underground storage of 2 in depleted natural gas fields
TRANSCRIPT
Underground storage of CO2 in depleted natural gas fields
Underground storage in Barendrecht
Margriet Kuijper, Shell CO2 Storage BV
SenterNovem Workshop Amsterdam 28 October 2009
Presentation Overview
Introduction Barendrecht Project
Learnings so far: Technical Commercial Legal (regulation, permits) Organisation
Public Acceptance Playing field Local proposition Communication strategy
3
What does the project entail?
Barendrecht CO2 storage
Pernis Refinery:almost 1 million tons of pure CO2
Annually:150,000 tons of CO2to soft drinks industry (& others)
Summer:380,000 tons of CO2 to greenhouses
Winter:injection of 400,000 tons of CO2 into Barendrecht gas field reservoirs
4
Pipeline
Largely in existing pipeline corridor Maximum pressure 40 bar (gas pipeline usually 60-90 bar)
6
Why Barendrecht?
Dutch government keen to have 2 smaller storage demonstration before major demonstration projects are launched (in 2015).
In 2007 a tender invitation procedure was launched to identify suitable projects.
Preference was stated for an early start date and onshore location (there is already an offshore project in NL: K12).
Shell is involved in several CCS projects and studies worldwide, and so had the right expertise and assets to take part in the tender round.
7
What makes Barendrecht so suitable?
Relatively unique situation:
available in short term
suitable CO2 source (>99% pure)
suitable field reservoirs (safe, almost fully depleted)
learnings on entire life cycle would be quickly available
relatively close together; short distance to CO2 source
in a region where people take climate problem seriously and are keen to develop a CO2 infrastructure (Rotterdam Climate Initiative)
Forward Plan
November 2009: go-ahead (or not) decision by ministers
Dec 2009 to Dec 2010: Permit process
2010 – 2011: baseline surveys, preparations, procurement
2012: construction and start CO2 storage
Learnings so far (1)
Technical: Managing pressure (and temperature) drop into the reservoir Containment demonstration: translation of proven methods for surface
equipment to subsurface reservoirs (bow-ties, risk matrices, consequence analysis, risk-based monitoring plan)
QRA for CO2 compression, transport, wells
Conclusion: uncertainties can be avoided or managed by conservative assumptions
Commercial 4 contracts: Senternovem; OCAP; NAM; SNR Key issues: long-term liabilities, CO2 ownership, capacity infrastructure,
stranded gas, uncertainties CO2 market (demand/supply, price)
Conclusion: high risk, low reward from a pure economic/commercial perspective
Learnings so far (2)
Legal (regulation, permits) EIA submitted and approved; large part of EIA and reference documents is
aimed at demonstrating subsurface containment Moving ahead of changing/new legislation (e.g. implementation EU CCS
directive, CO2 probit) New legislation (Rijks Coordinatie Regeling) has caused delays, but should
help decision making once activated First? project to claim credits under ETS (monitoring & verification plan, etc)
Conclusion: experience so far confirms that this is a major learning area for this project (it has accelerated learning and capacity building with the many different government agencies and civil servants that need to be involved)
Organisation Project team mainly part-time staff (to shift costs in case of external delays) Internal engagement and support is (almost) as challenging as external
Public Acceptance
Brief overview of theory Understanding the playing field The local value proposition Communication strategy (main elements)
Experience Barendrecht project The playing field The local value proposition Communication: lessons learned
Understanding the Playing Field
Urgency: Climate Change and Energy Security
Necessity of CCS (in addition to other options)
Sufficient knowledge and experience
Small demo’s:- capture- storage
Framework:- legal- financing- commercial-(spatial) plans
Large scale demo’s 2015Local Politics & Issues People in
Key Positions
Local Value Proposition
Local benefits Local impact and risks
National (global) benefits
Challenge: Negatives: here, now, “us”Positives: there, later, “them”
Public Acceptance Strategy
Key elements of a Public Acceptance Strategy:
1. Actions to improve the “playing field”
2. Actions to improve the local value proposition
3. A good communications strategy that takes account of the identified strengths and weaknesses in the playing field and local value proposition
Communication Strategy
Who-company
-experts
-partners
-gov’s
-Ngo’s
What-key messages
-risk communication
-words
-pictures
-process
How-media
-face2face
-packagingWhom-surveys
-role
-diversity
Where-existing meetings
-market stalls
-location
-schools
When-1 yr before formal procedure
-avoid local elections
-as often as needed
-use key external events
-partners need to be ready
Organisation-Competencies for
public acceptance
-Coordination
The Barendrecht Playing Field
Urgency: Climate Change and Energy Security
Necessity of CCS (in addition to other options)
Sufficient knowledge and experience
Small demo’s:- capture- storage
Framework:- legal- financing- commercial-(spatial) plans
Large scale demo’s 2015Local Politics & Issues People in
Key Positions
Local Value PropositionBarendrecht perspective
Local benefits Local impact and risks
National (global) benefits
Challenge: Negatives: here, now, “us”Positives: there, later, “them”
Risk Perception
Risk Property Score CO2-opslag
-- = publieke perceptieTimescale -
Worst case fatalities/impact +/--
Choice (exposure) -
Cost/benefit (equity) -/--
Personal influence/control -/--
New technology +/--
Damage irreversible +/-
Identification victims --
Harmful intention +/-
20
Uncertainties, risks and HSE risks
Uncertainties
Risks
HSE risks
New gas field
(or storage in saline aquifer)CO2 storage in depleted gas field
CO2 transport pipeline
Conclusion Public Acceptance
“playing field” was not favourable; national government started communications late
Local value proposition is/was not good enough
Risk perception challenges need more attention in communication
Difficult to control: NATME effect: Not According to My Expert Media choice of experts (credible) Individual Crusaders; e.g. media quoting CDA-politician “there
could be hundreds of thousands deaths in case of an accident”