First Edition
Foreword
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), the Mexican Ministry of Energy (SENER), and the
U.S. Department of Energy (U.S....
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 3
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Foreword..................................
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 20124
Introduction
Carbon Dioxide Emissions
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosph...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 5
Introduction
What Is Carbon Capture
and Storage?
Carbon capture and storage...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 20126
Introduction
Geological Storage
Environments
The process of identifying suit...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 7
Introduction
Importance of Carbon Capture and Storage
to North America
Incr...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 20128
Introduction
In August 2009, at the North American Leaders Summit in Guadala...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 9
Introduction
Screenshot of NACSA Viewer.
NACAP distributed database system....
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201210
North American Perspectives
Data displayed on this map were collected by
th...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 11
North American Perspectives
Large Stationary Sources of CO2
Emissions in N...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201212
North American Perspectives
Sedimentary Basins in North America
This map de...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 13
North American Perspectives
North American Geology Pertaining
to CO2
Stora...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201214
North American Perspectives
Shared Sedimentary Basins in North America
Data...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 15
North American Perspectives
Small, shared Pacific basins are located offsh...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201216
North American Perspectives
Oil and Gas Reservoirs in
North America
Oilandg...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 17
North American Perspectives
CO2
Storage Resources Estimates for Unmineable...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201218
North American Perspectives
CO2
Storage Resources Estimates for Saline Form...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 19
North American Perspectives
Future Geological Storage Options:
Basalt Form...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201220
Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada
Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada
C...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 21
Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada
The Alberta Carbon Trunk Line , which...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201222
Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada
Large Stationary Sources of CO2
in Can...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 23
Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada
CO2
Storage Resource Estimates for Oi...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201224
Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada
CO2
Storage Resource Estimates for Unm...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 25
Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada
CO2
Storage Resource Estimates for Sa...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201226
Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico
Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico
D...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 27
Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico
Estimated CO2
Emissions from Large St...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201228
Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico
Within the inclusion zone, 11 geologic...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 29
Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico
Different coal outcrops in the Santa ...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201230
Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico
Biosphere Reserve Centla Swamps, Tabas...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 31
Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico
CO2
Storage Resource Estimates for Sa...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201232
Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States
BSCSP Validation Phase geol...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 33
Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States
Regional Carbon Sequestrat...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201234
Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States
Large Stationary
Sources of...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 35
Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States
Oil and Gas Reservoirs
in ...
THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201236
Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States
Coal in the United States
I...
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
NACSA-2012WebVersion
of 52

NACSA-2012WebVersion

Published on: Mar 3, 2016
Source: www.slideshare.net


Transcripts - NACSA-2012WebVersion

  • 1. First Edition
  • 2. Foreword Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), the Mexican Ministry of Energy (SENER), and the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) are proud to release the North American Carbon Storage Atlas (NACSA), which was produced under the leadership of the North American Carbon Atlas Partnership (NACAP). Production of this Atlas is the result of cooperation and coordination among carbon storage experts from local, state, provincial, and Federal government agencies, as well as industry and academia. This Atlas provides a coordinated overview of carbon capture and storage (CCS) potential across Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The primary purpose of the Atlas is to show the location of large stationary carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emission sources and the locations and storage potential of various geological storage sites. This Atlas is a first attempt at providing a high-level overview of the potential for large-scale carbon storage in North America. As each country makes progress in the dynamic technology of CCS, additional resources will become available that allow for a more thorough effort to identify large stationary CO2 emission sources and potential storage sites. A key aspect of CCS is the amount of carbon storage potential available to effectively help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As shown in this Atlas, CCS holds great promise as part of a portfolio of technologies that enables Canada, Mexico, the United States, and the rest of the world to effectively address climate change while meeting the energy demands of an ever increasing global population. This Atlas includes the most current and best available estimates of potential CO2 storage resource determined by each of the three countries’ selected methodology. A CO2 storage resource estimate is defined as the volume of porous and permeable rocks available for CO2 storage and accessible to injected CO2 via drilled and completed wellbores. Carbon dioxide storage resource assessments do not include economic or regulatory constraints; only physical constraints to define the accessible part of the subsurface are applied. All data in this Atlas were collected before April 2011. These data sets are not comprehensive; however, it is anticipated that CO2 storage resource estimates, as well as geological formation maps, will be updated when sufficient new data are acquired. Furthermore, it is expected that, through the ongoing work of NRCan, SENER, and U.S. DOE, data quality and conceptual understanding of the CCS process will improve, resulting in more refined CO2 storage estimates. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 20122 About The North American Carbon Storage Atlas The North American Carbon Storage Atlas contains five main sections: (1) Introduction, (2) North American Perspectives, (3) Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada, (4) Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico, and (5) Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States. The Introduction section contains an overview of CCS and the North American Carbon Atlas Partnership efforts. The North American Perspectives section describes North American geology as it pertains to the potential storage of CO2 and provides maps that show the number, location, and magnitude of large stationary CO2 emission sources and the location and areal extent of sedimentary basins and geological formations within those basins that have been assessed to date. This section also provides summaries of the estimated CO2 storage resource in the assessed formations in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The remaining three sections provide more details on CO2 sources and storage resources in oil and gas reservoirs, unmineable coal, and saline formations in each of the three countries. Carbon dioxide storage resource estimates were derived from data available in each country. These data are representative of potential storage formations in the three countries and are needed to estimate key parameters, such as area (A), thickness (h), and porosity (φ) of a formation. Carbon dioxide emission and storage resource maps were compiled for this Atlas by U.S. DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) from information provided by the three countries. The CO2 geological storage information in this Atlas was developed to provide a high-level overview of CO2 geological storage potential across Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The location and areal extent of promising geological storage formations and the CO2 resource estimates presented in this Atlas are intended to be used as an initial assessment of potential geological storage opportunities. This information provides CCS project developers with a starting point for further investigations. Furthermore, the information provided by this Atlas will help quantify the extent to which CCS technologies can contribute to the reduction of CO2 emissions, but it is not intended to serve as a substitute for site-specific assessments and testing. Disclaimer This document was prepared as an account of work jointly undertaken by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. Neither the governments of Canada, Mexico, nor the United States nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the governments of Canada, Mexico, or the United States or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States or any agency thereof.
  • 3. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 3 Table of Contents Table of Contents Foreword................................................................................................ 2 About The North American Carbon Storage Atlas............................ 2 Disclaimer............................................................................................... 2 Introduction Carbon Dioxide Emissions..................................................................... 4 What Is Carbon Capture and Storage?................................................... 5 Geological Storage Environments.......................................................... 6 Importance of Carbon Capture and Storage to North America.............. 7 North American Energy Working Group................................................ 8 North American Carbon Storage Atlas Website..................................... 9 North American Carbon Storage Atlas Online Viewer............................ 9 North American Perspectives Carbon Dioxide Sources in North America........................................... 10 Sedimentary Basins in North America................................................. 12 North American Geology Pertaining to CO2 Storage............................ 13 Shared Sedimentary Basins in North America..................................... 14 Oil and Gas Reservoirs in North America............................................. 16 Coal in North America ........................................................................ 17 Saline Formations in North America ................................................... 18 Future Geological Storage Options: Basalt Formations and Organic Shale Formations in North America................................. 19 Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada........................................... 20 Large Stationary Sources of CO2 in Canada.......................................... 22 Oil and Gas Reservoirs in Canada........................................................ 23 Coal in Canada.................................................................................... 24 Saline Formations in Canada............................................................... 25 Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico........................................... 26 Large Stationary Sources of CO2 in Mexico.......................................... 27 Selected Geological Provinces in Mexico............................................. 28 Coal in Mexico.................................................................................... 29 Saline Formations in Mexico............................................................... 30 Detailed Analysis of Saline Formations in Mexico............................... 31 Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States.......................... 32 Large Stationary Sources of CO2 in the United States.......................... 34 Oil and Gas Reservoirs in the United States........................................ 35 Coal in the United States.................................................................... 36 Saline Formations in the United States............................................... 37 Further Reading................................................................................... 38 Appendix A—Summary of Methodologies for Determining Stationary CO2 Source Emissions....................................................... 40 Appendix B—Summary of Methodologies Used To Estimate CO2 Storage Resource.................................................... 42 Appendix C—Carbon Dioxide Stationary Sources and Estimated Storage Resources by Country................................ 48 Nomenclature...................................................................................... 50 Acknowledgments............................................................................... 51 Contact Information............................................................................ 52
  • 4. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 20124 Introduction Carbon Dioxide Emissions Greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere contribute to the greenhouse effect, which is the trapping of radiant heat from the sun in Earth’s atmosphere. Carbon dioxide (CO2 ) is of particular interest, because it is one of the most prevalent GHGs. Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless, nonflammable gas that provides a basis for the synthesis of organic compounds essential for life. Atmospheric CO2 originates from both natural and manmade sources. Natural sources of CO2 include volcanic outgassing, the combustion and decay of organic matter, and respiration. Manmade, or anthropogenic, CO2 primarily results from the burning of various fossil fuels for power generation and transportation. In addition, industrial activities (ethanol plants, refineries, chemical plants, etc.) contribute to anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The greenhouse effect is a natural and important process in the Earth’s atmosphere. However, GHG levels have significantly increased above pre-industrial levels. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), annual global energy-related CO2 emissions havereachedapproximately32gigatonnes. Many scientists consider the resulting increase in the atmospheric CO2 concentration to be a contributing factor to global climate change. Canada, Mexico, and the United States are signatories to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This treaty was approved in 1992 and calls for the stabilization of atmospheric CO2 concentrations at a level that could minimize impact on the world’s climate. No single approach is sufficient to stabilize the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, especially considering the growing global demand for energy and the associated potential increase in CO2 emissions. Conservation, renewable energy, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and improvements in the efficiency of power plants, automobiles, and other energy consuming devices are all important steps that must be taken to mitigate GHG emissions. In an analysis by the International Energy Agency (IEA), CCS provides 19 percent of the reduction in CO2 emissions required until 2050 to stabilize the atmospheric CO2 concentration at 450 parts per million. Technological approaches such as CCS are needed that will effectively reduce CO2 emissions, while allowing economic growth and prosperity with its associated energy use. The greenhouse effect describes the phenomenon whereby Earth’s atmosphere traps solar radiation caused by the presence of gases, such as CO2 , methane, and water vapor, in the atmosphere that allow incoming sunlight to pass through and absorb heat radiated back from Earth’s surface, resulting in higher temperatures. In Earth’s natural greenhouse effect, sunlight enters the atmosphere and is either reflected, absorbed, or simply passes through. The sunlight that passes through the atmosphere is either absorbed by the Earth’s surface or reflected back into space. The Earth’s surface heats up after absorbing this sunlight, and emits long wavelength radiation back into the atmosphere. Some of this radiation passes through the atmosphere and into space, but the rest of it is either reflected back to the surface or absorbed by GHGs, which re-radiate longer wavelength radiation back to Earth’s surface. These GHGs trap the sun’s energy within the atmosphere and cause the planet to warm. GHGs, such as CO2 , methane, water vapor, and nitrous oxide, trap indirect heat from the sun. Without the greenhouse effect, Earth’s climate would be approximately -18 °C (0 °F).
