Hydrogen Power (with CCS) at Peterhead. Jane Paxman, Policy and Communications Manager, Hydrogen Power, BP Alternativenergy
DF1 Comparison with other UK Power CO 2 Emission Comparison for Reference Generating Plants 900 800 700 600 gco 2 /kwh net electricity generation 500 400 300 876 723 491 CO2 Captured CO2 to atmosphere 200 430 404 368 343 100 0 UK Average Coal UK Average Oil UK Grid Electricity Average E Class CCGT Generating Type 43 UK Proven Baglan Bay - H Peterhead DF1 CCGT Class CCGT Technology - F Class UK Average Source: "Note on the UK Government s Proposed Approach to allocation of EU ETS allowances to the Electricity Generating Industry (Incumbents) for Phase II", DTI March 2006. 2
3
DF1 Significance DF1 will generate 475MW of baseload clean electricity from existing fossil fuels. DF1 would provide almost enough clean electricity to power three quarters of a million UK homes by removing more than 90% of the CO2 (1.8MT/annum) Largest CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery project in the North Sea 50-60 million barrels of additional oil. First CO2 pipeline in the North Sea. The project needs a policy support framework similar to that provided to renewable energy in the UK. Would deliver almost as much power as all the UK s current wind farms generate. Would create about 1000 direct engineering and construction jobs and some 150 permanent jobs onshore and offshore. 4
UK Strategic Benefits Material steps towards UK meeting GHG emissions targets both Kyoto and HMG s voluntary targets Potential for UK leadership in drawing others e.g. India and China closer into Kyoto process ( do as we do.. ) Mature UKCS infrastructure presents UK with one off opportunity Incremental EOR increases UK energy security Defers decommissioning costs Creates new skill set and service industry dovetailing with decline of existing North Sea Operations New overseas business opportunities for UK companies 5
Technology Elements Air Steam + H 2 0 CO 2 (1.8 mtpa) 475 MW CH 4 Steam Catalytic Reformer Shift Conversion CO 2 Capture H 2 CCGT H 2 O H 2 +CO H 2 +CO 2 Proven Technology Uses proven reforming technology to manufacture syngas from CH 4 (BP Trinidad) Uses proven shift reaction to generate H 2 and CO 2 Uses proven amine capture technology to capture and remove CO 2 (BP Algeria) Hydrogen fired CCGT proven and warranted by vendors Duplex steel well completions of Miller proven capable of handling Co2 All technology proven at this scale around the world 6
DF1 Site Layout 7
DF1 EOR Monitoring CO2 Model Storage model to provide assurance of long term storage integrity after site closure CO2 storage model Covers full volume of potential migration Important physicochemical processes for CO2 over thousands of years CO2 location, saturation, pressure, temperature from calibrated reservoir model Kms of impervious rock impede vertical water flow (<5 cm per 1000 yrs) Miller outline at surface Water flow vectors very few Cells with >50m/My Upwards Water Flow 4 km rock types Mol Fraction CO2 in 2100 Lo Hi 8
Current Status of DF1 Project Project Hydrogen Power FEED 120,000 man-hours Preparing Invitation to Tender for EPC Technology Pilot plant testing of reformer process conditions complete GE turbine burners test on hydrogen mix first pass complete C02 Transportation + Miller EOR FEED 90,000 man-hours Preparing ITT for Module MGS pigging being scheduled Technology Test of high pressure CO2 release complete Reservoir modelling complete Permits EIA complete S36 submitted Pre Construction COMAH submitted Environmental Statement being finalised Field Development Plan addendum underway Ca $40m spent to date and will complete FEED end 1Q07 with fully established client team of ca 60-70 and 150 contractors. 9
DF1 in 2007 Original schedule: FEED complete end 1Q 2007. S36 application on track Subject to appropriate type and level of Government policy support, project ready for final investment decision mid 2007. Government Policy Support: Project had told government DF1 could not continue beyond year-end 2006 without assurance that policy support would be available. Treasury s December 2006 Pre-Budget Report repeated HMG interest in supporting a CCS project and announced a process that will lead to a possible competitive bid process to select a suitable project. BP response:- Complete DF1 FEED. Prepare to participate in HMG s bid process. To make additional funds available for necessary activity in 2007. In parallel, it is financially prudent to prepare for decommissioning of Miller. Cost and expertise implications If given support, Government timeline means DF1 unlikely to be sanctioned before 2008. Earliest start-up of commercial operation now 2011. 10
Summary DF1 represents all elements of a full value chain project. DF1 is competitive with other forms of alternative energy and meets Government energy and environment policy goals. DF1 would have been ready for final investment decision in mid 2007. Remaining external barrier is a decision on type and level of government support. In project s interest to be in a position in 2007 to take part in Government bidding process. 11
Further Information Project documentation e.g. Section 36 Application and Addendum and Environmental Statement can be found on: www.peterheadhydrogenpower.com 12
DF1 Project Participants and Partners BP Global leader in hydrogen power projects and GHG sequestration Largest UKCS Operator C0 2 Capture Project, In Salah, Peterhead SSE Leading UK integrated energy company UK s largest non-nuclear and renewables generator 7.5 million UK supply customers Foster Wheeler Selected as FEED contractor One of the world s largest publicly-held EPC contractors Experienced in both process and power engineering Headquartered in UK, with 3000 employees in Reading engineering office GE Selected as turbine supplier for DF1 Considered most experience in syngas fired GTs Johnston Matthey/Davy Process Selected for syngas technology world leading catalyst and reforming company UK based with HQ in London and R&D facility at Stockton-on-Tees BASF Selected as CO2 capture technology supplier World leader in amine systems and CO2 capture All project participants selected on competitive bid basis 13