Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
64 CO2 EOR projects in the US, accounting for 3.3% of total US crude production. Of the
64 projects, 47 are located in the Permian Basin area of West Texas and Southeast New
Mexico (Ruether, et al 2002). Other areas with projects include the Rocky Mountains,
Oklahoma and Mississippi. Most of the carbon dioxide supplied to these fields originates
from large underground deposits of naturally occurring, high purity CO2. Three such
deposits transport by pipeline over 1 billion cubic feet per day ( >61,000 short tons of CO2
per day) of 97-99% pure CO2. A much smaller number of projects use CO2 waste streams
from natural gas processing facilities and fertilizer plants.
Future use of CO2 in EOR is expected to grow significantly, ensuring a stable
market. It has been estimated that in the Permian Basin alone over 50 additional projects,
recovering 500 million to 1 billion barrels of oil reserves, are economically viable at current
prices and technology. The largest potential region for CO2 -EOR is the State of California.
California is the fourth largest oil-producing state and has many mature fields that are ideal
for CO2 injection. In a DOE sponsored project, Chevron is conducting a CO2-EOR
experiment in the Lost Hills field that was discovered back in 1910. The fields cumulative
oil production to date has been only 5% of the original oil in place (OOIP), largely due to its
low permeability. The experiments have demonstrated a rapid oil response and it is believed
that CO2 injection may increase the fields oil recovery to 20% of OOIP (Ruether et al,
2002). If the project proves successful, this technique could be used to recover billions of
barrels of oil trapped in the siliceous shales and diatomite reservoirs in other parts of the
state (Montgomery et al., 2000). Another recent study estimated the demand for the entire
state of California to be of the order of 3-5 Tcf of CO2 (180 million to 305 million short tons
of carbon dioxide). At the Chevron project, CO2 is currently being trucked over 120 miles to
the injection site at a cost of $3.5 per thousand cubic feet (NTP) of CO2. This amounts to
$69 per short ton of carbon dioxide and illustrates the seriousness with which oil companies
are considering the benefit of CO2 injection.
The primary reason that the California CO2 EOR demand has yet to be satisfied is
the lack of a stable, readily available supply of carbon dioxide. Often, building pipelines to
transport CO2 from far away natural reserves through mountainous terrain proves
uneconomical.
The economics of a CO2 EOR project are heavily tied to the price of oil and
availability of CO2. The purchase of CO2 constitutes the largest cost of a CO2-EOR project.
Currently, the floor prices for providing CO2 from various sources are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Cost for producing CO2 from different sources
Natural Domes
$ 0.65 Mcf
Natural Gas Processing Plants
$ 1 Mcf
Captured from Power Plant Flue Gases
$ 3 Mcf
(1 Mcf = 1000 cubic feet at NTP)
The response of oil production from CO2 injection varies from field to field but the use of
gas is typically in the range of 2.5-11 Mcf CO2 injected per barrel of incremental oil
production. The average is 6 Mcf/bbl. In order to assess the cost of CO2 in any year
however, the following relationship developed by Martin and Taber can be used:
Value of CO2, $/thousand cubic feet (Mcf) = 0.50 + .020*(oil price, $/bbl)
The next few years will likely see strong growth in CO2 EOR. It has been estimated
that if pure and inexpensive CO2 were available to all U.S. oil fields, total demand would be
of the order of 60 to 100 Tcf (Martin and Taber, 1992). Due to the disperse locations of the
target fields and increasing urgency of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, captured power
plant CO2 may well become a growing part of the supply mix.
The moisture content of raw MSW is 20% on average. Based on the data shown by
Tchobanoglous (1993) in Table 2, Themelis and Kim (2002) showed that the hydrocarbon
formula that most closely approximated the mix of organic wastes in MSW is C6H10O4.
Raw MSW can be converted into a better fuel for power generation by making it
more homogeneous. Several waste-to-energy plants create a refuse-derived fuel (RDF),
through the separation of inert materials, size reduction, and densifying. RDF plants remove
recyclable or non-combustible materials and shred the remaining trash into a homogenous
fuel. The densified material is more easily transported, stored, combusted and gasified than
raw MSW. The size of a particle affects the time required to combust.
A ir
A sh
O 2 P la n t
B o il e r
N2
S te a m
T u r b in e
G R ID
RDF
P la n t
C O 2 D r y in g &
C o m p r e s s io n
P r o d u c t g a s to E O R
G as
C le a n in g
T ip p in g F lo o r
M SW
Non-condensable gases such as N2, O2, SO2 and NOx are stripped from the liquid CO2
during compression (Simbeck, 2001). As result, it is important that condensable
compounds, such as tars, are removed prior to compression to avoid operational problems
with the compressor. The use of pure oxygen allows for controlled combustion, which
should effectively eliminate these compounds in the flue gas. Furthermore, the use of
oxygen can reduce the need for large volumes of excess air thereby reducing the necessary
size and cost of the flue gas cleaning equipment.
Economic Analysis
In order to assess the cost of a Waste-to-Energy combustion plant supplied by bulk
oxygen and using recycled carbon dioxide, the following information was derived on the
basis of information available for the SEMASS existing facility at Rochester, Massachusetts:
Tons processed per Year: 910,000
Capital cost ($/kW): 3,676
Operating Cost ($/ton MSW): 30
Net power output (MW): 78
CO2 emitted (kg/kWh): 1.7
In addition, the following capital and operating costs for the oxygen plant were obtained
from reported data by Air Products and Chemicals. The APD ITM oxygen plant is a new
technology that may become commercially available in the near future.