  • 5. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 5 Introduction What Is Carbon Capture and Storage? Carbon capture and storage involves the separation and captureofCO2 fromtheatmosphericemissionsofindustrial processes and transporting the CO2 to deep underground geological formations for safe, permanent storage. Carbon capture and storage is typically targeted at industrial facilities that emit large amounts of CO2 . These facilities include power plants, petroleum refineries, oil and gas production facilities, iron and steel mills, cement plants, and various chemical plants. Geological storage is defined as the placement of CO2 into a subsurface formation so that it will remain safely and permanently stored. Five storage types for geological carbon storage are currently under investigation in North America, each with unique challenges and opportunities: (1) oil and gas reservoirs, (2) unmineable coal, (3) saline formations, (4) organic-rich shales, and (5) basalt formations. The storage process includes technologies for measurement, monitoring, verification, accounting, and risk assessment at the storage site. Effective application of these technologies will provide a high level of confidence that the CO2 will remain safely and permanently stored and ensure an accurate accounting of the stored CO2 , thus providing the basis for establishing carbon credit trading markets for stored CO2 . Risk assessments focus on identifying and quantifying potential risks to humans and the environment associated with carbon storage, and identifying appropriate measures to ensure that these risks remain low.
  • 6. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 20126 Introduction Geological Storage Environments The process of identifying suitable geological storage sites involves a methodical and careful analysis of both technical and non-technical aspects of potential sites. This process is analogous to the methods used in the petroleum industry to advance a project through a framework of resource classes and project status subclasses until the project produces hydrocarbons. Each type of geological formation has different opportunities and challenges. While geological formations are infinitely variable in detail, geologists and engineers in the petroleum industry characterize potential reservoirs by their lithology, depositional environment, trapping mechanism, and hydrodynamic conditions. The physical, chemical, and biological processes associated with deposition of a particular type of sediment influences how formation fluids are held in place, how they move, and how they interact with other formation fluids and solids (minerals). Certain geological properties may be more favorable to long-term containment of liquids and gases typically needed for geological storage. Several types of depositional environments are currently being evaluated for CO2 storage in North America. The different classes of reservoirs include: deltaic, coal/shale, fluvial, alluvial, strandplain, turbidite, eolian, lacustrine, clastic shelf, carbonate shallow shelf, and reef. Basaltic interflow zones are also being evaluated as potential reservoirs. Although the flow paths of the original depositional environment may have been degraded or modified by mineral deposition or dissolution since the geological units were deposited, the basic stratigraphic framework created during deposition remains. Geological processes working today also existed when the sediments were initially deposited. Analysis of modern day depositional environment analogs, paired with evaluation of core, outcrops, and well logs from ancient subsurface formations provide an indication of how formations were deposited and how CO2 within the formation is anticipated to flow. Types of depositional environments.
  • 7. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 7 Introduction Importance of Carbon Capture and Storage to North America Increased GHG emissions and potential global climate change represent a critical challenge to North America. In 2012, North America is projected to emit approximately 20 percent of the world’s CO2 . Most of these CO2 emissions come from fossil fuels used for energy. However, at least for the foreseeable future, we will continue to rely on fossil fuels to sustain our economy and quality of life. Energy demand is expected to grow in North America in the coming decades with concurrent increases in the demand for inexpensive, reliable, and available energy sources, including coal. The coal reserves in North America are substantial and will provide a reliable energy source well into the future. However, coal combustion releases the most CO2 per unit of energy produced of all fossil fuels. Without an effective way to limit and reduce CO2 emissions from coal, further increases in CO2 emissions could lead to consequences resulting from climate change. Innovation and research have already produced successful pilot projects demonstrating that CCS can help reduce GHG emissions, while minimizing negative impacts on our economy and lifestyle. The abundance of coal reserves in North America provides the incentive to implement CCS technologies, and, in doing so, to develop more sustainable power production methods. In addition to sustainable power and environmental benefits, enhanced oil recovery (EOR), enhanced coalbed methane recovery (ECBM), stronger and more stable local economies, and better partnerships between nations are all benefits North Americans can expect from the implementation of CCS technology. As the world economies globalize in scope, boundaries between countries can blur, especiallywhentheworldfacesissuesofGHGemissions.ForthecountriesinNorthAmerica, geological storage resources may need to supersede national boundaries to accomplish CCS technology implementation. Already, carbon pipelines transcend North America’s national borders. Jointly pursuing and documenting scientific data related to reducing the impact of energy production and use in North America is vital to the future. This Atlas is the first attempt between Canada, Mexico, and the United States to jointly publish information on CO2 stationary source and storage resource data. With active collaboration, consensus, and resources, North America can demonstrate a partnership in addressing unique challenges on this continent that will affect the world. This Atlas represents the beginning of that collaboration.
  • 8. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 20128 Introduction In August 2009, at the North American Leaders Summit in Guadalajara, Mexico, it was formally announced that the three countries had agreed to produce an atlas that would result in uniform mapping methodology and data sharing of large sources of CO2 emissions and potential storage sites in North America. The overall effort will— • Facilitate the sharing of information to foster and enhance data exchange on CO2 sources and storage formations in support of a GIS system, which is typically used to convey information in map form. The aim is to create a distributed database, rather than a central repository, where data from different states, provinces, or organizations can be accessed via a common portal and in similar format. • FormaconsensusonthemethodologytobeusedinestimatingtheCO2 storagepotential of various types of CO2 storage systems in North America. This will be particularly relevant for cross-border storage to eliminate international “fault lines” and ensure compatible estimates of storage potential in North America. • Promote potential collaboration on research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) related to CCS. This includes sharing efforts to evaluate alternative uses of CCS technologies, such as EOR or ECBM recovery. North American Energy Working Group The North American Energy Working Group (NAEWG) was established in the spring of 2001 by the Canadian Minister of Natural Resources, the Ministry of Energy of Mexico, and the SecretaryofEnergyoftheUnitedStates.ThegoalsofNAEWGweretofostercommunication and cooperation among the governments and energy sectors of the three countries on energy-related matters of common interest, and to enhance North American energy trade and interconnections consistent with the goal of sustainable development for the benefit of all. This trilateral process fully respects the domestic policies, divisions of jurisdictional authority, and existing obligations of each country. As a part of NAEWG, Canada (NRCan), Mexico (SENER), and the United States (U.S. DOE) initiated the North American Carbon Atlas Partnership (NACAP). NACAP is a mapping initiative designed to disseminate and exchange CCS-related information between Canada, Mexico, and the United States in order to effectively speed up the development of a geographic information system (GIS)-based CO2 sources and storage resource database in North America. The development of this GIS system supports the Carbon Storage Program in U.S. DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy, the objectives of NAEWG, current initiatives under the Canada-United States Clean Energy Dialogue, and the Mexico-United States Bilateral Framework on Clean Energy and Climate Change. It is expected that this initiative will serve as a key opportunity to foster collaboration among the three countries in CCS.
  • 9. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 9 Introduction Screenshot of NACSA Viewer. NACAP distributed database system. Schematic shows data sources and resulting database systems. Screenshot of NATCARB Viewer. North American Carbon Storage Atlas Website The NACSA website (www.nacsap.org) serves as a resource for information on CO2 stationary sources and CO2 storage resources in North America. The website houses full storage resource estimation methodologies and links to valuable information from the three countries involved in the NACAP effort. North American Carbon Storage Atlas Online Viewer The NACSA Viewer, accessible from the NACSA website, provides web-based access to all NACSA data (CO2 stationary sources,potentialgeologicalCO2 storageresources,etc.)and analytical tools required for addressing CCS deployment. Distributed computing solutions link the three countries’ data and other publicly accessible repositories of geological, geophysical, natural resource, and environmental data. The NACSA website and NACSA Viewer are hosted by West Virginia University and the U.S. DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), respectively. Canadian and Mexican data are uploaded when new information becomes available. U.S. data are made available in real time from the National Carbon Sequestration Database and Geographic Information System (NATCARB; www.natcarb.org), which in turn receives its data from the seven Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs, see page 33) and from specialized data warehouses and public servers. As part of the NAEWG effort, NACAP has collaborated on the development of this North American Carbon Storage Atlas (NACSA), the NACSA website, and the NACSA Online Viewer, a digital interactive atlas. NACAP’s goal is for each country to identify, collect, and distribute data of CO2 sources and geological storage opportunities in Canada, Mexico, and the United States in order to present these in a comprehensive GIS database for North America. Screenshot of NACSA website (www.nacsap.org).
