2 Introduction and Scope
Carbon capture and storage is amitigation technology that is proposed among a portfolio of low carbon technologies to reduce anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. CCS has an essential role to play for GHG emissions reduction. CCS is needed to assist in limiting GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at levels consistent with limiting global temperature rise to less than 2°C by 2050 as recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The challenge for development of CCS is to demonstrate and commercialise the entire value chain and to have established a frameworkfor CCS that enables the market to take over from early government intervention and establishment. The rate of commercialization ramp up must then be capable of attaining the targeted emissions reductions.
International Energy Agency (IEA) analysis indicates that a lowest-cost mitigation scenario consistent with 2°C rise requires CCS to be widely deployed across power generation and industrial processes. Forecast or target capture quantity will be required to reach 7 to 8 billion tonnes per annum (GTPA) from a current quantity 25 MTPA. Three goals are set: 50, 2,000 and 7,000 MTPA by 2020, 2030, 2050 respectively. These goals correspond to approximately 40% to 50% annual growth rate between 2020 and 2030 followed by a more moderate average 6% to 7% annual rate from 2030 to 2050. Assuming a typical 500 MWe coal fired station with 4 MTPA of CO2 captured, the rate of growth corresponds to around 500 projects between 2020 and 2030 (50 per year) and 1,250 between 2030 and 2050 (60 per year).
This type of growth profile has few precedents in the complex hydrocarbons and chemical process industries, which are akin to the types of processes contemplated to achieve CCS. Thehas requested a report on the "Learning from the LNG Sector", by which the developments of the LNG industry over time and with increasing maturity might be used as an analogue for possible developments in future CCS Sector. The LNG Industry is an apt comparison for possible future developments in CCS.
Starting from first commercial export facilities in the mid-to-late 1960's and at plant capacities of approximately one million tonnes per annum (MTPA), the number and capacity of LNG facilities has been accelerating. LNG train capacities have risen from 1 to 7 – 8 MTPA. Reliability and efficiency have increased and capacity unit cost in real terms has decreased as the coretechnology has improved. However, LNG projects are vulnerable to escalation of input costs such as for remote site development, materials and equipment price and construction labour costs. As a result, recent LNG projects in some regions are experiencing very high costs. Many of these effects may also be applicable to CCS projects at all stages of that industry's development.
There are 35 exporting LNG sites around the world with a total of 120 trains either operating or under construction ranging from 7.8 MTPA down to 1.5 MTPA. A list of plants and locations are included in following Section 4.3.5. Some aspects of the desired development trajectory for CCS might be comparable to the demonstrated development of LNG.
Table 1 – LNG Facilities
This report summarizes characteristics of the LNG industry and compares to the CCS industry as follows:
Section 3 describes the technical features of the LNG value chain, from gas reserve through production, processing, liquefaction, storage and transport to regasification.
Section 4 summarizes the global status of the LNG industry, in aggregate and listing major LNG production facilities.
Section 5 provides a brief description of the CCS value chain. It is not intended that this section would provide comparable detail as for LNG. Many Global CCS Institute members and readers familiar with the CCS industry will already be aware of the detailed features of CCS development from other Global CCS Institute reports and resources.
Section 6 commences the comparisons and lessons that may be derived from LNG for CCS. With the preceding sections having described technical features of LNG and CCS, this section examines project implementation features of LNG and interprets pertinent points of comparison for CCS.
Section 7 continues the comparison with project technical points of comparison between LNG and CCS.
Section 8 examines the possibility for integration of CCS and LNG projects.