For carbon capture to make an impact on shipping’s contribution to reaching global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets, there will have to be a considerable scaling up of current projects and activities. In the Scaling up CO2 shipping infrastructure webinar, experts considered how this will be achieved
The webinar Scaling up CO2 shipping infrastructure was sponsored by TGE Marine with supporting organisation Carbon Capture and Storage Association, and was part of the Carbon Capture & Storage Webinar Week in association with Marine Propulsion and Auxiliary Machinery and LNG Shipping & Terminals.
Joining the panel were Altera Infrastructure shuttle and storage sustainability manager Christian Fjell, Altera Infrastructure study manager Frank Wettland, Höegh LNG senior advisor - business development Tore Lunde, Element Energy senior consultant Michael Joos, and TGE Marine Gas Engineering head of business development & sales Björn Munko.
Mr Joos led the discussion, first clarifying the role of Element Energy as a low-carbon energy consultancy which works with end users to develop low-carbon emissions solutions, and works on the design of policies and the delivery side of carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects.
“First of all, why do we need CO2 shipping?” asked Mr Joos. “Multiple studies expect carbon capture, storage and utilisation will be required to reach net zero, especially in hard to reach industrial sectors,” he said.
In a poll, delegates were asked: Do you believe CCS and CO2 shipping will play a role in meeting the UN climate goals? 48% felt that shipping played a moderate role and 40% replied that shipping played a major role. Only 12% believed shipping only played a minor role, with 0% believing shipping had no role to play.
Shipping will be essential for those industries to achieve UN goals. “CCS will be required for net zero. Captured carbon will need to be transported from the emitters to the location of storage and this is where CO2 shipping will be needed,” he said. Up to around 650 km distance, the cost per tonne of CO2 moved favours pipeline, but above that distance the costs increase sharply. Below 650 km, shipping is more economical than pipeline for low volumes and long distances. The capex is also lower for shipping, reducing the financial risk profile, and in the early stages of CCS projects, volumes will be low, again favouring shipping over pipeline.
Even as volumes of captured carbon increase, shipping will still have a role. “Many large volume emitters will be too far away from potential storage sites,” said Mr Joos.
He noted that movement by sea in gas form is not economic and the captured carbon will need to be in liquid form. The key stages in the movement of captured carbon by ship are liquefaction stage, temporary storage stage, the shipping stage before being discharged to temporary storage and the conditioning stage for long storage.
This envisages the CO2 being brought back to a gas state and pumped offshore. But there are also plans to directly inject CO2 from the ship to the offshore storage, which would require heating the liquid CO2 back to a gas state.
In a poll, delegates were asked: What part of a CCS chain is the most challenging to realise? Just over half (51%) thought it was investing in the logistics infrastructure. Ensuring safe and permanent storage was a concern for 31% and 18% felt that investing in carbon capture technology represented the biggest challenge.
“What are the most expensive steps in the CO2 shipping chain?” asked Mr Jos. “It turns out the cost of the CO2 carrier including fuel costs and opex and the cost of liquefaction dominate the CO2 shipping costs.”
A key design consideration is the condition of the captured carbon for transportation. CO2 is not a liquid at ambient temperature. “It needs to be pressurised to get in the liquid phase,” said Mr Joos, ”In contrast to natural gas, CO2 has two ranges of conditions.”
“Low pressure and temperature corresponding to around seven bar and -50°C and medium pressure at around 17 bar and -25°C,” said Mr Joos. There is a trade-off between higher liquefaction versus lower shipping cost at low pressure compared to medium pressure.
Mr Joos pointed out that CO2 is currently transported in the low pressure condition in the food and beverage industry. However, economies of scale would require larger ships to bring down transport costs.
Can LPG carriers be converted to CO2 transportation? Unlikely, as CO2 is much denser. Other options include converting dry bulk carriers by inserting tanks into the holds but dedicated CO2 carriers are the most likely option.
Mr Joos believes the North Sea could potentially become a carbon storage centre for Europe, by utilising the depleted oil and gas fields. There are projects underway in Norway, the Netherlands and Scotland that are exploring this potential.