  • 10. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201210 North American Perspectives Data displayed on this map were collected by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. For more information, please refer to the respective country section found in NACSA. This map shows the location of large stationary sources of CO2 in North America. The color of a dot indicates the industry sector of the CO2 emitting facility, whereas the dot size represents the relative quantity of the CO2 released. Carbon Dioxide Sources in North America There are two different types of CO2 sources: natural and anthropogenic (manmade). Natural sources include respiration from animals and plants, volcanic eruptions, forest and grass natural fires, decomposition of biomass material (plants and trees), and naturally occuring sources in geological formations. Anthropogenic sources result from human activity and include the burning of fossil and biomass fuels, cement production and other industrial processes, deforestation, agriculture, and changes in natural land usage. Although CO2 emissions from natural sources are estimated to be greater than the anthropogenic sources, they are usually in equilibrium with a process known as the global carbon cycle, which involves carbon exchange between the land, ocean, and atmosphere. Increases in anthropogenic emissions throughout the last 200 years have led to an overall increase in the concentration of CO2 and other GHGs in the atmosphere.
  • 11. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 11 North American Perspectives Large Stationary Sources of CO2 Emissions in North America* Industry Sector Canada** Mexico** United States** Emissions (Megatonnes/Year) Number of Sources Emissions Estimates (Megatonnes/Year) Number of Sources Emissions Estimates (Megatonnes/Year) Number of Sources Agricultural Processing <1 1 1 3 2 13 Cement Plant 11 24 26 34 86 103 Electricity Production 100 71 106 64 2,421 1089 Ethanol 1 4 49 155 Fertilizer 5 7 10 13 Industrial 24 51 25 38 131 165 Petroleum/ Natural Gas 50 58 45 38 40 76 Refineries/ Chemical 28 33 2 11 199 136 Unclassified 1 5 76 61 Totals 219 254 205 188 3,014 1,811 * All data from facilities with emissions over 100 kilotonnes/year. ** Canadian sources and emissions data (2009) obtained from the GHGR database; Mexican sources and emissions data (2010) obtained from the RETC database; United States sources and emissions data (2011) obtained from the RCSPs and NATCARB. Additional details appear in Appendix A. Tonne (t) = 1 metric ton Kilotonne (kt) = 1,000 metric tons Megatonne (Mt) = 1,000,000 metric tons Gigatonne (Gt) = 1,000,000,000 metric tons Anthropogenic CO2 sources can be subdivided into two different types: stationary and non-stationary (e.g., in transportation). For purposes of this Atlas, large stationary sources of CO2 (greater than 100 kilotonnes per year of CO2 ) include power plants, chemical processing facilities, oil refineries, food processing plants, and other manufacturing facilities. Through CCS deployment, CO2 emitted from these sources can be captured and stored in geological formations. Different regions of North America vary in the magnitude and density of large stationary CO2 sources due to the location of energy resources (e.g., coal, oil and gas, carbonate rocks for cement production) and to the amount and nature of various industrial activities. In this Atlas, large stationary sources of CO2 have been divided into 9 major industry sectors (see figure and table to right). Emissions from petroleum and natural gas processing facilities occur primarily in the western and central regions of Canada and the United States, as well as along the Gulf of Mexico, where oil and gas resources are found. Refineries and chemical production facilities are also found in these locations, although in some cases they are located around harbors to process imported oil. Petroleum and natural gas processing facilities and refineries and chemical production facilities make the capture of CO2 more economical and efficient because they produce highly concentrated CO2 . Fossil fuel- based power generation sources represent the largest CO2 emissions by category, but also have the lowest CO2 concentration in the flue gas; hence, a challenge of CO2 capture is reducing costs. Most coal-fired power plants are located near coal deposits in western Canada and the United States, and are concentrated in central Canada (Ontario) and the midwest and eastern United States. Most of Mexico’s power generating stations are oil-fired and others use coal. Carbon dioxide concentrations from industrial facilities and cement plants, which are spread across North America, range from 15 to 30 percent of total emissions. For more information on CO2 sources and the methods each country used to determine its CO2 emissions, please see Appendix A.
  • 12. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201212 North American Perspectives Sedimentary Basins in North America This map depicts the extent of sedimentary basins in North America. There are three types of sedimentary rocks: (1) clastic (broken fragments derived from pre-existing rocks like sandstone); (2) chemical precipitates (such as carbonates [limestone] and rock salt); and (3) organics (plant or animal constituents that may form coal or limestone). Geological formations being investigated for CO2 storage are either clastics or fractured carbonates (both precipitates and organic), where CO2 is stored in the pore spaces between grains or in fractures that are often filled with brine. In this type of CO2 storage system, impermeable layers are required to form a confining zone that prevents the upward migration of CO2 . Data displayed on this map were collected by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. For more information, please refer to the respective country section found in NACSA.
  • 13. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 13 North American Perspectives North American Geology Pertaining to CO2 Storage At its core, North America is composed of ancient (Precambrian) rocks that formed during the first 3.5 billion years of Earth’s history. They are mainly crystalline, igneous, and metamorphic rocks, such as granites and gneiss, which are not suitable for carbon storage. These ancient rocks are exposed in the north-central part of the continent, called the Precambrian Shield. A series of sedimentary basins formed on the Precambrian Shield, such as the Williston, Illinois, and Michigan basins in the United States. These basins are generally the best suited for CO2 storage because they are tectonically stable and have a suitable succession (usually layer-cake type) of oil and gas reservoirs, deep saline formations, and coal beds with intervening shales and evaporite rocks that constitute caprocks (barriers to the flow of fluids, including CO2 ). Another significant feature of the North American continent is the collision of the North American tectonic plate with the Juan de Fuca, Pacific, and Cocos plates in the west, and the Caribbean plate in the south. As a result, mountain ranges and volcanic regions are present along the western coast of North America, which may not suitable for CO2 storage. Smallsedimentarybasinsarepresentalongthecoastandwithinthemountainranges.These basins contain oil and gas or coals, such as the Bowser basin in British Columbia, but due to high levels of tectonism, faulting, and fracturing, some of these basins may be unsuitable for CO2 storage. On the eastern side of the mountain ranges in western North America are basins of various sizes located from the Mackenzie basin in northern Canada to the Veracruz basin in southern Mexico. These include the Alberta basin in Canada; the Denver, Anadarko, and Permian basins in the United States; and the Sabinas and Tampico basins in Mexico. On the eastern side of North America, mainly in the United States, the Appalachian Mountains form a mirror image to the Rocky Mountains, with basins to their west, such as the Black Warrior and Appalachian basins. The mid-continent basins between the eastern side of the Rocky Mountains and the western side of the Appalachian Mountains are separated by the Transcontinental Arch, which trends into Canada across western-central North America and consists of sedimentary rocks overlying the Precambrian basement. The basins are also underlain by Precambrian rocks and contain oil and gas and/or coals. Given their attributes and depth, they are likely suitable for CO2 storage. The third important geological feature for North America as it relates to geological storage is the spread of the mid-Atlantic ridge and the formation of a series of sedimentary basins along the entire eastern coast of North America to the Gulf of Mexico and Campeche basins in Mexico. These basins usually contain oil and gas and are likely suitable for CO2 storage, but the challenge is their offshore location. Finally, a series of sedimentary basins, rich in oil, gas, and coal, are present in Alaska and the Canadian Arctic, such as the Alaska North Slope, Beaufort, and Sverdrup basins. They are also suitable for CO2 storage, but their distance from CO2 sources and the Arctic environment pose challenges for CO2 storage. Geological structure in southwestern United States. A majestic geological feature in Mexico. Badlands, Drumheller, Alberta Canada. (Copyright Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada. NRCan-1819)
  • 14. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201214 North American Perspectives Shared Sedimentary Basins in North America Data displayed on this map were collected by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. For more information, please refer to the respective country section found in NACSA. Canada–U.S. Border Canada and the United States share sedimentary basins in the Arctic, on the Pacific coast, along the continental border and possibly on the Atlantic coast. The Alberta basin, a large basin located mainly in Alberta and extending into northern Montana, is the Canadian basin most suitable for CO2 storage. It is separated from the Williston basin by the Bow Island (Sweetgrass) Arch, which trends southwest-northeast stretching through northern Montana, southeastern Alberta, and western Saskatchewan. The Williston basin is a large basin located in eastern Montana, North and South Dakota, southern Saskatchewan, and southwestern Manitoba. It has significant CO2 storage resource potential in the United States and is the second most important basin for CO2 storage in Canada. Both the Alberta and Williston basins are well-explored and rich in oil and gas reservoirs, coal and salt beds, and saline formations. They occur in tectonically stable regions, have infrastructure already in place, and are located underneath or near large stationary CO2 sources. They constitute primary targets for CO2 storage both in western Canada and in the United States west of the Transcontinental Arch. The Michigan basin is located in Michigan, eastern Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, and under Lake Huron in Ontario. It has good CO2 storage potential, with most of the resource situated in the United States. The Appalachian basin likely also has good CO2 storage potential, with most potential located in the United States. Rocks overlaying the Cincinnati Arch, which trends southwest- northeast from Alabama to Ohio and Ontario, include (in Canada) carbonates where oil and gas has been trapped. However, because of its shallow depth, the storage resource in Canada is likely limited, with more potential possibly under Lakes Huron, Erie, and Ontario.
