Techno-economic assessment of potential CCS deployment in the Southern African region

Transcription

1 Techno-economic assessment of potential CCS deployment in the Southern African region, ERC in conjunction with World Bank Dubrovnik, Croatia, 4th May 2011

2 Techno-economic assessment of potential CCS deployment in South-African region World Bank project conducted by consortium of VITO (Belgium), EIHP (Croatia) and ERC (South Africa) Overall objective: Assess possible application and development of CCS in power systems in Balkan and Southern Africa regions using a techno-economic model Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

3 Study Area of Southern African Region 4 Countries: South Africa, Botswana, Mozambique and Namibia Population 74.5 million GDP (PPP) ~600 billion USD2000 Electricity demand ~278 TWh CO 2 emission from power sector ~246 million tons UNFCC/Kyoto Ratified: all countries in study area Only South Africa has a quantitative reduction target Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

4 Power systems in Study Area Total installed power (2009) ~47 GW Thermal power plants 90% Mainly coal based Hydro and other RES 10% Nuclear power 1.8 GW in South Africa Peak load 41 GW Critical system reserve in several countries South Africa accounts for ~91% of total electricity demand Regional transmission network is sparsely connected with some new connection projects underway Local bottle-necks sometimes limit interconnection capacities Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

5 Share of Installed Capacity Installed power (2009) % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Botswana Mozambique Namibia South Africa Pump Stor Hydro Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

6 Generation (TWh) Generation (2009) Botswana Mozambique Namibia South Africa Net Imports Hydro Nuclear Gas Oil Coal Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

7 TWh Electricity demand projection ~ 220 TWh Zimbabwe Namibia Mozambique Botswana South Africa SA demand based on IRP 2011, others based on SAPP pool plan study of 2008 Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

8 Generation expansion options Large coal resource available in South Africa, Botswana, and Mozambique Large scale hydro Solar, wind, biomass Natural gas Namibia, Mozambique CBM Potential in Botswana, and South Africa Nuclear programs under consideration in South Africa Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

9 Generic Technology Options and Costs Plant Description Capital cost 1 Fixed O&M Var O&M Efficiency Avail./ Capacity Capacity credit $/kw $/MWh Factor $/kw OCGT liquid fuels Combined cycle gas Combined cycle gas with 1, CCS Supercritical coal 2, Supercritical coal with 4, CCS PWR nuclear 6, Biomass 4, Bulk Wind 2, NA Solar thermal central 5, NA receiver Solar PV (bulk) 3, NA Technology Costs based on SA IRP CCS Costs provided by VITO scaled to SA IRP costs. Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

10 RTS Capacitry Medupi (Coal) Kusile (Coal) Ingula (PS) DOE OCGT IPP Cogeneration Wind CSP Landfill, hydro Sere (Wind) Decomm. SA IRP committed build plan Committed build Committed build plan is forced in all scenarios. MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW MW Total Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

11 Storage Options modelled Storage Cost ($/ton) Country # in report Site Name Location Capacity (Gton) Cost/uncerta inty Risk premium Start Year South Africa 1 Karoo Basin Inland 12 very high NA - NA 0 SAF 2 Zululand Mesozoic Basin On-Shore East Coast 0.46 high % Mezosoic Algoa and Gamtoos Basin On-Shore South Coast 0.4 high 50% Onshore coal fields On-Shore inland 1.2 very high NA - NA 0 5 Mesozoic Outeniqua Basin Off-shore South coast 48 high 50% Mesozoic Orange Basin Off-shore West coast 56 high 50% Mesezoic Durban Basin Off-shore East coast 42 high 50% Depleted oil/gas fields Off-shore South coast medium 25% Botswana 9 Coal fields South West 3.78 high 50% BOT 10 Saline aquifers South East unknown very high NA - NA 0 Mozambique 11 Coal fields Inland South 6 very high % MOZ 12 Depleted gas fields Off-shore South 0.1 very high 50% Saline aquifer (Ibo) Off-shore North unknown very high NA - NA 0 Namibia 14 Saline aquifer Inland East unknown very high NA - NA 0 NAM 15 Depleted oil/gas fields Off-shore South high 75% Modelled? Some options are not modelled because of high uncertainty and costs. Start year for Namibia brought forward within model horizon. Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

