theme a co2 capture, transport, usage

Power Generation Technology Centre

THEME ACO2 capture, transport, usage

LeaderJohn Oakey

Cranfield University

UKCCSC Meeting, 27 - 28 March 2006 Edinburgh

Theme A• A1 – Theme A Integration• A2 – Fossil Energy Supply• A3 – CCS Synergies & Real Time Supply• A4 – CCS as a Bridge to H2

• A5 – Fossil Fuel Use• A6 – CO2 Transport• A7 – Long Term Utilisation


Technical options for carbon capture deployment in the UK

(2010, 2020 and 2030)

Aberdeen• 1 - Definition of Case Studies

(windows of opportunity in UKCS based on modelling)

• 2 – Economics (costs of capture to give cost/supply curve)

• 3 – Policy/Incentives

Imperial College• 1 – Review paper on CO2

capture and transport – to influence debate, scenarios & case studies

Reading• 1 – Guidelines based on

theme A scenarios and sensitivity analysis (subtheme A1)

Input from all theme A participants and advice from all other themes (especially on storage)

External consultation exercise with variety of stakeholders (Jon Gibbins to lead for UKCCSC?)

Synthesise and add to theme A activities to develop technical options for carbon capture deployment in the UK

Led by Theme Leader: John OakeyPower Generation Technology Centre

Overview of Sub-theme A1 – Theme A IntegrationUKCCSC Meeting, 27 - 28 March 2006 Edinburgh

Reading• 2 - Life cycle costs &

emissions – with & without CCS

• 3 - Power plant scheme scenarios & scenario collation

• 4 - Sensitivity analysis

Aberdeen• 4 – Storage Scenarios

A2.b Definition of theme A scenarios* -

report

A2.a Database of LC energy costs & CO2

emissions – report/CD

A2.c Sensitivity analysis report/CD

Input from Newcastle 4 (theme A5)

* scenarios limited to information required for technical cost assessment

Input from Theme B

Provide background for decision making on the role that can be played by CCS in meeting UK energy supply objectives

Require inputs from A2/A3/A4/A5

Sub-theme Leader: Tim Cockerill


Overview of Sub-theme A2 – Fossil Energy SupplyUKCCSC Meeting, 27 - 28 March 2006 Edinburgh

DeliverablesA.2.a Database of LC energy costs & CO2 emissionsA.2.b Definition of Theme A ScenariosA.2.c Sensitivity Analysis Report

TASK A.2.1: Overall assessment of lifecycle costs and emissions of fossil fuel supply options

TASK A.2.2: Assessment of impact of future energy supply scenarios

TASK A.2.3: Summary of published and produced data



A3.a Assessment of potential role and value of CCS for grid

operation (including intermittent renewables)

Overview of Sub-theme A3 – CCS Synergies & Real Time Supply

Cranfield• 1- Biomass reports/

links to biomass projects

Nottingham• 1 - Biomass

reports/links to biomass projects

ManchesterReal time supply modelling• 1 – Model design• 2 – Model development• 3 – Model use

A3.b Biomass co-combustion

assessment

Imperial College• 2 – Capture plant definition

(work done in A4)• 3 – Consultation on

simplified scenarios• 4 – CCS flexibility: value

from real time analysis & trading etc

• 5 – Biomass links (including with TSEC Biomass consortium)

Advice from stakeholders (including DTI and UKERC)

Investigate the impact of using renewable energy and nuclear in combination with CCS systems

Sub-theme Leader: Jon GibbinsPower Generation Technology Centre


A.3.a Assessment of potential role and value of CCS for grid operation

TASK A3.1: Capture plant technical definition TASK A3.2: Consultation on simplified

scenarios TASK A3.3: CCS flexibility: value from real

time analysis & trading


A.3.b Biomass co-combustion assessment

TASK A3.4: Biomass links


Evaluation of the possible candidate renewable energy fuels: availability and supply

Potential interactions with capture technologies: Biomass co-processing.

