Defining CCS Ready: An Approach to An International Definition

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 3: Transport Ready Plant Definition• Space needs around the plant for retrofitting of pipes and other infrastructuraldevelopment for ease of transport are still relevant based on technical and landdevelopments;• New approvals or permits for maintenance of transport readiness are obtained orrenewed as necessary;• Public engagement continues, and concerns of the community are addressed; and• Strong business relationships with transport equipment and service providers aremaintained.With the potential for significant increases in CO 2 transport, regulatory agencies arebeginning to reconsider existing regulations for CO 2 transport. For example, the UK HSE isconsidering the hazards of and standards for the conveyance of liquid, dense phase, andsupercritical CO 2 in pipelines, and will develop CO 2 classifications and pipeline safetyguidelines accordingly. 82 Key to maintaining transport readiness will be monitoring changesto regulations and best practice guidance.CCS Ready can be maintained by regular assessment of the following transport-relevantcriteria, and adapting CO 2 transportation plans as needed:• Project cost and timing considerations;• Technical developments with respect to viability, costs, and capacity needs;• Regulatory framework pertaining to technical, environmental, route development, andhealth and safety requirements;• Public opposition and continuous engagement; and• Procurement sources and development of business relationships.3.4 RecommendationsWide deployment of CCS will likely require a transport regulatory authority to approvepipeline construction and to oversee commercial practices and terms. As the CO 2 pipelineinfrastructure evolves, regulatory policies will not only facilitate rights-of-way negotiationsbut also help provide assurance to pipeline developers for infrastructural developmentnecessary for CO 2 transport. 83Jurisdictions may wish to clearly designate a commercial regulatory body for CO 2 pipelines(either with existing regulatory agencies or a separate agency). For example, in the US,there is no national commercial regulatory body for CO 2 pipelines, although the US FederalUS FERC regulates rates on interstate and gas pipelines. The composition of the transportedCO 2 and the construction and operation of the CO 2 pipelines and other transport methodswill also have to be regulated in some manner to ensure public safety and provide for easiertranshipments of CO 2 among various pipeline and other transport systems. It is also possible82 Paragraphs 83 and 84, pg. 30 of U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change (U.K. DECC). (2009a). Carbon capturereadiness (CCR): A guidance note for Section 36 Electricity Act 1989 consent applications (Publication no. URN 09D/810).London, UK: Author.83 Carnegie Mellon University CCSReg Project, Department of Engineering and Public Policy (CMU). (2009). Carboncapture and sequestration: Framing issues for regulation (CCSReg Interim Report). Pittsburgh, PA: Author.23 February 2010 46
Chapter 3: Transport Ready Plant Definitionthat a specific CCS-related regulatory body can integrate all regulatory aspects of CCSReady and CCS in the future, including transport and storage readiness.In addition to regulations, the government also might choose to have a role in financing andconstructing CO 2 pipelines as a means of accelerating their development. Until the economicgap is closed between the cost of CCS and the price of carbon, government participation maybe needed to potentially finance and, possibly, take an equity position in the development oflarger CO 2 pipeline networks. In general, it is expected that the experience of building naturalgas and oil pipeline infrastructure across the world over the past 80 years will provide someguidance for building a CO 2 pipeline network in any jurisdiction.If large volumes of CO 2 are to be stored, a large pipeline network will likely be needed.Coordinated development of CO 2 pipeline networks by interested parties—possibly undergovernment oversight—could have a number of advantages, including: 84• The potential of higher volumes per individual line segment leading to lower per-unitcosts;• Reduced proliferation of pipelines with a lower environmental footprint;• The number of storage sites can be minimized and thus those candidates with the bestgeotechnical quality can be given priority; and• An open-access pipeline can provide fair space allocation to smaller entities, along withmultiple EOR markets and supply points to provide choice and volume security toparticipants.It is feared that operators will be unable to exploit economies of scale due to lack ofcoordination and capital, 85 and smaller pipelines may be built due to short-term commercialpressures. Supplementing such smaller pipelines to meet an increase in the volume ofsequestered CO 2 would result in a higher lifetime system cost. Coordination may thus berequired to facilitate a more optimum initial sizing of the transport infrastructure. A centralinstitution overseeing CO 2 pipeline networks would be beneficial to improve coordinationamong parties.For example, as part of the EU Flagship Programme of 12 European CCS demonstrationplants, the European Technology Plant for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP) hasencouraged a plan for a continental CO 2 transport network. It is thought that regional“mainline” pipelines with a high CO 2 volume capacity will accept a supply from contributorypipelines from a range of EU member states. It is also thought that the basic CO 2 pipelineinfrastructure may mimic the network of natural gas pipelines in Europe today, albeit withfewer subsidiary connections. 8684 Alberta Carbon Capture and Storage Development Council. (2009). Accelerating carbon capture and storageimplementation in Alberta (Final Report). Edmonton, Alberta: Author.85 NERA Economic Consulting. (2009). Developing a regulatory framework for CCS transportation infrastructure (vol. 1 of 2)(Report no. URN 09D/596). London, UK: Author.86 Coleman, D.L.. (2009). Transport infrastructure rationale for carbon dioxide capture & storage in the European Union to2050. Energy Procedia, 1, 1673-1681. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2009.01.219.23 February 2010 47
Page 1: Defining CCS Ready: AnApproach to A
Page 4 and 5: PrefacePrefaceThe Global CCS Instit
Page 6 and 7: Acknowledgements and CitationsThe c
Page 8: Executive SummaryThe components spe
Page 12 and 13: Executive SummaryExhibit ES-3: Illu
Page 15 and 16: Chapter 1: IntroductionDevelopers o
Page 17 and 18: Chapter 1: Introductionor more, lic
Page 19 and 20: Chapter 1: Introductionrelatively n
Page 21 and 22: Chapter 1: IntroductionExhibit 1-3:
Page 23 and 24: Chapter 1: IntroductionJustificatio
Page 25 and 26: CO2 Transport Ready PlantExhibit 1-
Page 27 and 28: Chapter 2: Capture Ready Plant Defi
Page 43 and 44: Chapter 3: Transport Ready Plant De
Page 47 and 48: 3.3.2 Environmental, Safety, and Ot
Page 51: Chapter 3: Transport Ready Plant De
Page 55 and 56: Chapter 4: Storage Ready Plant Defi
Page 57 and 58: • Site DesignChapter 4: Storage R
Page 75 and 76: Appendix A: Summary of Reviewed Exi
Page 83 and 84: Appendix B: Technology Design Optio
Page 103 and 104:
Appendix B: Technology Design Optio
Page 105 and 106:
Appendix B: Technology Design Optio
Page 107 and 108:
Appendix C: Policy Considerations a
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix D: AcronymsAppendix D: Acr
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix D: AcronymsNGONO XNSBTFNSP
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix E: ReferencesInternational
Page 137 and 138:
Appendix E: ReferencesIntergovernme
Page 139 and 140:
Appendix E: ReferencesNational Coal
Page 141 and 142:
Appendix E: Referencesfrom http://w
show all

Defining CCS Ready: An Approach to An International Definition

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?