  • 15. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 15 North American Perspectives Small, shared Pacific basins are located offshore along the Pacific coast from southwestern British Columbia to northwestern Washington State. No infrastructure exists and little exploration has been carried out on these basins. Generally, these basins are likely not suitable for CO2 storage. Among the Atlantic basins that occur offshore along the Atlantic shelf, the Scotia shelf is within Canada’s territorial waters, and the Georges Bank basin is within the U.S. territorial waters,althoughsomesedimentsmaybepresentbetweenthetwo.ThesmallBayofFundy basin is shared between New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in Canada and Maine in the United States. Along the Alaska-Yukon border, some small basins are shared. Offshore in the Arctic, the Beaufort basin is shared between the Northwestern Territories and Yukon in Canada and Alaska in the United States. The basin most likely has significant CO2 storage potential, Domes covering CO2 injector wellheads at the Weyburn CO2 -EOR project in Saskatchewan, Canada, blend into the landscape. (Courtesy: CCS101) given the presence of oil and particularly large gas reserves, but the basin is far from major CO2 sources and the difficult Arctic marine conditions make it an unlikely candidate for CO2 storage. To conclude, significant storage potential exists in the shared basins between Canada and the United States. Mexico–U.S. Border The United States and Mexico share sedimentary basins along their border, predominantly in the east. The Gulf of Mexico basin is located in the southeastern United States and northeasternMexico,bothonshoreandoffshoretheGulfofMexico.Severalsub-basinsexist within the broader Gulf of Mexico basin, with the Rio Grande embayment and Burgos basin occurring along the border. The Rio Grande embayment is located along the southeastern coast of Texas, while the Burgos basin is located along the northeastern coast of Mexico. The boundary between the two intersects at the international border, where the Burgos basin is considered to be the equivalent or southern limit of the Rio Grande embayment. They are geologically similar and occur both onshore and offshore. Together, they form the westernmost part of the Gulf of Mexico basin. The Burgos basin has a high potential for gas reservoirs with a variety of traps. Considering the many oil and gas reservoirs in the Gulf of Mexico basin, significant CO2 storage potential exists in this basin. The South Texas basin extends from Texas into Mexico; within the South Texas basin is the Maverick basin, which straddles the border. There are potential oil and gas reservoirs in the Maverick basin. However, little exploration has taken place in this basin. The Marfa basin, located in west Texas and northeastern Mexico, may have some CO2 storage potential. The Orogrande basin is located in south-central New Mexico and Mexico and contains oil and gas reservoirs with CO2 storage potential. The Pedregosa basin starts in the corner of southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico and extends southeastward into north-central Mexico. The Pedregosa basin contains unexplored oil and gas reservoirs that may have CO2 storage potential like other basins to the north. To conclude, Mexico and the United States share many basins with CO2 storage potential, largely concentrated in the Gulf of Mexico basin.
  • 16. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201216 North American Perspectives Oil and Gas Reservoirs in North America Oilandgasreservoirsareporousrockformations(usuallysandstones or carbonates) containing hydrocarbons (crude oil and/or natural gas) that have been physically trapped. There are two main types of physical traps: (1) stratigraphic traps, created when changes have occured in rock types, and (2) structural traps, in which the rocks have been folded or faulted to create a trapping reservoir. Oil and gas reservoirs are ideal geological storage sites because they have held hydrocarbons for thousands to millions of years and have conditions that allow for CO2 storage. Furthermore, their architecture and properties are well known as a result of exploration for and production of these hydrocarbons, and infrastructure exists for CO2 transportation and storage. Traditionally, oil can be extracted from a reservoir in three different phases. The primary recovery phase uses the natural pressure in a reservoir to push the oil up through wells until the pressure drops to levels that do not allow the oil to flow any more. This process usually accounts for 10 to 15 percent of oil recovery. The secondary recovery phase involves the injection of water to increase the reservoir pressure and displace the oil towards producing wells. This process produces an additional 15 to 25 percent of the original oil. Together, these two phases account for the recovery of 25 to 40 percent of the original oil, but two-thirds of the oil remains in the reservoir. Tertiary recovery, or EOR, methods are used to recover an additional 20 to 60 percent of the original oil. Carbon dioxide can be used for EOR. When CO2 is injected, it raises the reservoir pressure and increases the mobility of the oil, making it easier for the oil to flow towards producing wells. This method, called CO2 -EOR, is an attractive option for CO2 storage because it uses pore space that otherwise would remain unavailable and it allows for the recovery and sale of additional oil that would otherwise remain trapped in the reservoir, thus lowering the net cost of CO2 storage. In North America, CO2 has been injected into oil reservoirs to increase oil recovery for more than 30 years. For more information on CO2 storage resource potential in oil and gas reservoirs and the methodologies each country used to estimate this potential, please see the country chapters and Appendix B. CO2 Storage Resource Estimates for Oil and Gas Reservoirs in North America (Gigatonnes) Canada Mexico United States Total 16 Data not available 120 Data displayed on this map were collected by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. For more information, please refer to the respective country section found in NACSA.
  • 17. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 17 North American Perspectives CO2 Storage Resources Estimates for Unmineable Coal in North America (Gigatonnes) Canada Mexico United States Low Estimate High Estimate Low Estimate Low Estimate High Estimate Total 4 8 0 61 119 Coal in North America Coal that is considered unmineable as determined by geological, technological and economic factors (typically too deep, too thin or lacking internal continuity to be economically mined with today’s technologies) may have potential for CO2 storage. Coal preferentially adsorbs CO2 over methane, which is naturally found in coal seams, at a ratio of 2 to 13 times. This property (known as adsorption trapping) is the basis for CO2 storage in coal seams. Methane gas is typically recovered from coal seams by dewatering and depressurization, but this can leave significant amounts of methane trapped in the seam. The process of injecting and storing CO2 in unmineable coal seams to enhance methane recovery is called enhanced coalbed methane (ECBM) recovery. Enhanced coalbed methane recovery parallels CO2 -EOR because it derives an economic benefit from the recovery and sale of the methane gas that helps to offset the cost of CO2 storage. However, for CO2 storage in coals to be possible, the coal must have sufficient permeability, which controls injectivity. Coal permeability depends on the effective stress and usually decreases with increasing depth. Furthermore, studies have shown that CO2 injection can negatively affect coal permeability and injectivity. For CO2 storage in coals or ECBM recovery, the ideal coal seam should have sufficient permeability and be considered unmineable. Carbon dioxide storage in coals can take place at shallower depths (but at least 200 meters deep) than storage in hydrocarbon reservoirs and saline formations (which require at least 800 meters), because the CO2 should be in the gaseous phase rather than in the supercritical or liquid phase. Research in this area is ongoing to optimize CO2 storage. For more information on CO2 storage resource potential in unmineable coals and the methodologies each country used to estimate this potential, please see the country chapters and Appendix B. Data displayed on this map were collected by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. For more information, please refer to the respective country section found in NACSA.
  • 18. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201218 North American Perspectives CO2 Storage Resources Estimates for Saline Formations in North America (Gigatonnes) Canada Mexico United States Low Estimate High Estimate Low Estimate Low Estimate High Estimate Total 28 296 100 1,610 20,155 Saline Formations in North America Saline formations are layers of sedimentary porous and permeable rocks saturated with salty water called brine (water with a total dissolved solid count exceeding 10,000 parts per million). These formations are fairly widespread throughout North America, occurring in both onshore and offshore sedimentary basins, and have potential for CO2 storage. For storage in saline formations, CO2 is pressurized and injected at depths greater than 800 meters, where, under high pressure, it maintains a supercritical state (liquid-like density, but gas-like viscosity). Under these conditions, it fills the pore space by displacing already present brine. It is important that a regionally extensive confining zone (often referred to as caprock) overlies the porous rock layer and that no major faults exist. Also, the storage capacity and injectivity of the formation needs to be known in order to determine whether CO2 injection is economical. Another important factor is the ability of the porous rock reservoir layer to permanently trap the CO2 , because the CO2 can dissolve in the brine (solubility trapping), react chemically with the minerals and fluid to form solid carbonates (mineral trapping), or become trapped in the pore space (volumetric trapping). Saline formations are estimated to have much larger storage potential for CO2 than oil and gas reservoirs and unmineable coals because they are more extensive and widespread, but their properties are less known. However, some knowledge about saline formations exists from the exploration for oil and gas and prior experience exists from the oil industry. Although saline formations have a greater amount of uncertainty than oil and gas reservoirs, they represent an enormous potential for CO2 storage, and recent project results suggest that they can be used as reliable, long-term storage sites. For more information on CO2 storage resource potential in saline formations and the methodologies each country used to estimate this potential, please see the country chapters and Appendix B. Data displayed on this map were collected by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. For more information, please refer to the respective country section found in NACSA.
  • 19. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 19 North American Perspectives Future Geological Storage Options: Basalt Formations and Organic Shale Formations in North America Two additional geological environments being investigated for CO2 storage are basalt formations and organic shale formations. The relatively large amount of potential storage resource and favorable geographicdistributionmakebasaltformationsanimportantformation type for possible CO2 storage, particularly in the Pacific Northwest and the southeastern United States. Basalt formations are geological formations of solidified lava. These formations have a unique chemical makeup that could potentially convert injected CO2 into a solid mineral form, thus isolating it from the atmosphere permanently. Some key factors affecting the capacity and injectivity of CO2 into basalt formations are effective porosity and interconnectivity. Current efforts are focused on enhancing and utilizing the mineralization reactions and increasing CO2 flow within basalt formations. Organic-rich shales are another geological storage option. Shales are formed from silicate minerals, which are degraded into clay particles that accumulate over millions of years. The plate-like structure of these clay particles causes them to accumulate in a flat manner, resulting in rock layers with extremely low permeability in a vertical direction. Therefore, shales are most often used in geological storage as a confining zone or caprock. Ongoing efforts are focused on using CO2 for enhanced gas recovery (EGR). While the location of some basalt formations and organic-rich shale basins has been identified, a number of questions relating to the basic geology, the CO2 trapping mechanisms and their kinetics, and monitoring and modeling tools need to be addressed before they can be considered viable storage targets. As such, no CO2 storage resource estimates for basalt formations or organic-rich shale basins are currently available. Shale basins in North America of potential future interest for storage are indicated on the map.Columbia River Basalt. This map displays organic-rich shale basin data that were obtained by the U.S. DOE and other sources and compiled by NATCARB. Carbon dioxide geological storage information in NACSA was developed to provide a high-level overview of CO2 geological storage potential across North America. Areal extents of geological formations presented are intended to be used as an initial assessment of potential geological storage. This information provides CCS project developers a starting point for further investigation. Furthermore, this information is required to indicate the extent to which CCS technologies can contribute to the reduction of CO2 emissions and is not intended to serve as a substitute for site-specific assessment and testing.
