Which Reservoir for Low Cost Capture, Transportation and Storage of Captured CO2?
The quality and location of a carbon dioxide (CO2) storage reservoir is critical for low cost carbon capture and storage (CCS). Is it better to utilize a lower quality reservoir nearby or transport the captured CO2 further to a better reservoir? This analysis brings together costs for capture, transportation and storage for a combined valuation on the cost of CCS. This initial combination of capture, transportation and storage cost modeling is also testing the methodology for analysis of combined CCS costs and selection of proximal storage for sources capturing different masses of CO2. Component cost for each segment of CCS is calculated at different annual rates on the mass of CO2 captured. The cost of capture at the source and for subsequent storage are modeled at 4.1 million metric tons (MMt) of CO2 per year, 3.6 MMt, 3.0 Mt, 2.2 MMt, 1.5 MMt and 0.7 MMt. Transportation costs are modeled per the mass of CO2 transported and the distance between the source and the storage reservoir. Four reservoirs are model for CO2 storage, two Rose Run and two Mt. Simon; all are in the database of the FE/NETL CO2 Saline Storage Cost Model. These selected reservoirs provide both a range of quality for storage as well as a general east to west alignment from the Appalachian Basin to the Illinois Basin, an area that can provide storage potential for sources along the Ohio River valley. The Rose Run 3 reservoir is located in central Pennsylvania and the Rose Run 4 reservoir is located in northwestern Pennsylvania. The Mt. Simon 1 reservoir is in central Illinois and the Mt. Simon 9 reservoir is in west central Ohio. Each reservoir has different qualities such that the Mt. Simon 1 in Illinois has the lowest storage costs while the Rose Run 4 in northwestern Pennsylvania has the highest storage costs. Source locations modeled are either east of the Rose Run reservoirs or between the Rose Run 3 and Mt. Simon 9 reservoirs. The distance between the source and either Rose Run reservoir was modeled at 100 km (62 mi) or 200 km (125 mi). Based on cost reflecting the mass of CO2 captured and stored as well as the distance transported, between 100 km (62 mi) and 1,078 km (670 mi), the source will select the Rose Run 3 reservoir or one of the Mt. Simon reservoirs.
AAPG Datapages/Search and Discovery Article #90195 © 2014 Eastern Section Meeting, London, Ontario, Canada, September 27-30, 2014