Carbon capture and storage

1. Lucas Desport – MINES ParisTech – PSL
Centre for Applied Mathematics, France
7th June 2021
The role of carbon capture, utilization and
storage in the global energy system: long-
term optimization and decarbonation of
the industry
IAEE 2021 Conference
1
Session 12 on Green Innovation

2. Summary
1. Context
2. Methodology
1. Discipline: prospective at a glance
2. Tool: the TIMES Integrated Assessment Model
3. Main assumptions
4. Scenarios under discussion
5. Results
6. Conclusion
2

3. Context – CCUS
3
National Petroleum Council, 2019. Meeting the Dual Challenge - The Role of CCUS in the Future Energy Mix.

4. Context – CCUS & Industry
4
Leeson et al., 2017. A Techno-economic analysis and systematic review of carbon capture and storage (CCS) applied to the iron and steel, cement,
oil refining and pulp and paper industries, as well as other high purity sources. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 61, 71–84.
Cement
Iron &
Steel
Chemicals
Pulp &
Paper
Non-
ferrous
Others
Industrial CO2 emissions per sector
8.5 Gt of direct CO2 emitted in 2017
or 23% of global CO2 emissions (IEA)

5. Context
5
The role of CCUS in the global energy system:
long-term optimization and decarbonization of
the industry

6. The prospective discipline
1. This is not forecasting, but the
starting point is common: the
image of the current energy
system
2. Optimal paradigm: minimizing
total annual cost or maximizing
welfare
3. Investment decisions under
several constraints and policies
 Assess the possible evolutions
of the energy system under climate
constraint for policymakers
6
IPCC, 2014. Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change ; Working Group III contribution to the Fifth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate change 2014. Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, NY.

7. The TIAM-FR model: A TIMES model
7
Remme, U., 2001. IEA-ETSAP | Times [WWW Document]. URL https://iea-etsap.org/index.php/etsap-tools/model-
generators/times (accessed 5.27.21).
𝑁𝑃𝑉 =
𝑟=1
𝑅
𝑡∈𝑇
(1 + 𝑑𝑟,𝑡)𝑡0−𝑡𝐴𝐶𝑟,𝑡
𝐴𝐶𝑟,𝑡 = 𝑐 ∙ 𝑋𝑟,𝑡
min 𝑁𝑃𝑉

8. 8
TIAM-FR: Regional disaggregation
• Exchanges between regions
• Base year 2010
• Perfect foresight of agents to 2100

9. TIAM-FR: Reference Energy System
9
Climate module

10. Main assumptions – Iron & Steel
• Other mitigation strategies implemented than CCUS
• Biomass burning
• Top gas recycling
• Electric arc furnace (EAF) route from scrap smelting
• Direct reduction of iron with EAF
• Direct reduction of iron (DRI) with H2
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Blast Furnace with capture
Blast Furnace with top gas recycling and capture
Corex with capture
CO2 avoidance cost [$/tCO2]
Direct cost, excluding CO2 transport and storage
Cost of avoided CO2 in the I&S industry from ETSAP

11. Main assumptions - Cement
• Data reference: European Cement Research Academy (ECRA) and the Usable
Energy Database (UED) of the UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC)
• Other mitigation strategies implemented
• Share of clinker in cement
• Biomass burning
11
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
MEA Post combustion
KS-1 Post combustion
Partial oxyfuel
Full oxyfuel
CO2 avoidance cost [$/tCO2]
Direct cost, excluding CO2 transport and storage
Cost of avoided CO2 in the cement industry

12. Main assumptions – CO2 utilization
• Based on the assumption of Pérez-Fortes et al. and the JRC-EU-
TIMES model
• On site production of synfuels (no CO2 T&D costs)
• E-fuels in output include
• Methanol
• Diesel
• Gasoline 12
CO2 conversion process
CO2
Electricity
H2
Heat
E-fuel
Residual CO2 emissions
Pérez-Fortes, M., Schöneberger, J.C., Boulamanti, A., Tzimas, E., 2016. Methanol synthesis using
captured CO2 as raw material: Techno-economic and environmental assessment. Applied Energy 161,
718–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.07.067

13. Main assumptions – CO2 T&S
• Storage potentials of 10,142 GtCO2 estimated by Selosse including
• Enhanced Oil Recovery
• Enhanced Coal Bed Methane
• Saline aquifers onshore and offshore
• Depleted oil or gas fields onshore and offshore
• Aggregated costs of CO2 transport and storage of
• 10 $/tCO2 in main scenario
• Sensitivity analysis with costs ranging from 20 to 50 $/tCO2
13
Selosse, S., 2019. Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage: how carbon storage and biomass resources potentials can impact the development
of the BECCS, in: Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage. Elsevier, pp. 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816229-3.00012-0

14. Scenarios
1. In line with Paris Agreement (PA)
• 1,5°C temperature elevation by the end of the century
• Involves a decarbonation of the world energy system in 2050
2. Industry decarbonation by 80% in 2050 (IND80)
• Compared to 2010 levels (IPCC, 2014)
• Including direct CO2 and non-GHG emissions as well as process
emissions
• Excluding indirect emissions
14

15. Results – The steel industry
15
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Production
[in
Mt]
Global crude steel production routes over the 21st century constrained to PA
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Production
[in
Mt]
Global crude steel production routes over the 21st century constrained to IND80
BF-BOF with CCS Existing assets BF-BOF with biomass DRI with H2 Scrap recycling EAF

16. Results – The cement industry
16
36%
44%
20%
Breakdown of cement standards
production (IND80)
42%
38%
20%
Breakdown of cement standards
production (PA)
Portland cement
Clinker 73% mixed with steel slags
Clinker 70% mixed with fly ashes
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Production
[in
Mt]
Global cement production routes over the 21st century constrained by PA
Existing assets Dry kiln with oxycombustion capture

17. Results – CO2 capture
17
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Combustion CO2
from industry
Combustion CO2
from power sector
Negative emissions Process CO2 from
industry
Amount
of
CO
2
captured
[in
Gt]
Cumulated CO2 captured
IND80 PA

18. Results – CCU or CCS?
18
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
IND80 PA
Amount
of
CO
2
stored
or
utilized
[in
Gt]
Fate of captured CO2
Storage Utilization
93%
of the CO2 utilized
comes from
industrial assets

19. Results – CCU for what?
19
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100
Synfuels
production
[in
PJ]
Global synfuel production over the 21st century
constrained by PA
Diesel Gasoline Methanol
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Diesel Gasoline Methanol
Production
share
Bio-based production CO2 utilization
Coal-based production Gas-based production
Refinery

20. Results – Sensitivity analysis
20
18.055
18.060
18.065
18.070
18.075
18.080
18.085
18.090
18.095
18.100
18.105
10 20 30 40 50
Cumulated
amount
of
CO
2
[in
Gt]
Cost of CO2 T&S [in $/t]
Impact on T&S costs on the amount of CO2 utilized

21. Conclusion
21
1. CCS faces strong competition from hydrogen in the steel industry
due to partial CO2 capture.
2. CCS is essential in cement plants but can also benefit from less
clinker-intensive cement production.
3. The CCU route has a minor future compared to the CCS but can
significantly help in producing clean fuels.
4. An 80% decarbonization of industry does not necessarily implies
more CO2 capture units but rather more expensive clean
production routes.
5. An 80% decarbonization policy is not necessarily desirable, (nor
feasible): the total annual cost of IND80 is twice higher than PA.

22. Thank you for your attention.
Do you have questions?
22