant producing the acid gas has been decommissioned,
and a third one has been shut down by the regulatory agency because
the operator greatly exceeded the approved operating parameters.
Figure 1 (right) shows the location of acid gas injection operations
in western Canada. The size of these 42 acid-gas injection operations
is relatively small, with approved injection rates and volumes
generally less than 0.1 million m3/d and 200 million m3, respectively.
Although the purpose of the acid gas injection
operations is to dispose of H2S, significant quantities of CO2
are being injected at the same time because it is costly to separate
the two gases. The composition of the injected acid gas varies
between 1 mol% H2S and 98 mol% CO2, and
85 mol% H2S and 15 mol% CO2, with minor
hydrocarbon gases constituting the balance (Figure 2a). The acid
gas is or was mixed with water at surface, prior to injection,
at 6 sites. Of these, two are actually water disposal sites with
a minor amount of dissolved acid gas (“sour water”
disposal), while a strong acid gas solution is injected at the
other 4 operations. Pure acid gas, with minor hydrocarbons, is
injected at all other operations. At 27 sites the acid gas is
injected into deep saline aquifers in regional-scale flow systems
confined by regional-scale aquitards. At 17 sites injection took
or takes place in depleted oil and/or gas reservoirs, and at 4
sites the acid gas is injected into the underlying water leg of
depleted oil and gas reservoirs. To date, more CO2
than H2S has been injected to date into deep geological formations
in western Canada (Figure 2b).
In their pure state, CO2
and H2S have similar phase equilibria (Figure 2c). The phase behavior
of the acid gas binary system is represented by a continuous series
of two-phase envelopes that separate the liquid and gas phases.
If water is present, both CO2 and H2S
form hydrates at temperatures up to 10ºC for CO2
and more than 30ºC for H2S. If there is too little water,
the water is dissolved in the acid gas and hydrates will generally
not form. The properties of the acid gas mixture are used in facility
design and operation to optimize storage and minimize risk. The
acid gas is separated, compressed, transported and injected at
temperatures in the system generally greater than 35°C to
avoid hydrate formation, which could plug the pipelines and injection
well. Usually a four-stage compression system is used to dewater
the acid gas to water content lower than the saturation limit,
to avoid corrosion. The acid gas is injected into the formation
in a dense-fluid phase, to increase storage capacity and decrease
buoyancy (Figure 2c).
The selection of an acid-gas injection site needs
to address various considerations that relate to: proximity to
sour oil and gas production that is the source of acid gas; confinement
of the injected gas; effect of acid gas on the rock matrix; protection
of energy, mineral and groundwater resources; equity interests;
wellbore integrity and public safety. Knowledge of the geological
setting and its characteristics is critical to assess the integrity
of the host formation or reservoir, and the short- and long-term
fate of the injected acid gas. The injection zone must be free
of natural fractures, and the injection pressure must be below
a certain threshold to ensure that fracturing is not induced.
All the wells and their status in the vicinity of the injection
well must be identified to ensure that there is no potential for
leakage through existing wells. To avoid diffuse gas migration
through the pore space of the overlying caprock or aquitard, the
difference between the injection pressure and the pressure in
the confining layer must be less than the caprock threshold displacement
pressure.
Acid gas injection in western Canada occurs over
a wide range of aquifer and reservoir characteristics and operating
conditions. The shallow injection zones (705 m to 913 m depth)
correspond actually to sour water injection. At 29 operations
the acid gas is injected into deep carbonate formations, mostly
platform carbonates but also a few carbonate reefs, with the remainder
into sandstone rocks sites, respectively. Shales constitute the
overlying confining unit (caprock) in most cases, with tight limestones,
evaporites and anhydrites for the remainder.
The range of depth, temperature and pressure,
and the rock characteristics of these injection operations show
that CO2 can be safely injected at great
depths, increasing thus the storage capacity by achieving higher
CO2 density. Safety is also increased
by lowering CO2 buoyancy, hence the CO2
migration potential, and by lengthening the flow path and increasing
the number of barriers to migration, such as intervening aquitards.
The porosity and permeability of the acid-gas injection formations
in western Canada are significantly less, and pressures and temperatures
are significantly higher than those of the Utsira aquifer in the
North Sea at Sleipner West, where CO2
is injected into a weakly-compacted formation in an off-shore
cratonic basin. These porosity, permeability, pressure and temperature
values are much more representative of aquifers and reservoirs
in continental sedimentary basins that have undergone compaction
and erosion, like those between the Rocky Mountains and the Appalachians
in North America, where CO2 injection
and geological storage on a large scale is most likely to be implemented
in Canada and the United States.
Acid gas injection operations represent a perfect
commercial-scale analogue to geological storage of CO2.
Beside western Canada, acid gas is currently injected into deep
geological formation in the United States, mostly in Wyoming.