12 CO2 Transport Options Country Transport Source Transport Sink Distance Unit Transport Cost Transport cost km $/tonco2/km $/tonco2 South Africa Coal fields East coast Coal fields South coast Coal fields Botswana coal fields East coast East coast South coast South coast Botswana Coal fields Coal fields Mozambique Coal fields Coal fields Coal fields Gas fields Gas fields Gas fields Namibia Coal fields Gas fields Gas fields Gas fields Zimbabwe Coal fields Coal fields Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

13 Development scenarios Reference scenario Least cost scenario "Normal" or "expected" development path in power generation assuming free market in electricity, Baseline scenario (South Africa IRP with CO2 Limit on South Africa) with EOR Forced construction of some power projects identified in the Revised Balance Scenario CO 2 tax and CO 2 limit (South Africa) scenarios Gradual increase of carbon tax With and without EOR and ECBM benefits Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

14 Levelized Cost in $/MWh Levelized Cost in $/MWh Screening curve analysis Levelized generation cost No carbon tax USD/ton CO % 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Capacity Factor Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Gas Turbine w CCS Supercritical Coal Supercritical Coal w CCS Nuclear Pressurised Water Reactor Wind 2030 Solar Photovoltaic 2030 Solar Thermal 2030 Biomass Imported Hydro 0 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Capacity Factor Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Gas Turbine w CCS Supercritical Coal Supercritical Coal w CCS Nuclear Pressurised Water Reactor Wind 2030 Solar Photovoltaic 2030 Solar Thermal 2030 Biomass Imported Hydro Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

15 Levelized Cost in $/MWh Levelized Cost in $/MWh Screening curve analysis Levelized generation cost USD/ton CO USD/ton CO % 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Capacity Factor Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Gas Turbine w CCS Supercritical Coal Supercritical Coal w CCS Nuclear Pressurised Water Reactor Wind 2030 Solar Photovoltaic 2030 Solar Thermal 2030 Biomass Imported Hydro 0 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Capacity Factor Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Gas Turbine w CCS Supercritical Coal Supercritical Coal w CCS Nuclear Pressurised Water Reactor Wind 2030 Solar Photovoltaic 2030 Solar Thermal 2030 Biomass Imported Hydro Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

16 Total Installed Capacity (MW) Electricity Supply (TWh) Reference scenario 600 Results Generation dominated by coal, with some hydro Diesel and Natural gas used for peaking ,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 - Coal Existing Coal New OCGT CCGT Nuclear Hydro Solar Wind DSM Final Energy Coal Existing Coal New OCGT CCGT Nuclear Hydro Pump Stor Solar Wind DSM System Peak Demand Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

17 CO2 Emissions (Mt) Average Generation Costs ($/MWh) Reference scenario Results CO 2 emission Cumulative: 6,622 Mton 2015: 265 Mton 2030: 392 Mton Average generation cost hovers around 45$/MWh before increasing from 2022 onwards, reaching around 52 $/MWh in CO2 Emissions Avg Gen Costs Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

18 Cumulative Stored CO2 (Mt) CO2 Emissions (Mton) Electricity Supply (TWh) Baseline Scenario (IRP SA) With EOR benefits, there is some retrofit on planned coal (CO2 transported to gas field) There are also some Gas CCS plants near the depleted field Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS CCGT CCGT CCS Nuclear Hydro Solar Wind DSM Final Energy Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS OCGT Off-Shore South Coast (SA oil/gas field) CCGT CCGT CCS Retrofit Total Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

19 CO 2 Limit and Tax scenarios Assumptions Two levels of CO 2 tax tested without and with EOR and ECBM benefits CO2 Tax levels: (each time ramping up from zero in 2015) USD/ton CO 2 by USD/ton CO 2 by USD/ton CO 2 by 2020 CO2 Limits: Set for South Africa in line with Copenhagen target of 275MT from power sector by 2025 (as also enforced in SA IRP 2011) EOR and ECBM benefits (subtracted from storage costs) : 40 USD/ton CO2 for depleted oil/gas fields (SA, Namibia, Mozambique) 4.8 USD/ton CO2 for ECBM (Botswana) Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