- Extending the range of biomass feedstock that can be used and considering future power plant design to maximise the amount of biomass co-fired

Quantification of benefits of using co-firing of renewable fuels


A.3.4. Biomass links

Modelling of CO2 reduction in different energy demand scenarios Maintain links with TSEC Biomass consortium


Overview of Sub-theme A4 – CCS as Bridge to H2

Cranfield• 2 – Gasification technical

assessment• 2a – Reforming of gaseous

feedstocks – e.g. BP(both to address H2 purity)(H2 dilution of natural gas

supplies? H2 requirements for transport applications?)

Nottingham• 2 – H2 from methane• 3 – Jet fuel from biomass• 4 – Gasification cycle data

(reports from other projects)

Imperial College• 6 – H2 use in gas turbines

and fuel cells – near term H2 production

A4.a Technical review and assessment using CCS for H2

production, in other sectors and to provide offsets

Explore the opportunities for producing H2 using CCS (including consideration of new sectors and offsets – negative CO2 output and saleable credits etc)

Input from biomass co-combustion work in A3?

Sub-theme Leader: John Oakey



A.4.a Technical review and assessment using CCS for H2 production in other sectors

TASK A.4.1: Scope of H2 production uptaking actual gasification technology


Review of steam reforming technology to produce hydrogen

Review of coal gasification and IGCC


TASK A.4.2: Scope of coal underground gasification

TASK A.4.3: Catalytic cracking of methane at low temperaturesTASK A.4.4: Jet fuel from biomass TASK A.4.5: H2 use in gas turbines and fuel cells



A5.b Assessment of technical implications

of various capture plant technologies

Cranfield• 3 – Lime capture &

chemical looping technologies – reports from other projects

• 3a – Oxy-fuel – coal (input from IC), gas, etc.

• 4 – CCS impact on RAMO

• 5 – Impact of CCS on plant operating cycles/flexibility

Nottingham• 5 – Adsorption technologies &

economics – reports from other projectsImperial College

• 7 – Power plant (steam cycle) model

• 8 – Amine scrubber modelling with power plant model (Imperial 7)

• 9 – Technical work on power plant flexibility with capture

A5.a Technical description of various

capture plant technologies

Assess some key capture technologies

International Test Centre at Regina

Technical advice on transport (A6) and storage (B)

Sub-theme Leader: John Oakey

Gasification assessment in A4


Overview of Sub-theme A5 – Fossil Fuel UseUKCCSC Meeting, 27 - 28 March 2006 Edinburgh

A.5.a Technical description of various capture plant technology TASK A.5.1: Identification and review of the

different carbon capture technologies TASK A.5.2: Power plant model


A.5.b Assessment of technical implications of various capture plant technologies TASK A.5.3: Impact of CCS on plant operating

cycles/flexibility



Air

FuelPower

Flue gas

CO2

Fuel conversion (Gasifier)

CO2 separation

Energy conversion

N2

H2

Air separation

O2

Storage

Compression

Shift reactor


CO2 pre-combustion capture at a coal gasification plant in North Dakota, USA. This plant employs a physical solvent process to separate 3.3 MtCO2 per year from a gas stream to produce synthetic natural gas. Part of the captured CO2 is used for an EOR project in Canada.

A.5.1.1. Evaluation of the state of art of pre-combustion capture technologies

Fuel

AirPower

O2

CO2

Air separation

Energy conversion

N2

Gas clean-up

Storage

Compression

CO2/H2O


Flue gas: ~ 97% CO2

Recycle: ~ 75%

Oxy-Combustion Pilot Plant

5 MWe CES water cycle plant at Kimberlina, California

A.5.1.2. Evaluation of the state of art of oxyfuel combustion


Lime capture & chemical looping technologies – reports from other projects

Adsorption technologies & economics – reports from other projects

Solvent absorption technologies - Amine scrubbing

Membranes technologies


Air

Fuel

Power

Flue gas

CO2

Energy conversion

CO2 separation

Storage

Compression


A.5.1.3. Evaluation of the state of art of post-combustion technologies

CO2 post-combustion capture at a plant in Malaysia. This plant employs a chemical absorption process to separate 0.2 MtCO2 per year from the flue gas stream of a gas-fired power plant for urea production (Courtesy of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries).



