The CCS Project Network

Transcription

1 The CCS Project Network Purpose and status Simon Bennett Programme Manager European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy 17 Sept 2010 CCS Project Network Advisory Forum

2 Objectives Facilitate the identification of good practices, lessons learned and recommendations with respect to large-scale CCS demonstration and enabling knowledge sharing amongst projects Providing a common EU identity to Network members Leveraging experience gained from projects and the evidence generated by them, in order to build public confidence about the feasibility and safety of CCS Promoting CCS, EU leadership and cooperation potential to third parties/countries 2

3 Knowledge sharing 4 drivers 1. De-risking of CCS 2. Acceleration of the deployment of CCS 3. Increasing the understanding of & confidence in CCS 4. Maintenance of an open market for post-demonstration deployment 2 interrelated means Facilitate exchange of experiences between projects on a reciprocal basis in order to ensure their success Provide external stakeholders with access to sufficient information to meet their needs 3

4 Status Network has been open for applications since May 6 projects (EEPR projects) have now signed a common Membership Agreement The Network is open to any project meeting the Qualification Criteria Applications are being discussed with several other non-eu funded projects Steering Committee became operational in August 4

5 Advisory Forum Provides external guidance to the CCS Project Network Co-chaired with ZEP Comprises representatives of: Member states Non-member projects Industry R&D NGOs International Organisations Generates annual recommendations about: Themes the Network could cover How the Network can interact with other organisations What other organisations can offer the demonstration projects These recommendations are made to the Steering Committee for implementation where possible 5

6 How the Network operates Knowledge Sharing Principles and processes Eelco Kruizinga Principal consultant, Knowledge Management Team Det Norske Veritas 17 Sept 2010 CCS Project Network Advisory Forum

7 Knowledge sharing: principles Seek the optimum ways of sharing knowledge to the benefit of members and stakeholders Members commit to providing the information listed in the Knowledge Sharing Protocol when they join Clear ownership of content Member: all content shared by Member European Commission: content created on behalf of the Network Respect intellectual property (IP) rights Key point: Not only about data, but also the stories and experiences that contextualise the data (Good practices, lessons learned, check lists, howto lists, case studies, management plans) These details are captured at workshops and online to assist projects, and processed for wider diffusion. 7

8 Knowledge sharing: categories identified Sharing, collection and dissemination of new knowledge generated by the projects: Technical set up and performance Cost levels Project Management Planning, permitting, public engagement, storage site characterisation, risk management Environmental impact Health and safety Goal: Identification of good practices, lessons learned and recommendations for implementing large-scale CCS projects in the above areas 8

9 Annual cycle a thematic approach 3-5 themes arising (determined by the Steering Committee) Annual theme-specific knowledge-sharing agenda for the year ahead A facilitator and an expert will support each group in delivering Facilitators: favourable conditions for knowledge exchange Experts: relevant background documentation and input Approximately 3 meetings per year per theme Online collaboration to continue work in between meetings Invitation of representatives of R&D institutions or other knowledgeable parties on a structural or ad hoc basis. Network Team meets at least once per year with each project to provide specific support/assistance Oslo, 2-3 Dec 2009 Bilthoven (NL), April 2010 Brussels, 30 June

10 Experience gathering and evaluation Provision of standardised project data Completion of an electronic knowledge-sharing form twice per year Covers all five knowledge categories Progress against the schedule/milestones, decision gates passed, CO 2 captured, permits obtained/not obtained, CAPEX and OPEX, changes in estimates/update of baselines Comparison tool to evaluate and help identification of potential best practices and experiences to share 10

11 Compare to identify sharing opportunities Sub-category 1 Project Project Project Project Project n-1 n CO 2 captured Permitting Stakeholder engagement Risk management Storage site monitoring Purity of CO 2 stream Safety monitoring and resolution systems Table 1. 'Traffic light table' as a preliminary evaluation of best practices and experiences. Colours reflect a preliminary assessment of the quality of the activities within each category: = high potential for sharing, = some potential for sharing, = potential for learning. 11

12 Dissemination and external sharing Coordinated, resource-saving actions: Public website a repository of reliable and up-to-date information on all European CCS demonstration projects Annual progress reports on projects and key topics Attendance at external events Involvement of specialist parties in events Collaboration and knowledge sharing with other networks and projects worldwide Interaction with key opinion leaders and the general public to disseminate information on progress of demonstration projects Presentation of facts re. CCS demonstration projects to assist local permitting processes During operational stages it will be important to make available all information on environmental performance and health and safety 12

