Costs, safety and uncertainties of CO2 infrastructure development

Abstract

To avoid drastic climate change, strong reductions in CO2 emissions are required. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a potential mitigation measure. With CCS, CO2 from industrial and energy related sources is captured from flue gases and subsequently transported with pipelines and / or ships to geological storage reservoirs. The main objective of this thesis is to analyze promising transport configurations taken into account economics, safety considerations, and effect of uncertainty on the development of a CO2 infrastructure. The purpose of this thesis is to provide in-depth insights needed to support the development of continental, national or regional CO2 infrastructures. In this thesis, different methods are applied, including: - Optimization modelling for assessing the most cost-effective transport configurations; - Quantitative risk assessment for assessing the economic and spatial consequences of safety regulations; - Real option theory for calculating the value of flexibility and analyzing the influence of uncertainty on the investment decision and lay-out of a CO2 transport infrastructure. In five different chapters, the costs, optimal transport configurations, consequences of safety regulation and implications of uncertainties for CO2 infrastructure development are investigated. This leads to the following main conclusions: - Dense phase CO2 transport is in most cases the best option. For onshore pipelines, the optimal inlet pressure is 9-13 MPa and pumping stations are advised every 50-100km from an economic point of view. - CO2 ship transport has hardly a flexibility value from a chain perspective compared to offshore CO2 pipeline transport. - Uncertainty is a main barrier for companies to invest in CCS. Consequently, uncertainty leads to a lower implementation rate of CCS. - Uncertainty hampers the development of an integrated CO2 network and increase the average transport and storage costs considerably. - Dense liquid CO2 transport is safe if it is well organized and additional risk mitigation measures are not required to comply with safety regulation. In contrast, additional risk mitigation measures are required for gaseous CO2 transport and these increase the costs up to 15%. - From a system perspective, gaseous CO2 transport is only advised for small volumes over limited distances.