A.5.1.3.1. Lime capture & chemical looping technologies

A.5.1.3.3. Solvent absorption technologies - Amine scrubbing

A.5.2. Power Plant model Review of performance

standards required for retrofit of CCS on current fossil plants and new more integrated fossil systems

Develop model of steam cycle for carbon capture plant



Define modes of operation of capture plant Basic amine system modelling (for application to steam

power plants with post-combustion capture) Integrated optimisation of amine scrubber modelling with

power plant model

Identify technologies with most potential for integration with likely developments in fossil generation

Identify optimum capture performance in the context of a flexible power plant producing low cost electricity

Determine the main factors that influence the cost of CO2 capture CCS impact on RAMO Influence of CCS on flexibility of IGCC


Power Generation Efficiency

Source: IEA GHG studies


Cost of CO2 Capture

A.5.3. Impact of CCS on plant operating cycles/flexibility

Cranfield• 6 – Pipeline materials review• 7 – Pipeline failure risk analysis

Aberdeen• 5 – Transport cost modelling

Newcastle• 1 - UK source/sink analysis –

CO2 quantities (review)• 2 - CO2 injection technologies

review• 3 – Regulatory impacts on

CO2 transport• 4 - Transport scenarios – link

to theme A1• 5 – Transport options & costs

A6.b CO2 transport scenarios for the UK including economic

analysis

A6.a Functional and technical review of CO2 transport (including regulations)

Theme B, GIS and Jeremy Colls (Nottingham)

Generate and collate information on CO2 transport options for the UK

Sub-theme Leader: Martin Downie



Overview of Sub-theme A6 – CO2 Transport

A.6.a. Functional and technical review of CO2 transport (including regulations)



TASK A.6.1: UK source/sink analysis-CO2 quantities

TASK A.6.2: Technical and Regulatory requirements for CO2 transport

TASK A6.3: Transport Options

A.6.b. CO2 Transport scenarios for the UK including economic analysis

TASK A6.4: Transport scenarios TASK A6.5: Strategic options & cost modelling

A.6.1. UK source/sink analysis - CO2 quantities Review sources: location; CO2 characteristics; distribution Review sinks: capacity, geological integrity, proximity to coast, existing

infrastructure, EOR. Sink assessment/ranking/selection Identify locations of suitable offshore storage reservoirs Identify possible locations of CCS plants, and quantities of CO2 to be

transported Identify existing pipeline infrastructure



Sleipner CO2 injection into Utsira deep saline reservoir

Transport overland, existing or new pipelines Sub sea transport using existing or new pipelines Transport by ship, collection from distributed sources,

delivery to sink



Photo: Dakota Gasification

A.6.3. Transport Options

Identify specific locations of suitable offshore storage reservoirs for scenario Identify possible location of specific CCS plant, and quantities of CO2 to be transported with

respect to the gradual deployment of CCS within the context of the possible energy supply scenarios developed in other themes

Technical assessment and optimisation of CCS transport strategies Specify regulatory constraints that might impact on developments Setting specifications and costs for offshore injection platforms Assessment of costs, technical and operational requirements (including energy consumption)

for pipe and ship based transport for the CCS deployments envisaged above Devise ‘optimal’ transport strategies for various CCS deployment scenarios



Possible CCS systems: sources for which CCS might be relevant, transport, and storage options

A.6.4. Transport scenarios

Capture & Storage Costs

Source: www.ieagreen.org.ukPower Generation Technology Centre


A.6.5. Strategic options & cost modelling

Modelling prospective production of oil and gas from UKCS to 2030 Modelling prospective end of field lives and economic end of infrastructure in

UKCS to 2030 Modelling Supply/Cost Curves for CO2 Capture Transportation (and Injection