  • 20. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201220 Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada Canada is committed to exploring carbon capture and storage as a leading technology to reduce GHG emissions in key sectors of the economy. With world-class geological storage potential, innovative companies, and a supportive policy and regulatory environment, Canada is making a significant global contribution to demonstrate CCS technology. Canada’s National Round Table on the Environment and Economy—an independent national advisory body on the environment and economy—reported in 2009 that, of all GHG reduction strategies needed to meet Canada’s emissions reduction commitments, CCS technology has the potential to offer the single largest reduction in CO2 emissions (up to 40 percent by 2050). A Canada-Alberta ecoENERGY Carbon Capture and Storage Task Force confirmed in a 2008 report the strong case for rapid and widespread deployment of CCS in Canada, estimating that Canada has the potential to store as much as 600 megatonnes of CO2 per year. Following that report, Alberta launched the Alberta CCS Development Council, which in 2009 produced a roadmap for the implementation of CCS in Alberta. In response to these task forces, the federal government and provincial governments have committed more than $3 billion to CCS initiatives through a number of federal and provincial programs. As a result of these incentives, six first-of-a-kind, large-scale integrated CCS demonstration projects, which are to capture and store more than 1 megatonne of CO2 annually each, are currently being advanced in Canada. Two are proceeding with construction; these include the SaskPowerBoundaryDamproject(acoal-firedelectricitygenerationproject)inSaskatchewan, and Enhance Energy’s Alberta Carbon Trunk Line (a CO2 pipeline project) in central Alberta. Fourotherprojectsareatvariousstagesofplanningandengineering.TheyincludetheQuest project at Shell’sScotfordoilsandsupgradingfacilityinAlberta,theTransAltaPioneerproject (also a coal-fired electricity generation project) and the Swan Hills project (underground coal gasification and syngas-based electricity generation) in Alberta, and Spectra Energy’s Fort Nelson shale gas processing project in northeast British Columbia. In almost all of these projects the captured CO2 is either used for CO2 -EOR or stored in saline formations. A seventh project, in operation since 2000, is the commercial CO2 -EOR project at Weyburn, Saskatchewan—one of the first large-scale CO2 storage projects in the world. This project, operated by Cenovus Energy, together with a similar CO2 -EOR project operated by Apache Canada at its adjacent Midale oilfield, injects nearly 3 megatonnes of CO2 per year to boost oil production. The CO2 is captured at a coal gasification facility in North Dakota, transportedacrosstheCanada-U.S.border,anddeliveredtotheEORoperationsatWeyburn. To date, more than 21 megatonnes of CO2 have been injected and safely and securely stored. The Weyburn-Midale site also serves as the location of the International Energy Agency on Greenhouse Gas (IEAGHG) Weyburn-Midale CO2 Monitoring and Storage Project. Canada is a foundingmemberofthisresearchinitiative,which constitutes the world’s largest international CO2 measuring, monitoring and verification project, involving a consortium of several governments and many energy companies and research organizations. Legalandregulatoryframeworksarebeingaligned to facilitate CCS deployment. In order for Alberta to proceed with its large-scale CCS projects, the government of Alberta passed the Carbon Capture and Storage Statutes Amendment Act in 2010 to address uncertainty related to geological pore space ownership and the management of long-term liability of stored CO2 . Alberta also launched a Regulatory Framework Assessment to examine the existing environmental, safety, and assurance processes and determine what, if any, new regulatory processes need to be implemented. A final report is expected by the end of 2012. In Saskatchewan, amendments to the Oil and Gas Conservation Act to clarify and expand regulatory authority around CCS were passed in 2011. And in British Columbia a CCS policy and regulatory framework is currently being developed. At the international level, Canada is working with the United States, through the U.S.-Canada Clean Energy Dialogue, to collaborate on CCS research and development projects, share knowledge gained from CCS projects, and enhance public engagement in CCS. Canada is also actively engaged in other international fora on CCS. It is a member of the Global CCS Institute; the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum; the Clean Energy Ministerial’s Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage Action Group; the International Energy Agency; G-8; G20; and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation.
  • 21. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 21 Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada The Alberta Carbon Trunk Line , which will carry CO2 captured at Alberta's industrial heartland to CO2 -EOR and storage sites in central Alberta. (Courtesy: Enhance Energy) A technician monitors the CO2 -EOR operations of the Cenovus Weyburn oilfield in Saskatchewan, Canada. (Courtesy: Cenovus) General view of the 1 megatonne/year CO2 capture plant under construction at the SaskPower Boundary Dam Generating Station near Estevan, Saskatchewan, Canada. (Courtesy: SaskPower) Summary of Canada’s CO2 Emissions from Large Stationary Sources, Storage Resource Estimates and Theoretical Storage Duration by Province/Territory Province / Territory CO2 Emissions* (Megatonnes/ Year) Oil and Gas Reservoirs Unmineable Coal Saline Formations Total Provincial/ Territorial Storage Resources (Gigatonnes) Total Provincial/ Territorial Storage Duration (Year) Storage Resources (Gigatonnes) Storage Duration*** (Year) Storage Resources** (Gigatonnes) Storage Duration*** (Year) Storage Resources** (Gigatonnes) Storage Duration*** (Year) Alberta 107 12 110 6 55 28 270 46 430 British Columbia 8 3 350 <1 20 <1 30 3 400 Manitoba 1 <<1 10 0 0 1 1,000 1 1,000 Northwest Territories <1 0 0 0 0 <<1 130 <<1 130 Ontario 41 <1 5 0 0 1 25 1 30 Quebec 16 0 0 0 0 4 210 4 210 Saskatchewan 20 1 40 <1 15 75 3,800 76 3,900 Other Provinces / Territories 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A Canada 219 16 70 6 30 110 500 132 600 Overall, Canada is committed to working both domestically and internationally to disseminate the knowledge gained from publicly- funded research and demonstration projects in order to accelerate the global deployment of CCS. This commitment includes the development of strategies and best practices for ensuring and communicating the safety and overall integrity of CO2 storage. The following pages describe the location, size, and type of Canada’s large stationary CO2 emission sources and the location and estimated size of the CO2 storage resources assessed in this Atlas.Theseresourcescompriseoilandgasreservoirs,unmineable coal, and saline formations. Based on these assessments, Canada’s CO2 storage resources are large. The summary table below shows for each province and territory the estimated mid-range CO2 storage resources and provides an indication of how many years that province or territory could theoretically store the CO2 emissions from its large stationary CO2 sources. While emissions from western Canada are the highest in the country, the region also has the largest storage resources, which will last for hundreds of years. On the other hand, Ontario, the second largest emitting province in Canada, has limited storage potential compared to its emissions.    * Based on 2009 emissions from stationary sources emitting over 100 kilotonnes/year.   ** Storage resources shown for unmineable coal and saline formations are mid-estimates. *** Storage duration is provided as an indication of the amount of CO2 storage resources available in a jurisdiction relative to its CO2 emissions. Storage duration is calculated by dividing the amount of a CO2 storage resource in a jurisdiction by the magnitude of the annual CO2 emissions of that jurisdiction. All emission, storage resource, and storage duration figures are rounded. N/A – Not assessed. <<1 – much smaller than 1. Tonne (t) = 1 metric ton Kilotonne (kt) = 1,000 metric tons Megatonne (Mt) = 1,000,000 metric tons Gigatonne (Gt) = 1,000,000,000 metric tons
  • 22. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201222 Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada Large Stationary Sources of CO2 in Canada In 2009, Canada’s total anthropogenic GHG emissions were estimated to be 690 megatonnes of CO2 eq., of which 545 megatonnes (79 percent) was CO2 , which in turn represented 1.8 percent of the world’s CO2 emissions. Close to one-thirdoftheGHGemissions(219megatonnesCO2 eq.)originatesfromlarge stationary CO2 sources with emissions greater than 100 kilotonnes per year. These emissions consisted primarily of CO2 (93.7 percent). Emissions from power generation from fossil fuels, mainly coal, represent approximately half of Canada’s CO2 emissions from large stationary sources (seepiechart),withpowerplantsconcentratedinAlbertaandSaskatchewan, where coal is mined locally, and in Ontario, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia whose power plants import coal (see map). The next sectors that emit significant amounts of CO2 are the energy sector (petroleum and natural gas) and refineries, petrochemical and chemical plants. The distribution of these large CO2 sources reflects the location of the energy industry in western Canada and also the location of oil importing ports and processing facilities on the east coast and in central Canada. The industrial sector is responsible for approximately one-tenth of the CO2 emissions from large stationary sources and is concentrated in Ontario and Quebec, the industrial heartland of Canada. Carbon dioxide emissions from cement plants, fertilizer plants, and other sectors (agricultural processing, ethanol production, and other unclassified) are cumulatively less than one-tenth of Canada’s emissions from large stationary sources. Given the nature of power generation, energy production, and the industrial base in the country, approximately half of the CO2 emissions from large stationary sources originates in Alberta (see pie chart), as a result of its fossil fuel-based power generation and economy. Large sources in Ontario emit approximately one-fifth of the emissions from large stationary sources, while large sources in Saskatchewan represent approximately one-tenth of Canada’s emissions from such sources. All other provinces and territories emit cumulatively approximately one-fifth of emissions from large sources. A full breakdown of the CO2 emissions from large stationary sources by industry sector and province/territory is provided in Appendix C. To conclude, the profile of the CO2 emissions from large stationary sources in Canada reflects the energy and industrial base of the country, with power generation and the energy industry concentrated in the Prairie provinces (Alberta and Saskatchewan) and the Maritimes (mainly Nova Scotia), and the industrial base concentrated in central Canada (Ontario and Quebec). Large Stationary Sources of CO2 Emissions in Canada Industry Sector CO2 Emissions (Megatonnes/Year) Number of Sources Agricultural Processing <1 1 Cement Plant 11 24 Electricity Production 100 71 Ethanol 1 4 Fertilizer 5 7 Industrial 24 51 Petroleum / Natural Gas 50 58 Refineries / Chemical 28 33 Unclassified 1 5 Canada Total 219 188 Tonne (t) = 1 metric ton Kilotonne (kt) = 1,000 metric tons Megatonne (Mt) = 1,000,000 metric tons Gigatonne (Gt) = 1,000,000,000 metric tons
