A new algebraic pinch analysis tool for optimising CO2 capture, utilisation and storage

Rapid industrialization and urbanization in the 20th century have led to increasing volumes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere[...]

The Royal Dutch Shell Group (Shell)1 was one of the first energy companies to acknowledge the threat of climate change - to call for action by governments; our industry and energy users; and to take action ourselves. Shell's strategy: to expand our alternative energies portfolio, while investing in advanced CO2 solutions in order to improve our ability to manage emissions from our hydrocarbon business. Measures to manage future emissions will include developing new technologies to capture and store CO2 underground. The pursuit of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies allows Shell to play an important and leading role towards addressing the need for an increasing worldwide demand for energy, while at the same time dealing with the need to reduce global emissions. No single universal policy or technology will solve the CO2 challenge. Therefore, various CCS solutions will need to be considered within a portfolio of measures to reduce global CO2 emissions while assisting a transition towards a low-carbon energy future. Shell seeks to position itself as part of the solution to the climate change issue. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has identified CO2 capture and storage (CCS) as the most promising for the rapid reduction of global emissions - by up to 55% by 21002. As the bridge to a more sustainable energy system, it is therefore a key solution for combating climate change - among a portfolio of solutions, including renewable energies, energy efficiency and biofuels In order to achieve deeper reductions in CO2 emissions there will need to be new technologies brought to the market to enable a ‘Kyoto 2’ type-agreement. Authorities such as the International Energy Agency, the European Union Commission for Research and the US Department of Energy predict that new technologies will include hydrogen fuels cells, clean coal technology, and storage of CO2 below ground – in deep saline formations or redundant reservoirs, or for enhanced oil recovery. Considerable attention is being focused on CO2 storage with the desire to reduce the cost of capture and storage below 25 $/t CO2. Shell has a special team working on the CO2 Capture Project (CCP) Joint Industry Project. For the CCP Shell carries out studies, manages projects and the team is involved evaluating opportunities for deployment of the technologies within Shell. Shell also provides the Vice Chairman for this initiative and has several key-players working on this project. CCP is an international collaboration among industry, governments, academics and environmental interest groups focused on developing technology for CO2 capture and geological storage. The CO2 Capture Team (CCT) conducts Shell's participation in the CO2 Capture Project (CCP) and other external programs. CCT also works internally to apply external learnings and technologies within Shell businesses. Additionally, Shell's research and development funds and manages a separate CO2 storage program. Our goals are to: reduce the cost of capture by 60 to 80%, anddemonstrate that geological storage can be secure.

Dual-objective chemical production planning by graphical-tabular Pinch Analysis for sustainable methanol industry in China

Geological Storage for CO2

A dynamic model for optimally phasing in CO2 capture and storage infrastructure

In the present work, four CaCO3-rich solid residues from the pulp and paper industry (lime mud, green liquor sludge, electrostatic precipitator dust, and lime dregs) were assessed for their potential as co-sequestrating agents in carbon capture. Carbonic anhydrase (CA) was added to promote both CO2 hydration and residue mineral dissolution, offering an enhancement in CO2-capture yield under atmospheric (up to 4-fold) and industrial-gas mimic conditions (up to 2.2-fold). Geological CO2 storage using olivine as a reference material was employed in two stages: one involving mineral dissolution, with leaching of Mg2+ and SiO2 from olivine; and the second involving mineral carbonation, converting Mg2+ and bicarbonate to MgCO3 as a permanent storage form of CO2. The results showed an enhanced carbonation yield up to 6.9%, when CA was added in the prior CO2-capture step. The proposed route underlines the importance of the valorization of industrial residues toward achieving neutral, or even negative emissions in the case of bioenergy-based plants, without the need for energy-intensive compression and long-distance transport of the captured CO2. This is a proof of concept for an integrated strategy in which a biocatalyst is applied as a CO2-capture promoter while CO2 storage can be done near industrial sites with adequate geological characteristics.