Storage EOR) Modelling Economic Incentives for CO2 Capture Transportation (and

Storage/EOR) Integrate results of detailed transport studies within the techno-economic model

to inform/modify life cycle analysis Cost of CO2 Transport

Nottingham• 6 – Develop catalysts• 7 – Probe methods of catalysis• 8 – Use, investigate and assess catalysts developed

A7.a Better understanding of catalysts which allow

photocatalytic reduction in CO2 (including catalyst

development)

To develop, for the first time, catalysts which allow photocatalytic reduction to be performed in supercritical CO2

Sub-theme Leader: Mike George


Overview of Sub-theme A7 – Long Term UtilisationUKCCSC Meeting, 27 - 28 March 2006 Edinburgh

Theme D (Social Processes)

Theme F (GIS)

Theme E (Dissemination)

Theme G (High Level Energy Modelling)

Theme H (Dynamic Pathways)

All Theme A• Publish papers and

articles and update website

• Input to integrating modelling as required/appopriate

Newcastle• Link to theme B re. GIS work on sinks

and injection technologies• Link to theme C on Nottingham work on

environmental impact of leaks• Link to GIS for sources/sinks etc

Theme C (CCS and environment)

Theme B (Geological Storage)

Aberdeen• Input from Theme B

for various tasks

Imperial College• Input from Theme

B for plant flexibility definition

• Output to GIS from biomass work (if appropriate)

• Input from GIS for review paper in A1

Input to Theme A Required from All Other Themes (not shown schematically)• Advice etc for technical options exercise in theme A1

Cross Theme Interactions Involving Theme A Activities



ID Task Name1 A.2.a. Database of LC energy costs &

CO2 emissions2 A.2.1. Overall assessment of

lifecycle costs and emissions offossil fuel supply options

3 A.2.1.1. Compose a consistent,simple methodology for overalllifecycle comparison and implementit in spreadsheet form(UR)

4 A.2.1.2. Define (in consultation withImperial) a list of fossil fuel supplyoptions to be considered initially inthe analysis (UR)

5 A.2.1.3. Apply the methodology to aselection of fossil fuel supplyoptions, for which literature data hasbeen collected (UR)

6 A.2.1.4. Compose an initial shortsummary report detailing the findingsof this section of work, for circulationto the consortium as a whole (UR)

7 A.2.1.5. Update/Extend the lifecyclecomparisons as data from othertasks is produced(UR)

8 A.2.1.6. Compose summary reports(UR)9 A.2.2. Assessment of impact of

future energy supply scenarios10 A.2.2.1. Define a number of possible

future fossil fuel supply scenarios11 A.2.2.2. Provide data describing the

future fossil fuel supply scenarios. Inparticular the data should describethe costs of fossil fuel at dates overthe next 50 years, along with likely

01/0604/05 07/05 10/05 01/06 04/06 07/06 10/06 01/07 04/07 07/07 10/07

ID Task Name12 A.2.2.3. Modelling prospective

production of oil and gas from13 A.2.2.4. Modelling prospective end

of field lives and economic end ofinfrastructure in UKCCSC to 2030 (toindicate windows of opportunity in

14 A.2.2.5. Provide predictions of thecontribution to UK energy supplymade by CCS under the abovescenarios. Summaries of existingwork in this field would provide a

15 A.2.2.6. Report detailing the scenarios (UA)16 A.2.2.7. Comment on the scenarios

(UR, UA)17 A.2.2.8. Assess the impact of future

scenarios on the lifecycle analysis ofCCS and non-CCS schemes, withrespect to energy costs and carbonemissions, using the Tyndall Centrederived model where appropriate,and interactions with the GIS theme.