13 Introduction to the Members Karl Bergman Chair of the CCS Project Network Steering Committee Vice President Techn. Dvlpt. Centre CCS Vattenfall AB 17 Sept 2010 CCS Project Network Advisory Forum

14 Locations of Member Projects Hatfield, UK Bełchatów, PL Rotterdam, NL Jänschwalde, DE Compostilla, ES Porto Tolle, IT 14

15 Bełchatów Bełchatów, Poland Project developer: PGE Mining and Conventional Power J.S.C. Support from: Alstom, The Dow Chemical Co., Polish Geological Institute, Schlumberger, subcontractors of geological works within I phase storage site selection Post-Combustion (advanced amine) 260 MW e gross capacity 1.8 MtCO 2 stored per annum Pipeline: km Storage: Deep saline aquifers; On-shore 15

16 Compostilla León, Spain Project developer: Endesa Generacion Partners: CIUDEN (Spanish Government), Foster Wheeler Oy. Oxy-combustion (CFB) 323 MW e gross capacity 2 MtCO 2 stored per annum Pipeline: ~ 135 km Storage: Deep saline aquifer On-shore 16

17 Hatfield Humberside, UK Project developer: Powerfuel Partner: National Grid Carbon Pre-Combustion 900 MW e Up to 5 MtCO 2 stored per annum Pipeline: ~175 km Storage: Depleted gas reservoirs or aquifers Off-shore 17

18 Jänschwalde Jänschwalde, Germany Project developer: Vattenfall Oxyfuel 250 MW e Post-Combustion 50 MW e 1.7 MtCO 2 stored per annum Pipeline: km Storage: Natural gas field or deep saline aquifer On-shore 18

19 Porto Tolle Veneto, Italy Project developer: Enel Post-Combustion 264 MW e Up to 1 MtCO 2 stored per annum Pipeline: ~100 km Storage: Deep saline aquifer Off-shore 19

20 ROAD, Rotterdam Rotterdam, Netherlands Project developer: Maasvlakte CCS Project C. V. JV Partners: E.ON Benelux, GDF SUEZ Post-Combustion 250 MW e 1.1 MtCO 2 stored per annum Pipeline: 25 km Storage: Depleted gas reservoirs Off-shore 20

21 Summary A wide set of combinations - Capture technology and type of storage Challenging capture concepts will be pursued Major current challenges are non-technical: Public perception Financing Legislation 21

22 Knowledge Sharing Activities to date in 2010 Pietro Barbucci Head of Fossil Fuels, R&D Policies Enel SpA 17 Sept CCS Project Network Advisory Forum

23 Meetings held April 2010, Bilthoven, The Netherlands 39 participants 30 June 2010, Brussels, Belgium 45 participants Forthcoming: 6-7 October 2010, Hamburg, Germany 23

24 Topics discussed Permitting Public engagement Risk management 24

25 Preliminary findings - Permitting Essential to comprehensively understand the planning/permitting/ consultation process Stakeholder engagement Have proactive engagement with regulators Have a proactive public relations programme Develop personal relationships with the local community Vital to have robust planning applications that address stakeholder issues In the site selection process - take a broader perspective than technology and cost, include environment, communities etc Spend much effort in the early planning stages ('optioneering') and include stakeholders in the process to help avoid planning pitfalls 25

26 Preliminary findings Public engagement Integration of public outreach......in project management (fundamental)...across value chain...across partners in the project...with umbrella organisations Key messages from the project Consistent set of overarching messages Specific messages for specific stakeholder groups. Who is the messenger? Social characterisation A tool to enhance understanding of local stakeholders and sitespecific social context Monitor public outreach over project lifespan Initiate this early Monitor baseline, media monitoring and local perception Cooperation with research programmes may be beneficial 26

27 Preliminary findings Risk management Risks related to CO 2 stream composition CO 2 stream composition strongly influenced by the capture technology and fuel source. Different transport solutions and storage sites may have specific requirements Standards for CO 2 streams in Europe do not exist and regulators are currently assessing how to manage this issue for the first CCS projects There will be risks associated with taking investment decisions on pipeline and CO 2 clean-up designs in the coming 12 months if the future requirements for the integration of multiple CO 2 streams are unknown Interface risks, technical and organisational Value chain interfaces and battery limits Changed operating conditions for one element in the value chain, effects on others Interfaces between several suppliers and subsuppliers 27

28 Expected outputs 2010 Permitting A Foundation Guideline for CCS Permitting Public engagement Overview of European current practice in public engagement Risk management CCS Risk Register Expected ranges for CO2 composition, to inform future work on impacts of impurities 28

29 Thank you for your attention 29