CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery and CO 2 capture and storage: An environmental economic trade-off analysis

[en] CO 2 enhanced oil recovery can play a significant role in stimulating carbon capture and storage because of additional oil revenues generated. However, it also leads to additional greenhouse gas emissions. We estimate the global warming potential of different CO 2 capture scenarios with and without enhanced oil recovery. During a 10 year period in which oil and electricity are produced without CO 2 being captured, the global warming potential is 11 MtCO 2 equivalents. We show that if CO 2 is captured and used for 15 years of enhanced oil recovery, the global warming potential decreases to 3.4 MtCO 2 equivalents. This level is 100% higher compared to the scenario in which the captured CO 2 would be stored in an offshore aquifer instead. If the capture of CO 2 is stopped when the oil reservoir is depleted, the global warming potential resulting from 10 years electricity production is 6 MtCO 2 equivalents. However, if CO 2 is stored in the depleted reservoir, the global warming potential is six times lower during that period. Electricity production and oil refining are the main contributors to the global warming potential. The net present value analysis indicates that for CO 2 prices lower than or equal to 15 €/t and oil prices greater than or equal to 115 €/t, it is most profitable to capture CO 2 for enhanced oil recovery only. Because of the low CO 2 price considered, large incomes from oil production are required to stimulate CO 2 capture. The environmental economic trade-off analysis shows that if CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery is followed by CO 2 capture and storage, costs increase, but the net present value remains positive and the global warming potential is reduced. Authorities could use these outcomes to support the development of economic mechanisms for shared investments in CO 2 capture installations and to mandate both oil producer and large CO 2 emitting firms to store CO 2 in depleted oil fields. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd

Disciplines :

Business & economic sciences: Multidisciplinary, general & others

Author, co-author :

Roefs, P.; Department of Economics - University of Antwerp, Prinsstraat 13- 2000, Antwerp, Belgium

Moretti, Michele ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Agronomie, Bio-ingénierie et Chimie (AgroBioChem) > Modélisation et développement

Welkenhuysen, K.; Geological Survey of Belgium – Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Jennerstraat 13 – 1000, Brussels, Belgium

Piessens, K.; Geological Survey of Belgium – Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Jennerstraat 13 – 1000, Brussels, Belgium

Compernolle, T.; Department of Economics - University of Antwerp, Prinsstraat 13- 2000, Antwerp, Belgium, Geological Survey of Belgium – Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Jennerstraat 13 – 1000, Brussels, Belgium

Language :

English

Title :

CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery and CO 2 capture and storage: An environmental economic trade-off analysis

Publication date :

2019

Journal title :

Journal of Environmental Management

ISSN :

0301-4797

eISSN :

1095-8630

Publisher :

Academic Press

Volume :

239

Pages :

167-177

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Available on ORBi :