  • 23. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 23 Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada CO2 Storage Resource Estimates for Oil and Gas Reservoirs in Canada (Gigatonnes) Province Oil Gas Oil & Gas (oil reservoirs with gas cap) Total Alberta <1 9 3 12 British Columbia <<1 3 <1 3 Manitoba 0 0 <<1 <<1 Ontario 0 <1 0 <1 Saskatchewan <1 1 <1 1 Canada Total <1 12 3 16 Oil and Gas Reservoirs in Canada More than 50,000 distinct oil and gas reservoirs and oil reservoirs with a gas cap are found in northeastern British Columbia, Alberta, western and southeastern Saskatchewan, and southwestern Manitoba. A few gas reservoirs and oil reservoirs withagascaparealsofoundinsouthernOntario,mostofthemoffshorebeneathLake Erie. Oil and gas reservoirs are also found offshore Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and in the Northwest Territories. Only reservoirs in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Ontario deeper than 800 meters have been accessed (see map) because reservoirs in other places are too far from CO2 sources. Several hundred large oil reservoirs in secondary and tertiary recovery (see page 16) were not considered because there is little CO2 storage resource left after flooding them with water and solvent or natural gas. Heavy oil and bitumen reservoirs, which are produced using thermal processes, were also not considered because of the geomechanical effects on the reservoir and caprock caused by the significant temperature variations during oil production. Hundreds of commingled oil or gas reservoirs were not evaluated in terms of CO2 storage resource because of the challenge in assessing the recovery and in-situ conditions of the individual reservoirs whose production is commingled. Finally, the additional CO2 storage resource that would be created by using CO2 -EOR was not evaluated because CO2 -EOR requires detailed evaluations based on numerical simulations of incremental oil recovery and CO2 storage. Such evaluations were beyond the scope of this Atlas. In calculating the storage potential of a given reservoir, it was assumed that, in conformance with current regulatory practices, CO2 injection will raise the reservoir pressuretotheinitialreservoirpressure.Thus,thecurrentevaluationoftheCO2 storage resource in oil and gas reservoirs covers only oil, gas, and oil & gas reservoirs that are, or have been, in primary production in the above-mentioned provinces. The majority of oil and gas reservoirs have small CO2 storage resource, in the order of kilotonnes. Only reservoirs with a CO2 storage resource at depletion greater than 1 megatonne were considered as a CO2 storage resource to be inventoried. This resulted in only approximately 1,000 oil and gas reservoirs with sufficient individual storage potential being evaluated; their cumulative storage resource is reported by province and type of reservoir in the adjacent table. Gas reservoirs have 24 times more CO2 storage capacity than oil reservoirs due to their larger number, larger size, and much higher recovery factor. Oil reservoirs with gas cap also have significant capacity at approximately 3 gigatonnes, and this is due mainly to the gas cap. Provincially, the largest CO2 storage resource is in Alberta, at close to 12 gigatonnes, followed by British Columbia with close to 3 gigatonnes. The CO2 storage resource in Saskatchewan is much smaller compared with these two provinces, while the CO2 storage resource in oil and gas reservoirs in Manitoba is negligible. The CO2 storage resource in oil and gas reservoirs in Ontario is small compared with the western provinces and also compared with Ontario’s CO2 emissions from large stationary sources. Location of the assessed CO2 storage resource in oil and gas reservoirs in Canada. Offshore reservoirs, reservoirs too far from CO2 sources, or reservoirs shallower than 800 meters were not considered in this evaluation. Also, heavy oil reservoirs, bitumen reservoirs, and oil reservoirs in secondary or tertiary recovery were not considered either. Only reservoirs with storage potential greater than 1 megatonne were considered in the final analysis.
  • 24. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201224 Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada CO2 Storage Resource Estimates for Unmineable Coal in Canada (Gigatonnes) Province Low Estimate Mid Estimate High Estimate Alberta 3 6 8 British Columbia <1 <1 <1 Saskatchewan <1 <1 <1 Canada Total 4 6 8 LocationofCO2 storageresourcesincoalinCanada.Coalsinsmallintra-montanebasinsinBritishColumbia, Yukon, on Vancouver Island, in the Northwest Territories and in the Arctic were not considered because they are located too far from CO2 sources. Coals in southern Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland were not considered because they are too shallow. Only coals in the Alberta basin in the depth range 800 to 1200 meters were considered in the assessment. Coal in Canada Canada has significant coal resources of variable rank (from lignite to anthracite) in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, Yukon and Northwest Territories, and in the Arctic. Except for metallurgical or coking coal, which is exported, lower rank coal (thermal coal) is mined in Alberta and Saskatchewan for power generation. In terms of the CO2 storage resource in coal, coals that are too far from CO2 sources, shallower than 800 meters, or deeper than 1200 meters were not considered in Canada’s evaluation, thus ensuring that they are deeper than protected groundwater resources and also taking into account the decrease in coal permeability,henceinjectivity,withdepthasaresultofincreasingeffective stress. Only coals in the Alberta basin (northeastern British Columbia, Alberta, and western Saskatchewan) were considered in this inventory of the CO2 storage resource in coal in Canada (see map). Several coal zones in the Alberta basin were mapped: the Upper Cretaceous Ardley, Edmonton and Belly River, and the Lower Cretaceous Mannville. Except for the latter, all other coals crop out at the ground surface where they are mined for power generation. Given the structure of the Alberta basin, these coal zones form distinct arcuate bands parallel with the Rocky Mountains. Coal CO2 adsorption isotherms and moisture and ash content were used in calculating the CO2 storage resource. The distribution of the CO2 storage resources in coal in the three westernmost Canadian provinces is shown in the table for low, mid, and high estimates (see also Appendix B for the methodology used). The discussion below is based on the mid estimates. Again, as in the case of oil and gas reservoirs, it can be seen that Alberta has by far the largest CO2 storage resource in coals in the country at 6 gigatonnes of CO2 . Saskatchewan’s CO2 storage resource is much smaller (300 megatonnes of CO2 ) and is located in western Saskatchewan, while Saskatchewan’s emissions from large sources are located in central, southern, and southeastern Saskatchewan. Therefore, utilization of this resource would require the construction of long pipelines. The CO2 storage resource in coals in northeastern British Columbia is the smallest at 170 megatonnes and is dwarfed by the CO2 storage resource in oil and gas reservoirs in the region. Given the size of the CO2 storage resource in coals in the three provinces compared with the size of the storage resource in oil and gas reservoirs and in saline formations (see next section) and considering the immaturity of this storage technology compared with storage in the other two geological formations, it is unlikely that the coal storage resource will be utilized in the near future.
  • 25. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 25 Carbon Capture and Storage in Canada CO2 Storage Resource Estimates for Saline Formations in Canada (Gigatonnes) Province Low Estimate Mid Estimate High Estimate Alberta 7 28 76 British Columbia <<1 <1 <1 Manitoba <1 1 4 Northwest Territories <<1 <<1 <1 Ontario <1 1 3 Quebec 1 4 9 Saskatchewan 19 75 203 Canada Total 28 110 296 Saline Formations in Canada The CO2 storage resource in saline formations was estimated for the Alberta, Williston, Michigan, and Appalachian basins in Canada, corresponding to northeastern British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, southwestern Manitoba, southern Ontario, and southern Quebec. Only saline formations deeper than 800 meters were considered to ensure that CO2 is in dense phase (liquid or supercritical, depending on temperature). Similarly, only regions of these saline formationswithporositygreaterthan4percentwereconsideredontheassumption that regions with porosity of less than 4 percent lack local capacity and injectivity to make them suitable for CO2 storage. The CO2 storage resource was estimated based on existing geothermal gradients and on the assumption of an overall average pressure increase of 10 percent above the initial formation pressure as a result of CO2 injection. Because the sedimentary succession in the Michigan and Appalachian basins in Canada is relatively thin, being located at the edge of these basins whose depo-centers are located in the United States, the CO2 storage resource was estimated for all saline formations occuring in these basins. The situation is quite different in western Canada (Alberta and Williston basins), where there are close to 30 saline formations of various areal extent and thickness in the sedimentary succession. It was not possible to estimate the CO2 storage resource in all these formations within the scope of this Atlas, so the CO2 storage resource was estimated for only the six deepest saline formations in the sedimentary succession. They are, listed in ascending order: Basal Aquifer (overlying the Precambrian crystalline basement), Winnipegosis, Slave Point, Cooking Lake, Nisku, and Charles-Rundle. These saline formations were selected based on several criteria, including areal extent, depth, thickness, porosity, permeability, pressure, temperature, water salinity, and seal integrity. The CO2 storage resources for British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba, provided in the table to the right, are based on CO2 storage resource estimates for these six saline formations only. This means that considerable CO2 storage resource in saline formations in the Alberta and Williston basins has not yet been assessed, and that the values provided in the table represent a lower limit of the CO2 storage resource in saline formations in the four western Canadian provinces. As shown in the table, for each of the assessed saline formations, low, mid, and high estimates for the CO2 storage resource were obtained using the methodology described in Appendix B. An examination of the maps in this section and in the section on CO2 sources shows that saline formations underlie most of the large stationary CO2 sources in Canada from northeastern British Columbia to southwestern Manitoba (the Alberta and Willistonbasins),wherepowergeneration,energy,andpetrochemicalindustriesare located, and in southern Ontario and southern Quebec, where power generation, manufacturing, refineries/petrochemical, and mining/smelting industries are located. Saskatchewan has the largest CO2 storage resource in saline formations, due to the large storage resource in the Basal Formation, followed by Alberta. Map shows location of saline formations in Canada assessed in NACSA. Saline formations too far from large CO2 sources, located in an area of high tectonic activity, located in small intra-montane basins in the Rocky Mountains and in the Atlantic provinces were not evaluated at this timeon thebasis of a screening process adapted after Bachu (2003). Only the saline formations underlying or close to large stationary sources in Alberta and Saskatchewan in the west (in the Alberta basin and the Canadian portion of the Williston basin) and in central Canada (in the Michigan and Appalachian basins) were evaluated, and the results are presented in the table below.