Plans are under way to use acid gas injection for developing the
huge reserves around the Caspian Sea, in the Middle East and in
Indonesia. The experience of these operations shows that gas storage
in geological media is a mature technology that can successfully
be expanded to and applied in large-scale operations that will
reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere
from large CO2 point sources. The technology
developed in the engineering aspects (i.e., design, materials,
leakage prevention and safety) can be easily adopted for large-scale
operations for CO2 geological storage,
since a CO2 stream with no H2S is less
corrosive and hazardous. However, before large-scale implementation,
a series of questions need addressing, the most important ones
relating to the short- and long-term fate of the injected CO2.
The acid-gas injection operations in western
Canada provide the opportunity to learn about the characteristics
and safety of these operations, and represent a unique opportunity
to investigate the feasibility of CO2
geological storage. For example, information about these operations
can be used for the screening and identification of future sites
for the geological storage of CO2. The
Alberta Geological Survey and the Alberta Research Council have
compiled all the information about these operations that exists
with the regulatory agencies in western Canada. This compilation
is available to member countries of IEA GHG (see Greenhouse Issues
number 66, Report PH4/18). The two organizations currently continue
the effort to complete and expand this characterization. In addition,
efforts are under way to establish a monitoring program at one
of these sites.
For further information, contact: Stefan Bachu,
Alberta Geological Survey, Alberta Energy and Utilities Board,
AB, Canada, Stefan.Bachu@gov.ab.ca or Bill Gunter, Alberta Research
Council, AB, Canada, Gunter@arc.ab.ca
Back to Top
CO2NET, the European Carbon Dioxide Network,
facilitating co-operation on CO2 geological
storage, CO2 capture and zero emissions
technology options has been successfully launched with overwhelming
support from around Europe and further afield.
From an initial 29 members, there are currently
some 54 organisations in 16 European countries plus Australia
contributing to the Network with over 200 individuals actively
involved in its work. These organisations range from major multinational
companies to SME’s, together with many Research Institutes
and Universities.
The launch of CO2NET took place at the European
Research 2002 conference held in Brussels from 11th – 13th
November 2002 to mark the commencement of the European Union’s
Sixth Framework Research Programme, 2002 to 2006.
Despite fierce competition, CO2NET was selected
for a Participation event and CO2NET with the SACS project were
chosen as a joint exhibition entry.
At the Participation event, nine CO2NET-associated European projects
on capture, storage and zero emissions presented their work and
results to date. Copies of these presentations may be found on
the Network’s website www.CO2net.com
There have been two other major events to date
and much activity throughout the Network’s work programme,
which is already achieving deliverables ahead of schedule, as
well as undertaking significant additional commitments for the
European Commission.
On 8th January 2003, on behalf of the European
Commission, CO2NET organised the Framework 6 (FP6) Opportunities
Seminar, which was held at the DTI Conference Centre, London and
hosted by Trade Partners UK. Open to all, over 160 people took
this unique opportunity to find out more about details of the
FP6 First Call and the CO2 Funding Opportunities.
Three presentations from the European Commission
set the scene. Proposal ideas in the fields of Pre- and Post-Combustion
Integrated Projects, Networks of Excellence on capture and storage
and Co-ordination actions were presented. As a networking opportunity
to identify new partners, 24 organisations, including several
from candidate member states, took the opportunity to present
a profile of their expertise and capabilities. All presentations
from this seminar may be found on www.CO2net.com
The Network’s first deliverable and third
Network event was the Work Planning Meeting, hosted by the Institute
of Petroleum Engineering, Heriot Watt University, UK from 8th
-10th April 2003. Fifty-four attendees represented 34 members
and all are extremely active and supportive of the objectives
of the Network. To cover the meeting schedule, parallel sessions
were held throughout the three days. The excellent facilities
and support provided by the Institute set the standard for the
Network’s future events.
All aspects of the Network’s work programme
were addressed during the meeting. Tasks and responsibilities
for delivery of results were dispersed throughout the membership.
The main elements of the work programme are:
R&D Strategy
The Network provides a “think-tank”
of expertise, information for policy-making and facilitates the
decision-making process at European and national level. A key
element of the Network’s role within Europe is to assess
and define R&D strategy.
The first year’s work is to provide an
overview of the state-of-the-art and recommendations for further
RTD with a view to the second call for proposals within the European
Framework Programme 6 (FP6), expected in the autumn 2004. For
the work to be used by the European Commission, a final draft
is planned for presentation at the next Network event in April
2004.
Brainstorming sessions in the six strategy work
groups on CO2 sources, CO2
Capture, CO2 Transport, Storage through
Enhanced Coal Bed Methane, Storage through Enhanced Oil Recovery
and Aquifer storage produced report outlines, which focus on state-of-the-art,
definition of the main issues, identification of the technology
gaps and recommendations for further R&D.
The group input is now being finalised to compile
a draft recommendation report for the European Commission. The
outcome of the first call for FP6 projects will be integrated
into the final recommendations. This input is available to members
for comment.