since 15 October 2019

Statistics

Number of views

165 (3 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

1 (0 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

OpenCitations

OpenAlex citations

See more details

publications

supporting

mentioning

contrasting

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

Bibliography

Anwar, M.N., Fayyaz, A., Sohail, N.F., Khokhar, M.F., Baqar, M., Khan, W.D., Rasool, K., Rehan, M., Nizami, A.S., CO 2 capture and storage: a way forward for sustainable environment. J. Environ. Manag. 226 (2018), 131–144 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.009.
API, Spec 5L-Specification for Line Pipe. 2004, American Petroleum Institute, 155p.
Bui, M., Adjiman, C.S., Bardow, A., Anthony, E.J., Boston, A., Brown, S., Fennell, P.S., Fuss, S., Galindo, A., Hackett, L.A., Hallett, J.P., Herzog, H.J., Jackson, G., Kemper, J., Krevor, S., Maitland, G.C., Matuszewski, M., Metcalfe, I.S., Petit, C., Puxty, G., Reimer, J., Reiner, D.M., Rubin, E.S., Scott, S.A., Shah, N., Smit, B., Trusler, J.P.M., Webley, P., Wilcox, J., Mac Dowell, N., Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way forward. Energy Environ. Sci. 11:5 (2018), 1062–1176.
Business Insider, Oil (Brent) Price Commodity. 2019 Consulted on 30/01/2019 https://markets.businessinsider.com/commodities/oil-price/euro.
Cooney, G., Littlefield, J., Marriott, J., Skone, T.J., Evaluating the climate benefits of CO 2 enhanced oil recovery using life cycle analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49:12 (2015), 7491–7500, 10.1021/acs.est.5b00700.
Corsten, M., Ramírez, A., Shen, L., Koornneef, J., Faaij, A., Environmental impact assessment of CCS chains – lessons learned and limitations from LCA literature. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 13 (2013), 59–71, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.12.003.
Cuéllar-Franca, R.M., Azapagic, A., Carbon capture, storage and utilisation technologies: a critical analysis and comparison of their life cycle environmental impacts. J. CO2 Utilization 9 (2015), 82–102, 10.1016/j.jcou.2014.12.001.
Dai, Z., Middleton, R., Viswanathan, H., Fessenden-Rahn, J., Bauman, J., Pawar, R., Lee, S.-Y., McPherson, B., An integrated framework for optimizing CO 2 sequestration and enhanced oil recovery. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 1:1 (2013), 49–54, 10.1021/ez4001033.
Dai, Z., Viswanathan, H., Fessenden-Rahn, J., Middleton, R., Pan, F., Jia, W., Lee, S.-Y., McPherson, B., Ampomah, W., Grigg, R., Uncertainty quantification for CO 2 sequestration and enhanced oil recovery. Energy Procedia 63 (2013), 7685–7693, 10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.802.
EEX, European Emission Allowances. European Energy Exchange. 2019 Website Consulted on 25/01/2019 https://www.eex.com/en/market-data/environmental-markets/auction-market/european-emission-allowances-auction.
EIA, Petroleum Supply Monthly, Preliminary Data for 2016. 2017, U.S. Energy Information Administration., consulted in February 2017 https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/supply/monthly/.
ETSAP, Energy Technology Systems Analysis Program. 2018, International Energy Agency (IEA) https://iea-etsap.org/.
Gasparatos, A., Scolobig, A., Choosing the most appropriate sustainability assessment tool. Ecol. Econ. 80:0 (2012), 1–7, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.05.005.
Gasparatos, A., El-Haram, M., Horner, M., The argument against a reductionist approach for measuring sustainable development performance and the need for methodological pluralism. Account. Forum 33:3 (2009), 245–256, 10.1016/j.accfor.2008.07.006.
Global CCS Institute, The global status of CCS: 2018. Australia. Grant, T., Morgan, D., Gerdes, K., (eds.) 2013. Carbon Dioxide Transport and Storage Costs in NETL Studies – Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies, 2018, National Energy Technology Laboratory, DOE/NETL-2013/1614, 31p.
Hardisty, P.E., Sivapalan, M., Brooks, P., The environmental and economic sustainability of carbon capture and storage. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 8:5 (2011), 1460–1477, 10.3390/ijerph8051460.
Healy, S., Graichen, V., Cludius, J., Gores, S., Trends and Projections in the EU ETS in 2018 – the EU Emissions Trading System in Numbers., 2018, European Environment Agency (EEA), Copenhagen 978-92-9480-003-9, 54p, 10.2800/542773 report 14/2018.