20 CO2 Emissions (Mt) Average Generation Costs ($/MWh) CO 2 Limit and Tax Scenarios 30$/ton Results 30 USD/ton CO 2 without EOR/ECBM Coal option less competitive CCS not competitive Increased share of nuclear, renewables and natural gas Cumulative savings in CO 2 emission amount to 281 Mton (4.2%) Average generation costs rise by 32% (including CO2 costs) and 4.2% (excluding CO2 costs) 30 USD/ton CO 2 with EOR/ECBM CCS option cost effective in SA (depleted oil fields) 80Mton by 2030 (full cap) Cumulative savings in CO 2 emission amount to 284 Mton (4.3%) Average generation costs rise by 31% (including CO2 costs) and 4% (excluding CO2 costs) CO2 Emissions Avg Gen Costs Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

21 Electricity Supply (TWh) Cumulative Stored CO2 (Mt) CO 2 Tax (limit on SA) scenario 30$/ton with EOR Results CCS coal option becomes competitive for South Africa Share of CCS based generation reaches 4% in CO 2 stored South Africa - offshore depleted oil/gas field CCS share in generation Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS OCGT CCGT Nuclear Hydro Solar Wind DSM Final Energy

22 Electricity Supply (TWh) Cumulative Stored CO2 (Mt) CO 2 Tax (limit on SA) scenario 60$/ton with EOR Results Very similar results to 30$/ton scenario Only SA depleted oil field used for CCS. Cumulative CO2 emission savings are: 484 Mton (7.3% - was 4.3% at 30$/ton) CO 2 stored South Africa - offshore depleted oil/gas field CCS share in generation Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS OCGT CCGT Nuclear Hydro Solar Wind DSM Final Energy

23 Electricity Supply (TWh) Cumulative Stored CO2 (Mt) CO 2 Tax scenario 120$/ton Results CCS deployed in SA and Botswana Substantial drop of CO 2 emission is registered after Mton of CO 2 stored Cumulative CO 2 emission savings are 1943 Mton (30%) Average generation cost is $75/MWh (55% incr. incl. CO2 costs) and $67/MWh (40% incr. excl. CO2 costs). Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May CO 2 stored Off-Shore East Coast (SA Durban) Off-Shore South Coast (SA oil/gas field) Off-Shore South Coast (SA Outeniqua) Coal Fields (Botswana) CCS share in generation Coal Existing Coal New Coal CCS CCGT CCGT CCS Nuclear Hydro Biomass Solar Wind DSM Final Energy

24 CO2 Emissions (Mton) Results summary CO 2 emission Reference Baseline $30/ton $30/tonEOR $60/tonEOR $120/ton EOR Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

25 Average Generation Costs ($/MWh) Results summary Average generation cost (incl. CO2 Costs) Reference Baseline $30/ton $30/tonEOR $60/tonEOR $120/ton EOR 0 Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

26 Average Generation Costs ($/MWh) Results summary Average generation cost (excl. CO2 Costs) Reference Baseline $30/ton $30/tonEOR $60/tonEOR $120/ton EOR 0 Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

27 Conclusions Current state and prospects Current state of power systems in Southern African region Electricity generation based mainly on local coal and hydro; TPPs relatively old and inefficient Regional transmission network is sparse Large potential for development of coal, hydro, solar and wind resources Natural gas available in the region but supply is far from potential demand Nuclear option under consideration in South Africa ECBM under consideration in Botswana Solar Thermal option under consideration in South Africa and Namibia Electricity demand will increase Use of conventional fossil fuel technologies will inevitably lead to a large increase of CO 2 emission Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

28 Conclusions Project activities realised An analysis of possible use of CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) technologies and their competitiveness with other options was carried out Underground storage volume and associated transport and storage costs were researched and estimated CCS options in electricity generation and their costs were estimated Techno-economic model for optimisation was developed Several development scenarios were simulated Reference, Base line, CO 2 Tax and CO 2 Limit, Fossil only scenario Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

29 Conclusions CCS Cost Effectiveness CCS retrofit is cost effective to reduce the costs of meeting the CO2 target in the baseline scenario (IRP SA investment plan) when EOR benefits are included. CCS options also becomes competitive if CO 2 tax of 30 USD/ton is applied, when EOR benefits are included. There is not much change in the system between $30/ton and $60/ton CO2. But at $120/ton there is a dramatic reduction in CO2 emissions The most cost effective CCS storage options within study horizon are in South Africa and Botswana CCS competitiveness depends on future plans for development of nuclear programs Further research of availability and costs of underground storages needed in all the countries in the region to reduce uncertainty Also interesting would be to look further than 2030, when other storage options become available. Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May

30 Thank you for your attention! Techno-economic assessment of CCS deployment in Balkan Dubrovnik May