Final report for One North East And NEPIC 21/12/10 - The Carbon ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The case for a Tees CCS networkFinal ReportTable 3 Description of onshore transport networksNetworkdescriptionAnchor-only Small Medium LargeNumber ofsourcesPeak capacity(Mt/yr)Onshore pipelinedistanceCapital cost foronshorepipeline(s)1 5 8 375 14 22 265 km 19 km 22 km 37 km£7.5 m £46 m £48 m £60 m3.5.2 Offshore pipelineChoices for the offshore pipeline will depend inter alia on routing issues, and engineeringjudgements on the potential for line pack, flexibility, stress management, availability of wallthicknesses, and vulnerability to incidental damage offshore. Larger diameter pipelinesminimise pressure drops, which may make operation easier to manage.For this report, the following assumptions are used, taken from interim outputs from theparallel engineering study 61 .61 See Appendix.24
The case for a Tees CCS networkFinal ReportTable 4 The costs of the offshore CO 2 pipeline (200 km from Tees Valley to the NorthSea) and combined network (inclusive of owners costs and rights-of-way).Network description Anchor-only Small Medium LargeNetwork physicalcapacity5 Mt CO 2 /yr 14 Mt CO 2 /yr 22 Mt CO 2 /yr 26 Mt CO 2 /yrModelled diameteroffshore500 mm600 mm900 mm900 mm(for 200 km length)(20”)(24”)(36”)(36”)Capital cost foroffshore pipelines 62 £333 m £365 m £485 m £485 mCombined capitalcost for network(onshore andoffshore pipelinesand shorelinecompression)Additional capital costfor network comparedtoanchor/demonstrationonly£346 m £425 m £546 m £562 m£0 £79 m £201 m £216 mCost of service(assuming users pay £12/t £7.3/t £7.4/t £7.4/tequally for access) 63The emitters on Teesside form a dense cluster of sources, so that distances for theonshore network are small. Even a “Large” scenario for onshore CO 2 pipeline network inthe Tees Valley has a capital cost of £60 m and combined pipeline length of only 76 km. 64Small distances, the opportunities to use brownfield land, a favourable planning regime 65 ,and a coastal location may significantly accelerate pipeline permitting relative to deepinland onshore sites where proximity to residential areas or use of greenfield land maybecome significant hurdles.The offshore pipeline cost increases with its length and diameter. The length relates to thedistance to storage site, plus any necessary routing correction. Large diameter pipelinesopen the potential for transport of large volumes of CO 2 , without the need for excessivecompression. 6662 Includes owners costs and rights-of-way.63 Assumes 20 year economic lifetime, 10% weighted average cost of capital.64 The onshore distance compares very favourably with that for the proposed CO 2 pipeline infrastructure for theYorkshire and Humber region.65See for examplehttp://www.teesvalleyunlimited.gov.uk/economyplanningenvironment/documents/north%20and%20south%20tees%20industrial%20development%20framework.pdf66 A range of possible offshore pipeline diameters can be modelled – see Appendix for details.25
Page 1 and 2: Project NameDocument NameDeveloping
Page 3 and 4: The case for a Tees CCS networkFina
Page 9: The case for a Tees CCS networkFina
Page 20 and 21: Annual emissions (MtCO2/yr)The case
Page 46 and 47: Commercial risk profileThe case for
Page 56 and 57: POLICY & REGULATORYTECHNICAL & OPER
Page 58 and 59: 5 Financing a Tees Valley CCS netwo
Page 74 and 75: 6.6 The role of the EU and UK Gover

Final report for One North East And NEPIC 21/12/10 - The Carbon ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?