  • 26. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201226 Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico Developing an understanding of CCS in Mexico’s energy sector has followed two parallel paths. The first path evaluates research for EOR technologies, which started at the beginning of the last decade. The second path includes the Federal government´s role in mitigating climate change. Carbon capture and storage was first introduced as a suitable technology to be developed and deployed in Mexico in the National Climate Change Strategy presented in 2007. The role of CCS was further explored in the Special Climate Change Program, which included commitments for the period 2009-2012: • Develop a study on the state of the art of CO2 capture and geological storage technologies, and their viability in Mexico (completed and published). • Prepare an analysis of a thermal power plant or a combined-cycle plant and its synergies with projects that can use CO2 emissions to accelerate photosynthesis processes and produce materials or alternative fuels. The inclusion of these specific objectives, as well as the federal government’s positive attitude towards technology development under international cooperation arrangements, led the energy sector to work on a set of CCS activities. NACSA is a tool to broaden technical cooperation and enhance public awareness of the development of CCS technology and its potential economic and environmental benefits. Mexicohasembracedotherparallelinternationalinitiatives,placingMexicoattheforefront of developing countries. Mexico is a founding member of the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute; an active participant in the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum; and the Carbon Capture, Use, and Storage Action Group of the Clean Energy Ministerial. In 2012, the federal government included Carbon Capture, Use, and Storage as a topic in the National Energy Strategy 2012-2026, with specific tasks and goals for the next 5 years, which comprise the development of a national atlas, a GIS on CCS, and a national strategy to be developed by the end of 2012. Likewise, other goals have been established for pilot and demonstration projects on CCS-EOR and the acceleration of photosynthesis processes. TheinformationpresentedinthisAtlasincludesgeological analyses and estimations of the CO2 storage potential on country and basin scales. The work was completed using theoretical methods, and no fieldwork was performed. However, it is expected that future research will include fieldwork, well drilling, and laboratory tests as part of regional, local, and site-specific assessments. Within the inclusion zone recommended for CO2 storage, nine out of eleven defined sedimentary provinces or basins were assessed to determine their theoretical storage potential in saline formations. Based on the analysis of 111 sectors, the theoretical CO2 storage resource was approximately 100 gigatonnes. Pipe conveyor oil, Mexico. Cargo ship, Mexican Sea. Electric tower, Mexico. Thermoelectric Central Petacalco, Michoacan.
  • 27. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 27 Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico Estimated CO2 Emissions from Large Stationary Sources in Mexico* Industry Sector CO2 Emissions (Megatonnes/Year) Number of Sources Agricultural Processing 1 3 Cement Plant 26 34 Electricity Generation 106 64 Industrial 25 38 Petroleum / Natural Gas 45 38 Refineries / Chemical 2 11 Mexico Total 205 188 * Only includes facilities with emissions greater than 100 kilotonnes/year, as reported via Annual Certificate of Operation (COA) to RETC, managed by SEMARNAT. Large Stationary Sources of CO2 in Mexico The most recent update of Mexico’s National Inventory of Greenhouse Gases was completed and submitted in 2010 under the Fourth National Communication to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change with data from 2006. The Inventory shows total annual GHG emissions in Mexico to be above 709 megatonnes of CO2 eq. Of this total, CO2 emissions amount to 492 megatonnes or 69.5 percent, which includes both stationary and non-stationary sources. If only large stationary sources are considered, annual CO2 emissions are estimated at 285 megatonnes or 40 percent. Accordingto2010datafromtheMexicanPollutantsReleaseandTransfer Registry(RETC),thereare188largestationaryCO2 sourceswithemissions totaling more than 100 kilotonnes per year. Their total emissions amount to approximately 205 megatonnes per year of CO2 . Power generation contributes the most to CO2 emissions from stationary sources, with emissions of 106 megatonnes per year or roughly 52 percent of the total. This figure includes emissions from Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE), as well as private power producers. The oil and petrochemical sector accounts for another 22 percent. Therefore, with emissions of 151 megatonnes per year, the energy sector as a whole is responsible for 74 percent of CO2 emissions from stationary sources in Mexico. Power generation produces a large volume of CO2 emissions from a small number of sources. Therefore, there is opportunity to use CO2 capture techniques in power plants. Map based on information from the databases of the Mexican PollutantsReleaseandTransferRegistry(RETC)andtheSecretariat of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT). Tonne (t) = 1 metric ton Kilotonne (kt) = 1,000 metric tons Megatonne (Mt) = 1,000,000 metric tons Gigatonne (Gt) = 1,000,000,000 metric tons
  • 28. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201228 Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico Within the inclusion zone, 11 geological provinces were identified as having potential for CO2 storage in saline formations deeper than 800 meters. Nine of these provinces were assessed and an estimate was generated for their CO2 storage resource potential. These provinces include Chihuahua, Coahuila, Central, Burgos, Tampico-Misantla, Veracruz, Southeastern, Yucatan, and Chiapas. In terms of CO2 storage in depleted and mature oilfields, Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) is at present conducting several studies that would facilitate a nation-wide evaluation of these storage resources. The results of such studies would be available for future editions of this Atlas. Selected Geological Provinces in Mexico Mexico is subdivided into two general zones: an exclusion zone and an inclusion zone. The exclusion zone is characterized by extensive volcanic igneous rocks and frequent seismic, tectonic, and volcanic activities. This zone is not recommended for CO2 storage until further geological studies have been conducted. The inclusion zone is represented by geologically stable areas, involving terrigenous, carbonate and evaporitic sedimentary rock sequences of different ages and depositional environments. The inclusion zone is the country´s best potential target for CO2 storage, although specific geological studies are still required. The inclusion zone comprises mainly the north-central and eastern portions of Mexico.
  • 29. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 29 Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico Different coal outcrops in the Santa Clara Formation in Central Sonora. Note the fractures, faults, and folds over very short intervals. (Courtesy: CFE Geology Department, 2010) Coal in Mexico The most important coal basins in Mexico are not suitable for CO2 storage. The Sabinas and Río Escondido coal basins in Coahuila state are still in production. They produce 10 megatonnes of coal each year to fire two of Mexico’s three coal-fired power plants. The Sabinas coal basin is also the current source of coal for the iron and steel industry in northeast Mexico, the most important in the country. As long as this situation continues, which according to evaluations could be more than 50 years, the northeast coal region cannot be used for CO2 storage purposes. As for the other two well-known Mexican coal basins, Sonora and Oaxaca, they both are of such structural complexity that CO2 storage would be difficult. The coal basins in the central and northern part of Sonora State are of Triassic and Cretaceous age, respectively, and have been subjected to a series of tectonic phenomena that have resulted in fractured, folded, faulted, and dislocated blocky formations, which makes it difficult to pursue and trail a coal bed. This situation limits the coal industry in Sonora to low-scale craft well-mining with production rates too low to develop industrial facilities. The Cretaceous coal basin in Oaxaca State is of a similar structure and complexity as Sonora. The pictures below illustrate the condition of the beds in the coal basins of Sonora and Oaxaca.
  • 30. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201230 Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico Biosphere Reserve Centla Swamps, Tabasco. Saline Formations in Mexico Saline formations in Mexico are located in continental areas as well as offshore along the marine shelf platform of the Gulf of Mexico. These saline formations occur within sedimentary rock sequences in geological basins or provinces, and they are envisaged as some of the most favorable CO2 storage resources in Mexico. Therefore, for the purposes of this Atlas, Mexican analyses only consider deep saline formations.
  • 31. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 31 Carbon Capture and Storage in Mexico CO2 Storage Resource Estimates for Saline Formations in Assessed Geological Provinces / Sectors in Mexico Geological Province Sedimentary Sequence Theoretical Storage Potential (Gigatonnes) Sectors Assessed Chihuahua Carbonate <1 5 Coahuila Carbonate 6 10 Terrigenous 7 2 Central Carbonate <1 1 Burgos Terrigenous 17 31 Tampico-Misantla Carbonate 3 4 Terrigenous 7 8 Veracruz Carbonate 1 5 Terrigenous 14 16 Southeastern Terrigenous 24 17 Yucatan Carbonate 4 2 Terrigenous 10 5 Chiapas Carbonate 6 5 Mexico Total — 100 111 Detailed Analysis of Saline Formations in Mexico The theoretical CO2 storage resource estimate for saline formations in 111 assessed sectors currently stands at 100 gigatonnes, distributed in different regions. The analysis of stratigraphical and structural data in the Chihuahua geological province yields five sectors with a CO2 storage resource estimate of approximately 0.42 gigatonnes in carbonate sedimentary rock sequences. Within the Coahuila geological province, 12 sectors are proposed that show a CO2 storage resourceof13gigatonnes.Sixgigatonneswerefoundincarbonatesedimentarysequences, and 7 gigatonnes in terrigenous sedimentary sequences. The estimated total CO2 storage resource in the Central geological province is approximately 0.01 gigatonnes; this considers only one carbonate sector. In the Burgos geological province, geological and stratigraphical analyses indentified 31 potential sectors within terrigenous sedimentary sequences. A total of 17 gigatonnes of CO2 storage resource was estimated. The analysis of stratigraphical and structural data in the Tampico-Misantla geological province yields 12 sectors with a total CO2 storage resource estimate of 10 gigatonnes. Four sectors correspond to carbonate sedimentary sequences and eight to terrigenous sedimentary sequences. The Veracruz geological province shows 21 sectors with CO2 storage potential. Five sectors are included within carbonate sedimentary sequences while 16 correspond to terrigenous sedimentary sequences. The total CO2 storage resource estimation is 15 gigatonnes. Within the Southeastern geological province, 17 sectors are capable of CO2 storage in terrigenous sedimentary rock sequences with a theoretical storage potential of 24 gigatonnes. After geological and stratigraphical analyses were carried out in the Yucatan geological province, 7 sectors were found with an estimated theoretical CO2 storage resource of 14 gigatonnes. Ten gigatonnes are in terrigenous rock sequences while four are in carbonate sequences. The CO2 storage resource estimated for the Chiapas geological province is 6 gigatonnes, located in five sectors composed of carbonate sedimentary sequences.