18 A.2.2.9. Compose a summary reportoutlining the impact of energy supplyscenarios on the carbon andeconomic viability of CCS and nonCCS fossil fuel supply options. (UR)

19 A.2.3. Summary of published andproduced data

20 A.2.3.1. Co-ordinate and contributeto report on theme A1, summarisingthe data gathered and setting out the

21 A.2.3.2. Make the source data andanalysis spreadsheets (excluding theTyndall Centre supported model)available in electronic form

Half 1, 2005 Half 2, 2005 Half 1, 2006 Half 2, 2006 Half 1, 2007 Half 2, 2007

ID Task Name1 Assessment of potential role and

value of CCS for grid operation(including intermittent

2 A.3.1. Capture plant technicaldefinition

3 A.3.1.1. First draft version (IC)4 A.3.1.2. Second draft version (IC)5 A3.2. Develop simplified scenarios6 A.3.2.1. Information gathering

exercise (IC)7 A.3.2.2. Initial conclusion for

modelling (IC)8 A.3.2.3. Review as required (IC)9 A.3.3. CCS flexibility: value

from real time analysis &10 A.3.3.1. Initial identification of

likely key sensitivities (IC)11 A.3.3.2. Develop

mathematical formulation torepresent different carboncapture technologies in

12 A.3.3.3. Develop a simulationtool to evaluate powersystem security with carboncapture applied to fossil fuelgeneration. Preliminary

13 A.3.3.4. Extend the model toinclude wind generation (IC)

14 A.3.3.5. Implementation of thesimulation tool to assesssecurity performance offuture UK electricity systems(using different capture

15 A.3.3.6. Sensitivity studies toanalyse the economic,security and environmentalperformance of differentcarbon capture technologieswith various generationsystems parameters (IC)

16 A.3.3.7. Revise keysensitivities report after

17 A.3.3.8. Final report (IC)

6/1

Input to sub-themeA5 and A1

Half 1, 2005 Half 2, 2005 Half 1, 2006 Half 2, 2006 Half 1, 2007 Half 2, 2007 Half 1, 2008 Half 2, 2008

ID Task Name18 A.3.b. Biomass co-combustion

assessment19 A.3.4. Biomass links20 A.3.4.1. Evaluation of the

possible candidaterenewable energy fuels:

21 A.3.4.2. Potential interactionswith capture technologies:Biomass co-processing

22 A.3.4.2.1. Extending the rangeof biomass feedstock that canbe used and consideringfuture power plant design tomaximise the amount of

23 A.3.4.3. Quantification ofbenefits of using co-firing ofrenewable fuels (UN)

24 A.3.4.4. Modelling of CO2reduction in different energydemand scenarios (UN)

25 A.3.4.5. Maintain links withTSEC Biomass consortium

01/06

Input to sub-theme A.4.1.

Input to sub-theme A.4.1.4.

01/05 04/05 07/05 10/05 01/06 04/06 07/06 10/06 01/07 04/07 07/07 10/07

ID Task Name

1 Technical review and assessmentusing CCS for H2 production, inother sectors and to provide

2 A.4.1. Scope of H2 productionup taking actual gasificationtechnology

3 A.4.1.1. Review of steamreforming technology to producehydrogen (UN)

4 A.4.1.2. Gasification cycle data –reports from other projects (UN)

5 A.4.1.3. Review of coalgasification and IGCC (CU)

6 A.4.1.4. Co-gasification of coalwith renewable fuels (UN, CU)

7 A.4.1.5. CO2 capacities ofadsorbents evaluation; developregeneration strategies (UN)

8 A.4.2. Scope of coalunderground gasification

9 A.4.2.1. Review of coalunderground gasificationtechnology (CU)

10 A.4.3. Catalytic cracking ofmethane at low temperatures

11 A.4.3.1.Develop effectivecatalysts and technology for thecatalytic cracking of methane to

12 A.4.4. Jet fuel from biomass13 A.4.4.1. Review of

Fischer-Tropsch synthesis (UN)14 A.4.4.2. Assessment of the use

of renewable-derived jet fuelthrough co-gasification of coal

15 A.4.5. H2 use in gas turbinesand fuel cells

16 A.4.5.1. Review of fuel cell types(IC)

17 A.4.5.2. Review of H2combustion in gas turbines (IC)

6/1

Input of DTI gasification projects

Inputs tosub-themeA.5.a.2.1.