Hertwich, E.G., Aaberg, M., Singh, B., Strømman, A.H., Life-cycle assessment of carbon dioxide capture for enhanced oil recovery. Chin. J. Chem. Eng. 16:3 (2008), 343–353, 10.1016/S1004-9541(08)60085-3.
Hussain, D., Dzombak, D.A., Jaramillo, P., Lowry, G.V., Comparative lifecycle inventory (LCI) of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) methods using different CO 2 sources. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 16 (2013), 129–144, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.03.006.
IPCC, Global Warming of 1.5 °C – an IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways. The Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty, vol. 562p, 2018, IPCC, Switzerland 978-92-9169-151-7 http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/.
IPCC, Stocker, T.F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.-K., Tignor, M., Allen, S.K., Boschung, J., Nauels, A., Xia, Y., Bex, V., Midgley, P.M., (eds.) Climate Change 2013: the Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA, 1535p, 10.1017/CBO9781107415324.
Jansen, F., Steinz, R., van Gelder, B., Potential for CO 2 storage in depleted fields on the Dutch Continental Shelf – cost estimate for offshore facilities. Energy Procedia 4 (2011), 3079–3086, 10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.220.
Kemp, A.G., Kasim, S., The economics of CO 2 -EOR cluster developments in the UK Central North Sea. Energy Policy 62 (2013), 1344–1355, 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.047.
Klokk, O., Schreiner, P.F., Pages-Bernaus, A., Tomasgard, A., Optimizing a CO 2 value chain for the Norwegian continental shelf. Energy Policy 38 (2010), 6604–6614, 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.06.031.
Korre, A., Nie, Z., Durucan, S., Life cycle modelling of fossil fuel power generation with post-combustion CO 2 capture. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 4 (2010), 289–300, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2009.08.005.
Lewis, M.C., Carbon Countdown: Prices and Politics in the EU-ETS. 2018, Carbon Tracker Initiative, 72p.
Melzer, L.S., Optimization of CO2 Storage in CO 2 Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects. 2010, Melzer Consulting, 57p https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/47992/1006-optimization-of-co2-storage-in-co2-enhanced-oil-re.pdf.
Mendelevitch, R., The role of CO 2 -EOR for the development of a CCTS infrastructure in the North Sea Region: a techno-economic model and applications. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 20 (2014), 132–159, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.11.007.
Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S., Olsson, L., Categorising tools for sustainability assessment. Ecol. Econ. 60:3 (2007), 498–508, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.023.
Pershad, H., Durusut, E., Crerar, A., Black, D., Mackay, E., Olden, P., Economic Impacts of CO 2 -enhanced Oil Recovery for Scotland. Final Report for Scottish Enterprise, Led by Element Energy with Dundas Consultants and the Institute of Petroleum Engineering., 2012, Heriot Watt University, 102p http://www.scottish-enterprise.com/∼/media/SE/Resources/Documents/DEF/Economic Potential of CO2-EOR in Scotland.pdf.
Piessens, K., Welkenhuysen, K., Laenen, B., Ferket, H., Nijs, W., Duerinck, J., Cochez, E., Mathieu, Ph, Valentiny, D., Baele, J.-M., Dupont, N., Hendriks, Ch, Policy support system for carbon capture and storage and collaboration between Belgium-the Netherlands “PSS-CCS”. Final report Research Programme Science for a Sustainable Development Contracts SD/CP/04a,b & SD/CP/803, 2012, Belgian Science Policy Office, 335p http://www.belspo.be/belspo/ssd/science/Reports/PSS-CCS_FinRep_AD.2.pdf.
Rotmans, J., van Asselt, M.B.A., de Bruin, A.J., den Elzen, M.G.J., de Greef, J., Hilderink, H., Hoekstra, A.Y., Janssen, M.A., Köster, H.W., Martens, W.J.M., Niessen, L.W., de Vries, H.J.M., Global Change and Sustainable Development: a Modelling Perspective for the Next Decade. RIVM Report 461502004., 1996, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Rupert, J.W., Impact of Geological Uncertainty on Project Valuations for Offshore CO 2 -enhanced Oil Recovery. Master thesis, 2014, Utrecht University, 108p https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/311424.
