CO 2 Sequestration Options for California Larry Myer WESTCARB Technical Director California Energy Commission (916) 551-1873; [email protected] ETAAC.

CO2 Sequestration Options for California

Larry MyerWESTCARB Technical DirectorCalifornia Energy Commission(916) 551-1873; [email protected]

ETAAC SubcomittteeMay 10, 2007

2

Outline

Introduction to CO2 sequestration

Geologic sequestration

– Technology description

– Risks, costs, monitoring

WESTCARB

– Results for California

– Phase II status

– Role of CEC in Phase III

3

Terrestrial and Geologic Sequestration are Both Options

Terrestrial: Sequestration of carbon by natural processes in forests, plants, and soil; CO2 source independent

Geologic: Sequestration of CO2 in deep saline formations, oil and gas reservoirs and coal-beds; requires industrial processes to capture at source and transport via pipeline

Technology for both options is available and being implemented

4

Advantages and Disadvantages of Sequestration Options

Terrestrial sequestration is low cost and has environmental co-benefits, but capacity and storage life are limited compared to geologic option

Geologic sequestration offers large capacity and potential permanence, but capture costs are high and assurance of no adverse environmental impacts is required

5

Geologic Storage Mechanisms

Physical, hydrodynamic, trapping

Dissolution

Phase trapping

Mineralization

Surface adsorption

6

Primary Storage Options

Oil and gas reservoirs

– Storage with Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR), Enhanced Gas Recovery (EGR)

– Storage only

Deep, unminable coal beds

– Storage with Enhanced Coal Bed Methane (ECBM) recovery

Saline formations

– Storage only

7

Geologic Sequestration Is Already Under Way

Statoil injects 1x106 tons per year at Sleipner

BP to inject 0.8x106 tons per year at In Salah

EnCana EOR project with CO2 storage in the Weyburn field

8

International Consensus on Geologic Sequestration Issues Provided by IPCC Report

“ With appropriate site selection informed by available subsurface information, a monitoring program to detect problems, a regulatory system, and the appropriate use of remediation methods to stop or control CO2 releases if they arise, the local health, safety, and environment risks of geological storage would be comparable to risks of current activities such as natural gas storage, EOR, and deep underground disposal of acid gas.”

Availability of sinks, capacity

Technology readiness

Costs

Risks

Monitoring

Remediation

IPCC, 2005

9

Many Lines of Evidence Indicate Storage Can Be Safe and Secure

Natural analogues

– Oil and gas

– CO2 formations

Industrial analogues

– Natural gas storage

– CO2 EOR

– Liquid waste disposal

Monitoring existing projects

– Sleipner

– WeyburnLocation of Natural Gas Storage

Projects in the U.S.

10

Monitoring will be a Key Element of Geologic Sequestration Projects

The oil and gas industry has developed highly sophisticated geophysical technologies which are directly applicable to geologic sequestration

Additional approaches should, and are, being developed

Monitoring requirements have not been established, but monitoring over the operational life of a geologic sequestration project using current technology would cost only ~$0.10/ton CO2

11

Potential Release Pathways and Remediation Measures

(IPCC Special Report on CCS)

12

WESTCARB: West Coast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership

Opportunities for terrestrial and geologic CO2 storage are being evaluated

Over 70 participating organizations

Phase I (complete): focus on regional assessments

Phase II (underway): focus on pilot studies

Phase III (coming): pre-commercial geologic field test

Midwest

Southeast

Illinois

Basin

SouthwestWest Coast

PlainsBig Sky

13

Afforestation and Fuel Management are Major Terrestrial Opportunities in California

40 year sequestrationpotential

40 year marginal costs

Lands suitable for fuelremoval

14

Major Geologic Storage Opportunities in California

Gas reservoir capacity: 1.7GtOil reservoir capacity: 3.6Gt

15

Supply Curves for Geologic Storage Improve Cost Estimates

CO2 source characterization

Capture cost estimation (about 80% of total cost)

CO2 storage capacity estimation

Transportation cost estimation

Source-sink matching

Matching sources to sinks(From H. Herzog, MIT)

Marginal Cost Curve for California, Current Conditions

16

California Afforestation Supply Curve

Supply Curve for Carbon Sequestration on Rangelandsover a 40-Year Period

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 60,000,000 70,000,000 80,000,000 90,000,000

Cumulative tonnes CO2/ year(average per year over 40 years)

Cost

($)/

ton

ne C

O2

17

Pilots Planned in Arizona, California, Oregon, and Washington

Pilots are representative of best sequestration options, unique technologies and approaches, in region

Pilots involve site-specific focus for– Testing technologies

– Assessing capacity

– Defining costs

– Assessing leakage risks

– Gauging public acceptance

– Testing regulatory requirements

– Validating monitoring methods

18

Rosetta Resources CO2 Storage Pilot

Lead industrial partner: Rosetta Resources

Validate sequestration potential of California Central Valley sediments

Test CO2 Storage Enhanced Gas Recovery

Inject about 2000 tons at about 3400ft depth

Focus on monitoring

19

Shasta County (CA) Terrestrial Pilot

Validation of forest growth type for rangelands

Develop and test fuel management activities; baselines and measurement and monitoring

Validate emissions reductions from conservation and sustainable forest management practices

20

Results Inform Current Policy Decisions

AB 1925 requires Energy Commission to prepare a report to Legislature on “recommendations for how the state can develop parameters to accelerate the adoption of cost-effective geologic sequestration strategies for the long-term management of industrial carbon dioxide”

AB 32– Requires statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990

levels by 2020 (target specified in Executive Order S-3-05– Electricity generated out of state “counts” in state total– Authorizes market-based compliance mechanisms

21

WESTCARB Phase III

10 year effort, beginning Oct 2007

Pre-commercial projects of scale – up to 1x106 tons CO2 sequestered per year

Focus on geologic sequestration

Significant interest expressed by several companies in California

Department of Energy Advances Commercialization of Climate Change Technology

DOE to Provide Over $450 Million to Support the Deployment of Carbon Sequestration Technologies in North America

(Oct 31, 2006 DOE Fossil Energy Techline)

22

Summary

The technological tools needed to carry out large scale CO2 sequestration are available

Results of WESTCARB Phase I show major opportunities in California in terrestrial and geologic sequestration

Field work in WESTCARB Phase II expected to commence by year-end for4 of 5 pilots

Results are proving timely for CA policy on GHG mitigation