Carbon dioxide capture and storage: Public perception, policy and regulatory issues in the Netherlands

Analysis of the effect of formation dip angle and injection pressure on the injectivity and migration of CO2 during storage

As the world transitions to a low-carbon future, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies are a critical component of efforts to decarbonise key energy and industrial sectors while reducing hard-to-abate atmospheric CO2 emissions. Given that onshore geology is often unsuitable for CO2 storage, the availability of extensive offshore storage opportunities increases the likelihood that states will utilise offshore geological formations located on the continental shelf for this purpose. However, offshore geological storage capacity varies significantly between states, leading some to seek access to their neighbours’ continental shelves for CO2 storage. In Europe, regional CO2 storage cooperation has resulted in bilateral agreements, formalised as non-legally binding memoranda of understanding (MoUs), to facilitate cross-border CO2 transport and storage. These arrangements provide a structured yet flexible framework for fostering cooperation among states involved in such projects. However, they also raise legal questions, particularly regarding compliance with international legal obligations, including European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) law. This article examines the legality of cross-border CO2 transport and storage networks in Europe. It analyses the legal challenges posed by the general prohibition on waste export, the conditions under which cross-border CO2 transport and storage may be permitted, and the role of bilateral arrangements in fostering regional cooperation. It also explores the interaction between international legal frameworks—such as the London Protocol and UNCLOS—and regional instruments, including the EU CCS and Emissions Trading System (ETS) Directives. The article argues that, despite their non-binding nature, these MoUs demonstrate the parties’ intention to implement their obligations under the London Protocol, UNCLOS, and other applicable international law. Furthermore, this practice has been adopted by several European states without objection from other states or international judicial scrutiny. As such, these MoUs may have interpretative value as a supplementary means of interpretation under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, potentially influencing the application of existing treaty obligations related to cross-border CO2 transport and storage. Finally, this article considers the challenges of transposing the European legal framework to other regions exploring similar cross-border CO2 networks.

On the operability of power plants with CO2 capture and storage

Oil and gas production in FPSOs (floating, production, storage, and offloading) faces a dual challenge: meeting variation in energy demand while decreasing its negative environmental impact. The present article integrates thermodynamic analysis of oil and gas processing plants and screening analysis to determine the most important operational parameters to lower energy demand and increase efficiency and production. Therefore, the main goals of this study are to identify the contribution of the total effect of the operating parameters in an FPSO with CCUS (CO2 capture, utilization, and storage). Twenty-seven thermodynamic and structural design variables are selected as input parameters for the sensitivity analyses. Four machine learning-based screening analysis algorithms such as smooth spline-analysis of variance (SS-ANOVA), PAWN, gradient boosting machine (GBM), and Morris are adapted to achieve the following objectives: (1) overall power consumption of FPSO, (2) CO2 removal efficiency of carbon capture and storage (CCS), (3) power consumption of CCS, and (4) total oil production. The influence of three real crude oil compositions with variations in gas–oil ratio (GOR) and CO2 content is assessed. The combination of thermodynamic and screening analyses showed that the optimal operating pressure parameters of CCS significantly reduce the energy consumption and exergy destruction of the key main and utility plants. Furthermore, the results indicated that total power consumption, CCS efficiency, and CCS power consumption are much more sensitive to the CO2 content of the fluid reservoir than GOR, while the total oil production is influenced only by the GOR content. Finally, for scenarios with high CO2 or GOR content, the effect of design variable interactions is decisive in changing the separation efficiency and/or the compression unit performance.

Best Practice for Transitioning from Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Enhanced Oil Recovery EOR to CO2 Storage

Overcoming business model uncertainty in a carbon dioxide capture and sequestration project: Case study at the Boise White Paper Mill

The role of CO2 capture and storage in Saudi Arabia's energy future

Cement manufacturing is one of the most energy and CO2 intensive industries. With the growth of cement production, CO2 emissions are increasing rapidly too. Carbon capture and storage is the most feasible new technology option to reduce CO2 emissions in the cement industry. More research on environmental impacts is required to provide the theoretical basis for the implementation of carbon capture and storage in cement production. In this paper, GaBi software and scenario analysis were employed to quantitatively analyze and compare the environmental impacts of cement production with and without carbon capture and storage technology, from the perspective of a life-cycle assessment; aiming to promote sustainable development of the cement industry. Results of two carbon capture and storage scenarios show decreases in the impacts of global warming potential and some environmental impacts. However, other scenarios show a significant increase in other environmental impacts. In particular, post-combustion carbon capture technology can bring a more pronounced increase in toxicity potential. Therefore, effective measures must be taken into account to reduce the impact of toxicity when carbon capture and storage is employed in cement production. CO2 transport and storage account for only a small proportion of environmental impacts. For post-combustion carbon capture, most of the environmental impacts come from the unit of combined heat and power and carbon capture, with the background production of MonoEthanolAmine contributing significantly. In combined heat and power plants, natural gas is more advantageous than a 10% coal-saving, and thermal efficiency is a key parameter affecting the environmental impacts. Future research should focus on exploring cleaner and effective absorbents or seeking the alternative fuel in combined heat and power plants for post-combustion carbon capture. If the power industry is the first to deploy carbon capture and storage, oxy-combustion carbon capture is an excellent choice for the cement industry.