Input from sub-theme A.3.4.

BCURA and other projects input

5/05 7/05 9/05 11/05 1/06 3/06 5/06 7/06 9/06 11/06 1/07 3/07

ID Task Name1 A.5.a. Technical description of

various capture plant technologies2 A.5.1. Identification and review

of the different carbon capture3 A.5.1.1. Evaluation of the state of

art of pre-combustion capturetechnologies (IC, CU)

4 A.5.1.2. Evaluation of the state ofart of oxyfuel combustion (IC,

5 A.5.1.3. Evaluation of the state ofart of post-combustion capturetechnologies (CU, IC, UN)

6 A.5.1.3.1. Lime capture &chemical looping technologies– reports from other projects

7 A.5.1.3.2. Adsorptiontechnologies & economics –reports from other projects

8 A.5.1.3.3. Solvent absorptiontechnologies - Amine

9 A.5.1.3.4. Membranes technologies10 A.5.1.3.5. Cryogenics11 A.5.1.4. Novel capture processes12 A.5.2. Power Plant model13 A.5.2.1. Review of performance

standards for retrofit of CCS oncurrent fossil plants and newmore integrated fossil systems

14 A.5.2.2. Develop model of steamcycle for carbon capture plant

15 A.5.2.3. Define modes ofoperation of capture plant (IC)

16 A.5.2.4. Basic amine systemmodeling (for application tosteam power plants with

17 A.5.2.5. Integrated optimization ofamine scrubber modeling withpower plant model (IC)

01/06

Input to sub-theme A2 and A5

Input from sub-theme A4.1

Input tosub-themeA.5.a.2.4.

Input fromsub-theme A.3.1

Input tosub-theme A2and A3

05/05 07/05 09/05 11/05 01/06 03/06 05/06 07/06 09/06 11/06 01/07 03/07 05/07 07/07

ID Task Name18 A.5.b. Assessment of technical

implications of various captureplant technologies

19 A.5.3. Impact of CCS on plantoperating cycles/flexibility

20 A.5.3.1. Identify technologies withmost potential for integration withlikely developments in fossilgeneration (IC, CU)

21 A.5.3.2. Identify optimum captureperformance in the context of aflexible power plant producing lowcost electricity (IC, CU)

22 A.5.3.3. Determine the mainfactors that influence the cost ofCO2 capture (flexible capture

23 A.5.3.4. CCS impact on RAMO (CU)24 A.5.3.5. Influence of CCS on

flexibility of IGCC (CU)

01/06

Input from sub-theme A4

05/05 07/05 09/05 11/05 01/06 03/06 05/06 07/06 09/06 11/06 01/07 03/07 05/07 07/07 09/07

ID Task Name1 A.6.a. Functional and technical

review of CO2 transport(including regulations)

2 A.6.1. UK source/sinkanalysis-CO2 quantities

3 A.6.1.1. Review sources:location; CO2 characteristics;distribution (BGS and UN)

4 A.6.1.2. Review sinks:capacity, geological integrity,proximity to coast, existinginfrastructure, EOR. Sinkassessment/ranking/selection(BGS and UN)

5 A.6.1.3. Identify locations ofsuitable offshore storagereservoirs (UN)

6 A.6.1.4. Identify possiblelocations of CCS plants, andquantities of CO2 to betransported. (UN)

7 A.6.1.5. Identify existingpipeline infrastructure

01/06

Input tosub-themeA.1.2.

Input fromsub-themeA.1.3.