  • 32. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201232 Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States BSCSP Validation Phase geological pilot site near Wallula, Washington. (Courtesy: Sarah Koenigsberg) Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States The U.S. DOE’s Carbon Storage and Carbon Capture Programs are helping to develop technologies to capture, separate, and store CO2 in order to reduce GHG emissions without adversely influencing energy use or hindering economic growth. These technologies encompass the entire life-cycle process for controlling CO2 emissions from large stationary sources, such as coal-based power plants. By cost-effectively capturing CO2 before it is emitted to the atmosphere and then permanently storing it, coal can continue to be used while promoting economic growth and reducing CO2 emissions. Integrated, cost-effective, and efficient CCS technologies must be developed and demonstrated at full-scale prior to their availability for widespread commercial deployment. The U.S. DOE’s Carbon Storage Program is comprised of three key elements for CCS technology development and research: (1) Infrastructure; (2) Core R&D; and (3) Global Collaborations. The primary component of the Infrastructure element is the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs), a government/ academic/industry cooperative effort tasked with characterizing, testing, and developing guidelines for An estimated 600 to 6,700 years of CO2 storage resource is available in the United States based on 2011 emission rates. U.S. DOE’s Carbon Storage Program Field Projects Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Field Projects: • 8 large-scale field tests planned (approximately 1 megatonne) • 18 small-scale field tests complete (more than 1.23 megatonnes injected) • 11 terrestrial CO2 storage tests complete Non-Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Field Projects: • 3 small-scale field tests (injection of less than 0.5 megatonnes of CO2 per year) in unconventional reservoirs
  • 33. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 33 Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (RCSP) Acronym/Abbreviated Name Big Sky Carbon Sequestration Partnership BSCSP Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium MGSC Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership MRCSP Plains CO2 Reduction Partnership PCOR Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership SECARB Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration SWP West Coast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership WESTCARB MGSC’s CO2 injection testing in the Blan No. 1 well, Hancock County, Kentucky. the most suitable technologies, and infrastructure for CCS in different regions of the UnitedStatesandseveralprovincesinCanada.The Core R&D element iscomprisedof four focal areas for CCS technology development: (1) Monitoring, Verification, and Accounting; (2) Geologic Storage; (3) Simulation and Risk Assessment; and (4) CO2 Utilization. The Core R&D element is driven by technology needs and is accomplished through applied laboratory and pilot-scale research aimed at developing new technologies for GHG mitigation. The Core R&D and Infrastructure elements provide technology solutions that support the Global Collaborations element. The U.S. DOE participates and transfers technology solutions to international efforts that promote CCS, such as the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, NAEWG, and several international demonstration projects. To accomplish widespread deployment, four Carbon Storage Program goals have been established: (1) develop technologies that will support industries’ ability to predict CO2 storage capacity in geological formations; (2) develop technologies to demonstrate that 99 percent of injected CO2 remains in the injection zones; (3) improve efficiency of storage operations; and (4) complete a series of Best Practices Manuals that serve as the basis for the design and implementation of commercial CCS projects. Carbon capture and storage and other clean coal technologies being developed by U.S. DOE can play a critical role in mitigating CO2 emissions while supporting energy security in the United States. The U.S. DOE’s Carbon Storage Program is working to ensure that enabling technologies will be available to affect broad CCS deployment in the United States. Continued U.S. leadership in technology development and future deploymentisimportanttothecultivationofeconomicrewards and new business opportunities both domestically and abroad. Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Initiative InitiatedbyU.S.DOEFossilEnergy,theRegionalCarbonSequestrationPartnerships (see map at bottom) are a public/private partnership tasked with developing guidelines and testing for the most suitable technologies, regulation, and infrastructure needs for CCS within seven different regions of the United States and Canada. Geographical differences in fossil fuel use and CO2 storage potential acrosstheUnitedStatesandCanadadictateregionalapproachestoCCS.Theseven RCSPs that form this network currently include more than 400 state agencies, universities, and private companies, spanning 43 states, and 4 Canadian provinces. SECARB’s Development Phase Early Test detailed area of study. Preparation of the injection well for the PCOR Partnership’s huff ‘n’ puff test.
  • 34. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201234 Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States Large Stationary Sources of CO2 in the United States In the United States, U.S. DOE’s RCSPs have documented the location of 1,811 stationary CO2 sources(eachemittingmorethan100kilotonnesper year) with total annual emissions of approximately 3,014 megatonnes of CO2 . The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates total U.S. GHG emissions at approximately 6,800 megatonnes CO2 equivalent in 2010. This estimate includes CO2 emissions, as well as other GHGs, such as methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. The states with the largest CO2 stationary source emissions are Texas, Indiana, Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Louisiana, West Virginia, Missouri, and Kentucky. The 210 stationary sources identified in Texas are estimated to emit 368 megatonnes per year of CO2 . The 62 stationary sources identified in Indiana are estimated to emit 154 megatonnes per year of CO2 . The 51 stationary sources identified in Ohio are estimated to emit 149 megatonnes per year of CO2 . For details on large stationary sources of CO2 by state, see Appendix C. Additional details can be obtained from the NATCARB website (http://www.netl.doe.gov/ technologies/carbon_seq/natcarb/index.html). The number of sources and emissions reported in this Atlas was based on information gathered by the RCSPs and NATCARB as of April 2011. Large Stationary Sources of CO2 Emission Estimates in the United States Region CO2 Emissions (Megatonnes/Year) Number of Sources BSCSP 22 37 MGSC 262 119 MRCSP 699 353 PCOR 404 323 SECARB 1,034 481 SWP 293 163 WESTCARB 224 264 Non-RCSP 77 71 U.S. Total 3,014 1,811 This map displays CO2 stationary source data that were obtained from the RCSPs and other external sources and compiled by NATCARB. Each colored dot represents a different type of CO2 stationary source with the dot size representing the relative magnitude of the CO2 emissions (see map legend). Tonne (t) = 1 metric ton Kilotonne (kt) = 1,000 metric tons Megatonne (Mt) = 1,000,000 metric tons Gigatonne (Gt) = 1,000,000,000 metric tons
  • 35. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 2012 35 Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States Oil and Gas Reservoirs in the United States Mature oil and gas reservoirs have held crude oil and naturalgasformillionsofyears.Thesereservoirsconsist of a layer of permeable rock (usually sandstone, but sometimes carbonates) with a layer of nonpermeable rock, also called caprock (usually shale) above that forms a seal holding the hydrocarbons in place. These same characteristics make oil and gas reservoirs excellent target locations for geological storage of CO2 . Anaddedadvantageisthattheyhavebeenextensively explored, which generally results in a wealth of data available to plan and manage proposed CCS efforts. Whilenotallpotentialmatureoilandgasreservoirsinthe United States have been examined, U.S. DOE’s RCSPs have documented the location of approximately 120 gigatonnes of CO2 storage resource. Areas with the largest oil and gas reservoir CO2 storage resource potential are Texas, federal offshore, Ohio, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, North Dakota, California, Pennsylvania, and Montana. These CO2 storage resources are significant, with an estimated 120 years of storage available in Texas oil and gas reservoirs at Texas’s current emission rate. Louisiana’s oil and gas reservoirs are estimated to have CO2 storage resource for more than 95 years of emissions from the state. For details on oil and gas reservoir CO2 storage resource by state, see Appendix C. AdditionaldetailscanbeobtainedfromtheNATCARB website (http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/ carbon_seq/natcarb/index.html). CO2 Storage Resource Estimates for Oil and Gas Reservoirs in the United States RCSP Gigatonnes BSCSP 2 MGSC 1 MRCSP 15 PCOR 8 SECARB 30 SWP 60 WESTCARB 4 U.S. Total 120 CO2 -EOR production wellhead at a SECARB test site. (Courtesy: Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas–Austin) The map above displays CO2 storage resource data that were obtained by the RCSPs and other sources and compiled by the NATCARB team. Carbon dioxide geological storage information presented on this map was developed to provide a high-level overview of CO2 geological storage potential across the United States. Areal extents of geological formations and CO2 resource estimates presented are intended to be used as an initial assessment of potential geological storage. This information provides CCS project developers a starting point for further investigation. Furthermore, this information is required to indicate the extent to which CCS technologies can contribute to the reduction of CO2 emissions and is not intended to serve as a substitute for site-specific assessment and testing. Please note that data resulting in a straight edge in the map above is indicative of an area lacking sufficient data and is subject to future investigation.
  • 36. THE NORTH AMERICAN CARBON STORAGE ATLAS 201236 Carbon Capture and Storage in the United States Coal in the United States In the United States, unmineable coals that are too deep or too thin to be economically mined are potentially viable for CO2 storage. While not all unmineable coal has been examined, U.S. DOE’s RCSPs have documented the location of approximately 61 to 119 gigatonnes of potential CO2 storage resource in unmineable coal. Areas with the largest unmineable coal CO2 storage resource potential are Texas, Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Wyoming, Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, and Washington. An estimated 35 to 85 years of CO2 storage resource is available in Texas unmineable coals for Texas’s current emission rate. Alaska’s unmineable coal are estimated to have CO2 storage resource for 520 to 1,200 years worth of emissions from the state. For details on unmineable CO2 storage resource by state, see Appendix C. AdditionaldetailscanbeobtainedfromtheNATCARB website (http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/ carbon_seq/natcarb/index.html). CO2 Storage Resource Estimates for Unmineable Coal in the United States RCSP Low Estimate (Gigatonnes) High Estimate (Gigatonnes) BSCSP 12 12 MGSC 2 3 MRCSP 1 1 PCOR 1 1 SECARB 33 75 SWP 1 2 WESTCARB 11 25 U.S. Total 61 119 Surface coal mine near Gillete, Wyoming. (Courtesy: Greg Goebel)The map above displays CO2 storage resource data that were obtained by the RCSPs and other sources and compiled by the NATCARB team. Carbon dioxide geological storage information presented on this map was developed to provide a high-level overview of CO2 geological storage potential across the United States. Areal extents of geological formations and CO2 resource estimates presented are intended to be used as an initial assessment of potential geological storage. This information provides CCS project developers a starting point for further investigation. Furthermore, this information is required to indicate the extent to which CCS technologies can contribute to the reduction of CO2 emissions and is not intended to serve as a substitute for site- specific assessment and testing. Please note that data resulting in a straight edge in the map above is indicative of an area lacking sufficient data and is subject to future investigation.

Related Documents