IOL- 0 9 UNDERGROUND DISPOSAL OF CARBON DIOXIDE (DU 3?06 . April, 1991 IMPERIAL OIL LIMITED UNDERGROUND DISPOSAL OF CARBON DIOXIDE APRIL, 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS • • • • • • • • Executive summary Introduction 5 co2 Emissions co2 Disposal Sources Options Cost and Benefit Relative Current 5. 6 Assessment Contribution of 9 co2 to the Greenhouse Initiatives Effect 11 12 Conclusions 12 - 2 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Imperial from has examined the particular, relevant The to first employing the company has its business and unique these oil The second co 2 into These options "point" and pipelined are of over subterranean study sands of about tonnes emissions and Imperial estimates develop, over point gas to co 2 "sinks". In options which of co 2 enhance the straight are such where a reasonable distance into highly subterranean recovery disposal formations relevant as there can to of by these injection saline are be sources power aquifers. large, single captured, processed injection wells that Alberta where there per day of the five - about would to 10 year up to 50,000 of Alberta of the or - 3 - oil other fertilizer and from these facilities are of Alberta co 2 feasible to 42 percent total. be technically period, the infrastructure per day tonnes aggregate about facilities, and Canadian it in generation plants co 2 emissions a third in emission refining that a about 2 coal-fired 10 percent dispose sources (co 2 ) expertise. which and plants. represents two co 2 emissions large petrochemical permanently dioxide so-called involves on co production 142,000 carbon formations. focuses a number and only remove injection subterranean are sources access This deep to examined involves containing hydrocarbons. of steps atmosphere of reservoirs direct 3. 5 emissions percent of from of co 2 . the Canadian to This larger co 2 emissions. Capital operating For costs the could costs of up to hydrocarbon range For the straight between $35 and $45 per preliminary in the carefully and with also of identify net and $50 per tonne currently disposal areas for that with co2 net costs are large co2 which annual disposal depending some of the there of with other on disposal could in government range assess projects. technology These development costs to to be need In this collaborative agencies definitively specific net alternatives. participating more joint of co2 , of option, and for cost offset disposal industries will billion co2 . of is $7.5 tonne to disposal weighed that co2 the option, and other Saskatchewan benefits 10 plants. underground Imperial studies for work shows assessed regard, $225 million of hydrocarbons costs. society about $15 recovery Imperial's be recovery between incremental would in the Alberta costs studies where and will this is appropriate. Imperial is identify and evaluate part of opportunities. projects, a conducting larger This depending a follow-up the most program study on the program co2 attractive to could identify lead findings. - 4 - in its own operations injection enhanced to co2 pilot projects oil recovery demonstration to as INTRODUCTION As a significant Canadian fuels, Imperial Oil public policy and Paper The the on Potential paper paper dioxide is (CO ), 2 "to by "sinks", atmosphere, or reservoirs to industries site. that still Imperial's directional and with others in co2 Emissions Imperial fuel does academic, are only co 2 and understanding at subject are industry to of the carbon commitment for carbon from oil the bearing option co 2 of at technical stakeholders the modification in dioxide a relevant this 1990. operations." incorporate Instead, in into amounts evolving. follow-up time. as a all plant input since study to results from similar reflect Conclusions Imperial are collaborates studies. Sources estimates combustion sinks change outlined carbon the "Discussion potential injection yet s The precise recovery fossil in disposal economic significant not Imperial' was released remove oil of climate commitments underground generate paper government, to enhanced global gases. and consumer participating underground greenhouse perspective This studies as in which the technical support From Imperial's of issue seven mechanisms such the of examining the to perspective on one and committed Warming" one of the determine dioxide company's up marketer is concerning Global follows discussion Limited debate presented producer, that were in 529 1988, Canada's million - 5 - tonnes co2 or emissions about from 1. 45 fossil million tonnes per exist day. in Western sources, per day options Canada in close proximity Alberta's order, Alberta's represents focuses energy heating. Even distributed, through concentrated be gathered. larger points most is would In the likely the of total 340,000 for tonnes Canada, near vented be the to the and this power types to medium from which widely volumes the of some of collection from should co 2 can the and locations term, and are generation atmosphere costly, decreasing transportation emissions the the least in generation, few sources 1 summarizes otherwise emissions originates, of industrial sources. co2 that of power in a relatively Table significant sources. sources, significant injection to co 2 generation related underground production a quarter Alberta i~dustrial for estimated nearly on the from the numerous and since study are Since these of supply collection become necessary. co 2 Disposal Two broad options co 2 can enhance For Options be oil the exist injected Table hydrocarbon recovery need to on the be opportunities disposal deep production option, required. Depending into and gas former for into subterranean operations an and disposal controlled. generally for the example, require - 6 - for to disposal. would considered be for