05/05 07/05 09/05 11/05 01/06 03/06 05/06 07/06 09/06 11/06 01/07 03/07 05/07 07/07

ID Task Name8 A.6.2. Technical and

Regulatory requirements for9 A.6.2.1. CO2 physical

properties; flowcharacteristics; inlet/loadingand outlet/unloading

10 A.6.2.2. Injectionrequirements and

11 A.6.2.3. Assessment ofMaterials for CO2 transport

12 A.6.2.4. Regulations:compare US and UKregulations; identify issuesand design constraints; effecton system design andequipment choice; gapanalysis; safety. Report theadditional regulations and

13 A.6.2.5. Risk Analysis fortransportation by ship andpipeline (CU and NU)

14 A.6.3. Transport Options 15 A.6.3.1. Transport overland,

existing or new pipelines16 A.6.3.2. Subsea transport

using existing or new17 A.6.3.3. Transport by ship,

collection from distributedsources, delivery to sink Input to sub-tasks A.6.4.

05/05 07/05 09/05 11/05 01/06 03/06 05/06 07/06 09/06 11/06 01/07 03/07 05/07 07/07

ID Task Name18 A.6.b. CO2 Transport

scenarios for the UK includingeconomic analysis

19 A.6.4. Transport scenarios20 A.6.4.1. Identify specific

locations of suitable offshorestorage reservoirs forscenario (UA and UN)

21 A.6.4.2. Identify possiblelocation of specific CCSplant, and quantities of CO2to be transported withrespect to the gradualdeployment of CCS withinthe context of the possibleenergy supply scenarios

22 A.6.4.3. Technicalassessment and optimisationof CCS transport strategies

23 A.6.4.3.1. Specify regulatoryconstraints that might impact ondevelopments

24 A.6.4.3.2. Setting specificationsand costs for offshore injection

25 A.6.4.3.3. Assessment of costs,technical and operationalrequirements (including energyconsumption) for pipe and shipbased transport for the CCSdeployments envisaged above

26 A.6.4.3.4. Devise ‘optimal’transport strategies for variousCCS deployment scenarios (All)

01/06

Input fromsub-tasks A.6.1.

Input to sub-tasksA.6.1. and A.6.3.

05/05 07/05 09/05 11/05 01/06 03/06 05/06 07/06 09/06 11/06 01/07 03/07 05/07 07/07

ID Task Name27 A.6.5. Strategic options &

cost modelling28 A.6.5.1. Modelling

prospective production ofoil and gas from UKCS to2030 (to include potential

29 A.6.5.2. Modellingprospective end of fieldlives and economic end ofinfrastructure in UKCS to2030 (to indicate windows

30 A.6.5.3. ModellingSupply/Cost Curves forCO2 CaptureTransportation (and

31 A.6.5.4. ModellingEconomic Incentives forCO2 CaptureTransportation (andStorage/EOR) Incentivesexamined will include taxincentives/such as R andD tax credits, capitalgrants, use of EU ETSallowances, extension for

32 A.6.5.5. Integrate resultsof detailed transportstudies within thetechno-economic model(input from UA) toinform/modify lifecycle

05/05 07/05 09/05 11/05 01/06 03/06 05/06 07/06 09/06 11/06 01/07 03/07 05/07 07/07

ID Task Name1 A.7. Better understanding of

catalysts which allowphotocatalytic reduction in CO2(including catalyst development)

2 A.7.1. Develop catalystsphotocatalytic reduction to beperformed in supercriticalCO2 (UN)

3 A.7.2. Probe the mechanismof catalysis to facilitate thedevelopment of efficientphotocatalysts (UN)

4 A.7.3. Use, investigate andassess catalysts developed

5 A.7.3.1. Use new immobilizedcatalysts for CO2 reduction bydepositing these catalysts intomesoporous solids usingconventional solvents (UN)

6 A.7.3.2. Investigate whethertheir insolubility in supercriticalCO2 is sufficient to preventsignificant leaching (UN)

7 A.7.3.3. Assess whether thecompounds can be sufficientlydispersed to retain theirphotoactivity (UN)

01/0605/05 07/05 09/05 11/05 01/06 03/06 05/06 07/06 09/06 11/06 01/07 03/07 05/07 07/07

theme a co2 capture, transport, usage

Documents

edinburgh theme aa1

theme b

theme a5

b definition of theme

theme aco2 capture

ccs systemssubtheme

a2a3a4a5subtheme leader

value of ccs