APD ITM 3200 tons/day plant (Best Case):
oil price of $30/bbl. At an oil price of $20/bbl, the break-even tipping fee increases to
about $63/ton, which is still competitive. Additional sources of potential revenue for this
plant include the sale of nitrogen from the oxygen plant, carbon dioxide credits and the sale
of its bottom ash and fly ash (or a reduced disposal expense). However, as these markets are
not sufficiently developed or always available, they were not included in the analysis.
Table 3. Economic Evaluation
Feedstock
MSW Heat Content
Site Characteristics
13
Moisture Content
Percent Combustible
Kg of O2 per tonne MSW
Kg of C per tonne MSW
Kg of CO2 per tonne MSW
20%
60%
1,065
296
1085
Mj/kg
kg
kg
kg
Economics
Cost of Electricity
0.05
Cost of Oil
30
5
12%
20
910,000
$/kWh
$/Barrel
113,518
78
19%
0.83
20%
286,712,323
$US
49,851,616
$US
81,900,000
$US
418,463,939
$US
$/Ton
Operations
Years
Cash flow
Expenses
Capital Annuity Payment
-$61.56
Operating Cost
-30.71
$/Ton
MSW
$/Ton
MSW
Revenue
Electricity ($0.05/kWh)
12.57
0.22
CO2 Sale
20.29
-59.20
Short
Tons
kg/hr
MW
30
$/ton MSW
0.71
$/ton MSW
660
kWh/ton
MSW
173
kwh/ton MSW
110
kwh/ton MSW
126
251
kWh/ton
MSW
kWh/ton
MSW
$/Ton
MSW
$/Ton
MSW
$/Ton
MSW
$/Ton
Conclusions
The preliminary economic analysis presented in this paper indicates that carbon
dioxide capture is economically and technologically feasible. This is, however, contingent on
the presence of a market for the utilization or disposal of the carbon dioxide. Several prior
studies have already shown that EOR projects that utilize carbon dioxide are expanding
rapidly (Mortis, Montgomery, and Ruether et al). Particularly in areas such as Southern
California, that are far from natural carbon dioxide reservoirs and have mature oil fields, it
6
appears that the demand exceeds the supply, especially in the current environment of high
oil prices. Carbon dioxide derived from industrial processes such as from hydrocarbon
combustion could fill this role economically especially if the WTE plants are sited near to
EOR projects. The primary reason that an oxygen combustion plant that recycles and
captures carbon dioxide has not yet been commercialized is the concern that the capital and
energy costs of producing significant quantities of oxygen would be prohibitively expensive.
However, over the last several years there has been significant innovation in the field of
oxygen separation that greatly reduces the energy consumption per ton of oxygen produced.
This, coupled with the concerns over greenhouse gas emissions and the prospect carbon
dioxide taxes or emissions trading system that would further enhance the economics of a
CO2 capturing scheme, seem to provide the impetus to look at such projects seriously.
From a technology viewpoint, this type of plant is available today and has been
proven to be reliable within the coal industry. For the purposes of this economic analysis, a
suspension firing Waste-to-Energy plant was chosen because it is proven technology.
However, numerous other combustion and gasification plants should be considered as well.
Combusting an MSW feedstock with industrial oxygen mixed with recycled carbon
dioxide, thus resulting in a nearly pure CO2 product stream that can be captured and
sequestered, offers numerous advantages. The resulting electricity provided is renewable, the
process would be net carbon negative, assuming a fraction of the waste is biomass in origin,
and the process provides a disposal alternative for non-recyclable combustibles with zero air
emissions.
References
Air Products and Chemicals. Presentation, Slide 13,
http://www.gasification.org/98GTC/GTC01054.pdf
Herzog, H. The Economics of CO2 Separation and Capture, Technology, vol. 7, supplement 1, pp.
13-23, (2000). http://sequestration.mit.edu/pdf/economics_in_technology.pdf
Klein, A. Gasification: An Alternative Disposal and Energy Recovery Process for Municipal Solid
Wastes. Earth and Environmental Engineering M.S. Thesis, Columbia University, 2002.
Martin, F.D. and J.J. Taber, Carbon Dioxide Flooding, J. Petroleum Technology, 396-400, 1992.
Moritis, G., Future of EOR & IOR, Oil & Gas J., 99.20, 68-73, 2001.
Montgomery, S., M. Morea, M. Emanuele, and P. Perri, San Joaquin basin is scene of new effort to
evaluate EOR in Monterey, Oil & Gas J., 98.39, 2000.
Ruether, J., R. Dahowski, M. Ramezan, and C. Schmidt, Prospects for Early Deployment of Power
Plants Employing Carbon Capture, Electric Utilities Environmental Conference, Tucson, AZ,
January 22-25, 2002. http://www.netl.doe.gov/products/ccps/index.html
Simbeck, D. , Carbon dioxide mitigation economics for existing coal fired power plants,U.S. Dept. of
Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) First National Conference on
Carbon Sequestration, May 14-17, 2001 Washington, DC.
Themelis, N.J., Kim, H.Y., Brady, M.H. Energy Recovery from New York City municipal
solid wastes, Waste Manage Research, Vol. 20, p. 223-233 (2002).