disposal. concentration enhanced nearly either network _ options non-hydrocarbon For formations, pipeline the option, reservoirs: or strictly extensive summarizes 2 underground pure oil of co 2 would recovery co 2 . This (EOR) would Table 1 Alberta Industrialand PowerGenerationPointSourcesof CO2 CO 2 Emissions (1000 tonnes/day) % of Alberta Emissions Examples Power Generation 97 29 Wabamun, Sundance Oil Sands 30 9 Syncrude, Suncor, Cold Lake Fertilizer & Petrochemical 15 4 Redwater, AGEC, Medicine Hat, Union Carbide Source - TOTAL 142 42 Table 2 PotentialCO2 RemovalOptions Additional Hydrocarbon Recovered % OOIP %0GIP Net CO2 Retained % HCPV I. Hydrocarbon Recovery Schemes A. Conventional Oil/Gas Operations Pressure Maintenance Gas Cycling 5-20 80 Enhanced Gas Recovery 10-50 60 Immiscible Oil Recovery (i) Vertical (ii) Horizontal B. Miscible Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) Miscible Displacement (i) Vertical (ii) Horizontal Miscible Chase Gas (i) Flue Gas or Nitrogen (ii) CO2 II. Non-Hydrocarbon TOTAL Schemes 6-11 5-10 Estimated Disposal Volumes 1000 Tonnes/day % of Alberta Emissions 15-30 5-10 15-30 5-10 0-50 0-15 8 8 20-30 6-12 70 8 2 2 70 70 100 -50 -16 require some processing, concentrations of 10 to power In addition, the co2 plants. corrosion At the from application the subterranean the rock operations. spaces produced oil from hydrocarbon In or terms of to contribute co2 operations. 2 provides a percentage Also the estimated hydrocarbon will of approximately potential be necessary the a percentage of oil of to the and to gas the the the ·into or from gas conventional will return to remove in the co2 this exist to to miscible and the amounts utilize EOR amounts injected, recovery gas-in-place in injected in and hydrocarbon co2 limit reservoir. benefits, the is oil opportunities compared of volume 65,000 back original-oil-or as also it to from facilities. recovered co2 in gas be taken co2 the be recovery reservoir retention propane also stack and other injected recovery, net are the to additional not conventional of technically operation methane, it estimates pore Estimates would available in the have displace and recycle CO2 retained in the vary significantly. Table to of to The would in EOR operations, some hydrocarbon typically in pipelines which gas, is by volume steps stream end, Since the 15 percent reservoir pore co2 since can benefits (OOIP or subterranean of as OGIP) . formation original hydrocarbons disposal volumes is in place or (HCPV). feasible provided in Table tonnes per day and ethane) are being - 7 - of 2. For hydrocarbon injected to for each example, gases provide type of while (such pressure as maintenance it is in types total consumption as much as 25 percent of technically for The second A similar of major of disposal but the wells solids to replace can one hand also plug disposal at the surface it ten would year period, day. It amount of off co2 the could access might the a is also co 2 f ·or injection of chemical this to suggesting straight reactions the insoluble the disposal aquifer required type between forming formation As a result, be into of this enhance to purposes. future compared to reduction comes at technically the day valuable and significant appear per the existing reduction and for ooo tonnes when water be to mixing and mitigate the effects. In summary, five the be applied The effectiveness extent could 2. involves on the used removal plugging option Alberta, of this per equivalent aquifers. depend it an in operations, tonnes as shown on Table saline On gas 30,000 inject formation carbonates. capacity to operations co 2 could of and to disposal will saline oil 15,000 operations production volume conventional subterranean the perhaps feasible miscible 50, that co 2 . by other in oil estimated replaced deep conventional of to dispose co2 --co 2 which would to injectants These projects. volumes, Canadian over al 1 Alberta a significant to develop, infrastructure hydrocarbon in feasible industrial cost. - 8 - over of some currently while emissions, emissions. up a to extent used fairly in minor represent But a this cost To and Benefit evaluate Assessment the necessary to is that the an will developed to of assumed involved, nearest, aquifers be implementation of with start-ups staged each project will will over last year for wherever or, suitable, It envisioned the field scenario envisages 5,000 tonnes It a combined not and revenues period. where but is context, handling a five 20 years, recovery this and each offset transportation In costs partially will, be used. is revenues disposal most it and the which co 2 the required. 10 schemes costs benefits gathering, estimate co 2 disposal, hydrocarbon is of of disposal that with infrastructure facilities type recovery associated disposal necessarily this estimates It be straight of hydrocarbon costs. possible, cost develop from increased these net is the per day, assumed that project life of 25 to purify, years. Capital costs will treat, compress hydrocarbon include and that required pipeline products to and 2 recycling co enable estimated to total $750 million scheme. The $750 million cost nearly pure first. co Then, 2 as from the oil to sands is the higher costs required from gas streams will be offset to scheme $750 to the restrain million the required to growth level. - 9 - purify co . These costs 2 $1,250 million (1990$) that collection plants developed to to of and fertilizer an infrastructure may be possible facilities those assumes advanced, flue for remove and and As capital a will result, per the occur technology concentrate some extent. in of are is co 2 it Therefore costs for a each capital investment of approximately reduce emissions (about 15 percent A 50,000 first step the per and expected that first three projects and to would costs project and service basis, per tonne Some revenues generated straight of costs technically net basis tonnes day magnitude. required It to is implement a transportation consortium over million the whole increased per a disposal are the of of about by hydrocarbon the could benefits that $65 to related and facilities costs of additional recovery fewer of a cost hydrocarbon offset expected life Combined using cost for requiring 25 year year. project, 00/mcf) costs the of and frame. $22.5 projects costly sale. and lower be reduced by half. An assessment these be to necessary into expenditures, this would ($3. 