Research Projects, Skills and IPR Database
To facilitate research collaboration and map
European centres of excellence, a research project, skills and
IPR database is being developed, building on and continuing the
data gathering already undertaken by others, such as IEA GHG.
A global overview of required activities is complete.
Country representatives, associated project owners and coordinators
have been engaged. The database inventory was agreed and task
delegation was completed at the meeting.
Developing and populating the database, which
will eventually be available in the public domain on the CO2NET
website is taking place now, with presentation of the first set-up
planned at the next meeting in April 2004. If you have a research
project and / or expertise, which should be on this CO2
capture and storage database, please send your contact details
to the Network at info@CO2net.com and the work team will contact
you.
Training and Education
Building on previous work included in the associated
European projects, the training and education team is developing
training materials and educational activities to increase awareness
and acceptance of the technologies for CO2
capture and storage.
Data input and collection is particularly important.
Ideally, access to third party experience is needed and printed
brochures should be available. These are not currently budgeted
and offers of sponsorship, financial or in-kind, to fund this
work would be welcome.
Brochures are planned for: Experts on “Technical
lessons learned”, NGO’s on “Risk management”
and the Public “On CO2 Sequestration”.
Detailed brochure content was agreed at the meeting. Course material
for professional interactive education is planned. Future communication
strategy will be developed.
Education and training material is expected to
be downloadable from the Network website. The first of these,
the brochure for experts is planned for December 2003.
Best Practice and Risk Assessment
The Network is assessing best practice to lay
the foundations for benchmarking and standardisation. To facilitate
identification and review of best practice documents for CO2
storage, a questionnaire is being developed to collect potential
best practice information from projects that have not yet produced
best practice documents. If you have information to contribute
to this review, please send your contact details to the Network
at info@CO2net.com and the work team will contact you.
The members began initial discussions on risk
acceptance criteria for CO2 storage.
Preliminary results will be published on the CO2NET forum on the
website and CO2NET members will be invited to comment.
Technical Reports
A technical library of documents will eventually
be available in the public domain of the Network’s website.
Volumes on CO2 capture and CO2
storage are being prepared. Content details and chapter authors
are agreed.
Technical Presentations
The technical session rounded off the three-day
meeting and included updated information on:
• Saline Aquifer CO2 Storage,
• Geological Storage of CO2 from
Fossil Fuel Combustion - European potential,
• Natural Analogues for the Storage of CO2,
• CO2 Separation - Gas Turbine
Technologies,
• Lime carbonation-calcination cycles to capture CO2
from combustion gases,
• Risk analysis of long-term storage in geological formations,
• Reduction of CO2 emission using
storage in coal seams,
• Advanced Tools for Improved Coalbed Methane Recovery,
• Absorption technology for CO2-capture,
• Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Strategies
• and recent CO2 related developments
within member organisations.
The presentations are available to Network members
on the website.
CO2NET Website
The core of the Network is a sophisticated website
that embraces interactive forum technology to provide real-time
communication links and is the prime vehicle for CO2NET
members to discuss, share and exchange information. The website
can be found at www.CO2net.com.
As the other work tasks in CO2NET deliver their
material, this site will become a significant repository of information
and expertise ranging from the research projects, skills and IPR
database, state-of-the-art reviews, RTD strategies, best practice
codes to technical briefing documents on all aspects of CO2,
designed for a range of stakeholders from the general public to
technical experts.
The website is now fully operational, completing
the Network’s second deliverable. Throughout the three-day
meeting, website familiarisation and training was provided to
all participants. The website is linked to interactive forum software
to enable direct website communication between members and will
trial an electronic workshop in late 2004 to facilitate the development
of the European Research Area “Virtual Centre of Excellence”
for CO2 storage, capture, reduction and
elimination; a Network goal towards establishing safe, technically
feasible, socially acceptable CO2 mitigation
options for wide scale introduction.
CO2NET Events
The 2004 Annual Seminar and next meeting of the
Network membership is scheduled for 20th – 22nd April 2004
at TNO in Utrecht, the Netherlands to discuss and agree state
of the art and best practice, forward actions concerning RTD and
demonstration projects, research, competencies and IPR database
content, release of information into the public domain, competency
gaps and future interactive web meetings.
If you are interested in attending the biannual
events in 2004 and 2005, becoming involved in the work of CO2NET
and your organisation is not already a member, membership is still
open. Membership applications can be made on-line through the
website at www.CO2net.com.
Different membership fees to October 2005 apply
for the scale and nature of organisations. Membership is now available
for non-EU organisations involved in EU CO2
related projects.
CO2NET Contact Details
Please address enquiries to: CO2NET, c/o Technology
Initiatives Ltd., 18 Church Road, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, TN1 1JP,
UK. Tel: +44 1892 540820, Fax: +44 1892 540824 info@CO2net.com
Back to Top
|
