IEA CCS Summer School

TransportationJames Watt, AMEC

2

Agenda

Current Experience

Compressors

Pipelines

Design issues for transport

Shipping

Infrastructure development

3

4

5

CO2 Source CompressionPipeline/

Boosting

Compression/

PumpingWellhead

Reservoir

CO2 Recovery

Oil Refining

Fuel Power Plant

Grid

Requirements

Emission

ControlCapture Dehydration Compression

Pipeline /

Boosting

Well

Boosting

(optional)

Sequestration

site

Storage Feedback

Emitter drivers

Grid Requirements

Lo

ad

Time

Dynamics are different

Power plants are not constant emitters,

they follow grid requirements producing

power between 40 and 90% of the time

Well heads and storage sites are

expected to prefer continuous operation

6

US Pipelines

CO2 Pipelines

CO2 Pipelines - planned

5000km, natural and anthropogenic sources

7

Transport Compression

6000 km, predominantly in the

US and Canada

50 million tonnes per annum

10 incidents

Typically dense phase or

supercritical fluid

Typical compressors used on

other CO2 processes

8

Compressor Train Options

Variable Speed Drive

Electric

Gas Turbine

Steam Turbine

Diesel/Fuel Oil

Natural Gas

Syngas/H2

Liquid fuels

Integrally Geared

Axial

Centrifugal – single

shaft

Centrifugal -

multiples

Reciprocating

PumpLiquefaction

Air

Water

Chilling

Closed loop

Open loop

Sea water

Chilled water

Refrigerant

Carbon Dioxide

(sidestream)

Mol Sieve

Glycol

Joule-Thomsom

Absorption

Compression –

Liquid drop out

Water content

Inhibitor injection

DRIVE TYPE PRIME MOVERCOOLING

INTER & AFTER STAGEDEHYDRATION HYDRATE CONTROL

9

Things to watch for,…

Basic configuration depends on

Flexibility

Reliability

Vendor data

Pipeline specification

Parasitic load requirements

In the future compression will

become more integrated

Dehydration technology and

requirements

Glycol, mol sieve, absorbers

Water content

10

Flexibility

Process flexibility How well can the system adjust to flow

changes

Operational flexibility How well can a system adjust to outages,

reliability, composition changes, failures

and start-up

Not just about load factors Flexibility can be caused by the store

Capture plant operating envelope

Pipeline capability (re-use)

Maintenance

Impact of reliability issues

Gaps in performance envelopes

Compressor operating ranges

Compressor inlet/outlet requirements

Multiple emitter impacts

Start-up/Shut-down -20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 50 100 150 200 250

CCGT Uncoupled CCS

Compressor CurveOperating Points

11

Typical regulations and standards

US

“49 CFR 195, Transportation of

Hazardous Liquids by Pipeline”

“49 CFR 192, Transportation of

Natural and Other Gas by Pipelines:

Minimum Federal Safety Standard”

Canada

“Z662-07, Oil and Gas Pipeline

Systems”

Regulations specify design codes

US regulations require the use of

any named code or specification

49 CFR 192 is sometimes also

applied given a release is gaseous not

liquid

BS PD

8010:1

BS3293, 3518, 3974,

4515-1, 4515-2,

4882, 6651, 7361-

1, 4515-2, 4882,

6651, 7361-1,

7910

EN 287, 288,

10204, 10208,

10224, 13480,

60079-10, 60079-

14, ISO 3183-3,

PD 5500

API5L, 6A, RP 5L2

ASMEB16.5, B16.9,

B16.11, B16.20,

B16.21, B16.47,

B31.3, B31.8,

Section VIII

Division 1

MSSSP-44

ASTMA193/A193M

A194/A194M

A312/A312M

A320/A320M

A790/7990M

B423-03

B444-03 NFPANFPA 30

NACEMR-0175

IGETD/1

12

Critical Issues

Process Conditions

Properties

Operating conditions at entry and exit

Flow calculation method

Transient (surge) modelling

Flow characteristics

Typical carbon dioxide compositions

Two phase flow conditions

Piping design

Fracture propagation

Blow down assembly design

Blow down rate basis and calculation

Linebreak controls

Pig trap

Depth of cover

Routing topography

Safety & environmental

Ambient/ground temperature

Blow down rate basis and calculation

Dispersion pattern

Frequency and position of block valves

Leak detection systems

Line inventory

Measurement

Custody transfer methods

Moisture analysis

Material selection

Pipeline materials

Carbon equivalent

Hardness value

Fracture strength

Valve, fitting and trim types

Seal, packing materials of construction

Valve actuators

Cleaning and strength testing

Cleaning

Hydrostatic testing/drying/dewatering

Construction techniques

Corrosion monitoring

External corrosion

Fracture propagation

Special construction and welding

Stress relief

Pipeline Operation

Refrigeration effects during start-up/blow down

Start-up/Shutdown methodology

Line pressuring

Requirement for blow down noise control

Environmental considerations

Operational problems

Operational Safety

13

Key Issues

Caron Dioxide + water

Carbonic acid

Weak acid

Acidity increases with temperatrue and pressure

Clathrates (hydrates) can form at ambient temperatures and relatively low

pressures.