50-$4. from of required 10 schemes of these disposal transportation nearly of design time translate co 2 of be the about costs would would development of the be operating projects. For each would capital $75 for the to per and initiate extend tonnes be an ambitious years Assembling stakeholders Operating five 50,000 required would projects to infrastructure. the times recovery-related be co 2 emissions). objective lead would by about Alberta day long billion atmosphere of the tonne implement the to $7.5 can hydrocarbon be based successful that allows of co 2 (7-10 recovery on large-scale for mcf) estimating EOR scheme. recycling, per the barrel - 10 - could of oil could efficiency Such require recovered. schemes, between offset of a on a 0.4-0.5 A few unique and small that project better field efficiencies projects of the favourable and Therefore, using depending cost co2 tonne a benefit These such of results estimates, leading be required to there recovery and benefits, resulting need current not of co2 the barrel, project, the $15 and thirds and net $50 per correspond of gross to costs. 3. co2 price growth utilization would a improved would As a consequence, not be projects, of with net hydrocarbon no costs by contributors the self-supporting. combination overall and efficiency, scenario. only per revenues oil be recovery themselves. So that co2 and emissions reservoirs. an appropriate in Table less inappropriate. between two be offsetting costs of the which emissions, by society. hydrocarbon in and in significant expenditures underground quarter likely be shared Alberta offsetting disposal Contributions Significant to considering will be of These projects straight more broadly reduced a break-even would to be increased recovery Further, Relative to in tonnes life significant exceed hydrocarbon 0.4-0.5 the summarized technology, but one would of demonstrated opportunities over might have However, expectations growth are Canada achievable. a requirement between Western proposed, $2.75/mcf). By Imperial's would are disposal ($1 and in magnitude on price of tests to the Greenhouse commitment by only Further, schemes the context do are not for and priorities - 11 - required 15 percent the potential Effect to reduce by injection into benefits appear co2 are to disposal better co2 -based of be economic can be understood, in placed it Table 3 Projected Costs and Benefits of CO2 Disposal $/tonne of CO2 Hydrocarbon-Recovery $/MCF of CO2 Projects CO2 Supply Cost 65-75 3.50-4.00 Hydrocarbon Recovery Benefits 25-50 1.25-2.50 Net CO2 Supply Cost 15-50 1.00-2. 75 35-45 1.75-2.25 Straight Disposal Net CO2 Supply Cost is important to greenhouse other gas examine emissions greenhouse current and with gases (i.e. compare this others, approach such methane to as reducing reducing emissions and CFCs) from their of sources. Initiatives As stated at expertise the outset, of Imperial. academia and other inputs, stakeholders will assessment. collaborative studies costs and and identify paper Other comprehensive in Alberta this other Saskatchewan that co2 of areas for from is experience industries, to currently achieve will definitively for specific technology a more participating and government more and governments, industries disposal joint the be required Imperial with benefits presents agencies assess projects development in the and where will this is appropriate. Imperial is evaluate the projects to also conducting most enhance study will could result in pilot These types of nation to exploit an in-house program attractive opportunities hydrocarbon recovery be completed by mid-1991 demonstration initiatives co2 will disposal identify co2 for in and, to its and injection operations. depending This on the findings, industry and projects. better position opportunities should this the become desirable. Conclusions 1. Disposal of 50,000 feasible in the tonnes near term per if - 12 - day a of co2 combination is technically of enhanced hydrocarbon recovery and straight disposal schemes is implemented. 2. Capital expenditures required over operating costs, range of a and at five the $65 to projects of to cost to 10 for $75 per $35 least year co2 of per billion period: disposal tonne $45 $7.5 for tonne would with be in hydrocarbon for be combined co2 of would the recovery straight disposal projects. 3. Increased is not 4. from expected costs, to revenue but $15 to to fully could reduce $50 per tonne. Significant impact of such 5. Should net disposal greenhouse gas their right, underground high for degree to emissions strategies emissions In evolve through options injection assessment. costs projects co2 injection these projects associated required co2 recovery of collaboration achieve a relatively through implementation schemes. international own a be reducing the disposal and would in hydrocarbon offset investments among stakeholders minor enhanced require particular, greenhouse gas strategies adopted steps such emissions achieve that the - 13 - to are disposal further technical to be compared broadest benefits and other uneconomic as . the opportunities need co2 to reduce co2 of and reduce to for in by cost other ensure society. the