Singh, B., Strømman, A.H., Hertwich, E., Life cycle assessment of natural gas combined cycle power plant with post-combustion carbon capture, transport and storage. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 5:3 (2011), 457–466, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2010.03.006.
Singh, B., Strømman, A.H., Hertwich, E.G., Comparative life cycle environmental assessment of CCS technologies. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 5:4 (2011), 911–921, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.03.012.
Stewart, R.J., Haszeldine, S., Carbon Accounting for Carbon Dioxide Enhanced Oil Recovery. Scottish Carbon Capture & Storage. 2014, 62p https://www.sccs.org.uk/images/expertise/misc/SCCS-CO2-EOR-JIP-Carbon-Balance.pdf.
Stewart, R.J., Haszeldine, R.S., Can producing oil store carbon? Greenhouse Gas footprint of CO 2 -EOR, offshore North Sea. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49:9 (2015), 5788–5795, 10.1021/es504600q.
Treasury, H.M., Budget 2015. 2015, 119 UK https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/416330/47881_Budget_2015_Web_Accessible.pdf.
Turk, J.K., Reay, D.S., Haszeldine, R.S., UK grid electricity carbon intensity can be reduced by enhanced oil recovery with CO 2 sequestration. Carbon Manag. 9:2 (2018), 115–126 https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2018.1435959.
Üçtug, F.G., Agralı S., Arıkan, Y., Avcıoglu, E., Deciding between carbon trading and carbon capture and sequestration: an optimisation-based case study for methanol synthesis from syngas. J. Environ. Manag. 132 (2014), 1–8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.10.016.
Van der Giesen, C., Meinrenken, C.J., Kleijn, R., Sprecher, B., Lackner, K.S., Kramer, G.J., A life cycle assessment case study of coal-fired electricity generation with humidity swing direct air capture of CO 2 versus MEA-based post-combustion capture. Environ. Sci. Technol. 51:2 (2017), 1024–1034, 10.1021/acs.est.6b05028.
Vandeginste, V., Piessens, K., Pipeline design for a least-cost router application for CO 2 transport in the CO 2 sequestration cycle. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2:4 (2008), 571–581, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2008.02.001.
Welkenhuysen, K., Integration of Geoscientific Data and Uncertainties in Techno-Economic Forecasting on CO 2 Capture and Storage. Doctoral thesis, 2017, 212p KU Leuven.
Welkenhuysen, K., Rupert, J., Compernolle, T., Ramirez, A., Swennen, R., Piessens, K., Considering economic and geological uncertainty in the simulation of realistic investment decisions for CO 2 -EOR projects in the North Sea. Appl. Energy 185 (2017), 745–761 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.10.105.
Wernet, G., Bauer, C., Steubing, B., Reinhard, J., Moreno-Ruiz, E., Weidema, B., Zah, R., Org, W., The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 21 (2016), 1218–1230, 10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8.
Zapp, P., Schreiber, A., Marx, J., Haines, M., Hake, J.-F., Gale, J., Overall environmental impacts of CCS technologies – a life cycle approach. Inter. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 8 (2012), 12–21, 10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.01.014.
ZEP, The Cost of CO 2 Capture, Transport and Storage – Post-demonstration CCS in the EU. European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants. 2011, 51p http://www.zeroemissionsplatform.eu/downloads/811.html.

Name	Provider / Domaine	Expiration	Description
JSESSIONID	Oracle Corporation www.uliege.be	Session	General purpose platform session cookie, used by sites written in JSP. Usually used to maintain an anonymous user session by the server.
CookieScriptConsent	CookieScript .uliege.be	1 year	This cookie is used by Cookie-Script.com service to remember visitor cookie consent preferences. It is necessary for Cookie-Script.com cookie banner to work properly.

Name	Provider / Domaine	Expiration	Description
_pk_id	InnoCraft Ltd .uliege.be	1 year	Used to store a few details about the user such as the unique visitor ID
_pk_ses	InnoCraft Ltd .uliege.be	30 minutes	Short lived cookies used to temporarily store data for the visit
_pk_ref	InnoCraft Ltd .uliege.be	6 months	Used to store the attribution information, the referrer initially used to visit the website