Depressurisation issues

Fracture characteristics of pipelines

Contamination influences

Material influences

14

Impurities

P-T Phase Envelope

Carbon Dioxide - Nitrogen

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

-140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40

Temperature,°C

Pre

ss

ure

, b

ar

CO2 0.1 N2 0.005 N2 0.03 N2 0.04 N2 0.05 N2 0.025 N2 0.06 N2

15

Entry Specification

EU’s Dynamis project has published a proposed entry specification

Based on contaminant issues around

Physical properties

Changes in critical point

HSE issues of contaminants on release

Geologic storage requirements

Corrosion

Provides reduced variability of fluids in a network

Sets part of the design basis for capture plants

EU Dynamis Proposed Entry Specifciation

15

16

Impact of material issues

17

Re-use of existing infrastructure

Existing Natural Gas network

30 – 94 bar

Not suitable for dense phase

Transport of gas is low

Offshore pipelines are higher

design pressures

Distance offshore is a factor

Onshore booster stations can be fitted

Offshore boosters would require a

platform

Existing pipelines are aging

Re-classify a pipeline

Re-do all calculations to appropriate

standard

Inspection and repair

18

19

Shipping vs. Pipelines

Over very long distance

pipelines become less

economical

Conditions are different

-50C, and 6.5 bar

Comparable to,

LNG, -160C, ~atm

LPG, -104C, 6 bar

20

Integration

Could integrate into

infrastructure

Would need storage

Valuable buffer for network

Typically 1.5x volume

Flow

Enables import or export

Enables remote emitters

Can be used to provide stable

flow to stores

The following example

considers Teesside

21

What do you need for shipping?

Ships!!! Plural, more than one

Investment cost

Direct to store

Not flexible, hook-up issues

Not suitable for long injection periods

Import to pipeline network

Flexible

Enables stranded/remote assets

Needs two terminals

Intermediate storage

Compression at source

Storage vessels

Recompression at pipeline/storages

Expensive!

Isle of Grain LNG Phase 1

Typical arrangement of CO2 terminal?

22

Shipping

• Consider Import / Export potential

• Import enables utilisation of a Tees based CO2 pipeline into a storage

site

• Removes flexibility/variance in flow rates through network

• Increases volume transported – reduces costs

• Export enables ship based export for EOR purposes

• Both require expensive terminals and ship fleet

• Terminal c. £150 million CAPEX at import/export points

• Shipping is scenario dependent £170 – 270 million CAPEX

• Significant buffer storage c. 60,000 tonnes

• £5.9 – 7.3/tonne CO2

23

Shipping Conclusions - Teesside

• Transport only costs

• For 10 million tonnes per year the 30 year relative cost is

• Import 4.47 £/te CO2

• For 5 million tonnes per year the 30 year relative cost is

• Import 7.32 £/te CO2

• Export 7.34 £/te CO2

• Influence on network

• Everyone pays

• 1 to 13% increase in network costs

• Importer pays

• 11 to 15% decrease (benefit for onshore emitters)

• Additional onshore CAPEX spend 5-7%

• Import beneficial to network as long as the importer pays the

shipping and terminal cost

• EOR will change this if CO2 has a commodity value

24

Common Infrastructure

Common infrastructure costs are the most difficult to cost or analyse

The assumptions aren’t often clear

Many are driven algorithms using GIS, which aren’t well discussed

Economics differ

Preference for comparison based on overnight cost per tonne

Followed by the complex economics

Modelled cost per tonne

Humber region £1.7/t

Scotland c. £8/t

Tees £2-4/t depending on storage target

Influences on cost per tonne

Period of operation

Scenario’s

Emitter size

Right sizing of pipelines

25

Cost of Infrastructure Schemes

26

James Watt

Process Engineering Manager

AMEC

Lingfield House

Lingfield Point

Darlington, County Durham

DL1 1RW, United Kingdom

Tel +44 (0)1325 744400 Fax +44 (0)1325 744404

DDI +44 (0)1325 744652

mailto:james.watt@amec.com

www.amec.com