The UK Government is currently developing a business model for carbon capture, which Mr Joos noted, is based on CO2 being waste, and the whole chain owned and operated by one entity.
One such project is ’Stella Maris’, a large-scale carbon capture and storage initiative that is a collaboration between the owner and infrastructure provider, Altera (ex-Teekay Offshore, now a separate company) and industrial partners Höegh LNG, Gassnova, Equinor, Total, SINTEF, TGE Marine Gas Engineering GmbH, Moss Maritime, SEVAN SSP, DNV and APL Norway. The aim is to produce a one-stop zero emissions 10M tonne per year infrastructure comprising two to three carbon collection storage offloading (CCSO) units, a fleet of 50,000 m3 CO2 shuttle tankers, with continuous injection of CO2 into saline reservoirs in the North Sea (geologists having ruled out batch injection).
Mr Fjell noted that CCS can help to achieve global climate targets and Altera and Höegh LNG provide a unique alignment of experience and expertise in the sector. “Offshore CO2 transport, injection and storage is basically what Altera and Höegh LNG, shuttle tankers and FSRU businesses is doing today, but in reverse,” said Mr Fjell.
In the Stella Maris scenario, CO2 is collected from different suppliers in Europe and aggregated to a floating hub laying just outside a harbour or a cluster of industries. The floating hub conditions the CO2 to transport specification and presents the liquified CO2 to the CO2 shuttle tankers, which deliver to the reservoir injection hub.
The Stella Maris initiative rests of the economy of scale – 10M tonnes of CO2 minimum per year. “For large volumes, we need to go for low pressure and low temperature for the transport phase,” said Mr Fjell. “We are down to 6.5 bar pressure and -50°C in the tanks and for this concept there will be continuous injection into the reservoir.”
Mr Wettland continued the explanation of the role of the different partners in the Stella Maris project. “Altera is well-suited and brings experience of floating production and shuttle tanker operations. TGE Marine has the CO2 tank design and the arrangements in the ships. SEVAN SSP brings the offshore storage unit and injection unit with APL Norway provides the offshore loading systems. DNV represents the risk evaluations, regulations and compliance side and provides an advisory role on structures and materials.”
He added, “Of course, we have Höegh LNG, and in addition we have Equinor and Total, who bring experience from other projects and SINTEF acting in a reference consultancy role regarding learnings from the Northern Lights project and the SINTEF NCCS research group.”
The collaboration is now moving into the concept selection phase. “We are evaluating different alternatives of the base case of tankers loading to the large offshore storage floating offshore storage, which is then compressing and injecting the CO2. One alternative is to take away the storage unit and have tankers load direct into the injection unit,” said Mr Wettland. That scenario would require sufficient loading hubs and tankers to ensure continuous injection.
A third alternative would be to move the offshore storage and injection unit onto the tankers and have the tankers inject directly into the reservoir. “These are the three alternatives under evaluation right now, and we will conclude based on the most cost-effective solution measured in cost per tonne injected CO2,” said Mr Wettland. The timeline is to have the Stella Maris project running as a large-scale carbon capture operation in 2025.
In a poll, delegates were asked: How many years do you think it will take you to develop CO2 shipping technologies and skills in your field once you decided to invest into them? Just over half (52%) thought it would take two to five years and 23% thought it would take five to seven years. An ambitious 10% thought it would only take a year, but a more cautious 7-10 years was chosen by 11% and 4% selected more than 10 years.
The design specification of the Stella Maris CCSO units is for an annual capacity of 3M tonnes, with a storage capacity of 50-80,000 m3. The CO2 will be supplied to the CCSO in a variety of ways, including low and high-pressure pipelines, trucks, barges and rail from nearby industrial producers of CO2. The CO2 will be processed at the CCSO into a form for injection before being loaded on the shuttle carrier.
In a poll, delegates were asked: How many (>1,5 mtpa) CCS projects will be operational by 2026 in northern Europe? One CCS project: 27%; Two CCS projects: 58%; Three CCS projects: 15%.
Mr Lunde noted there is a huge potential market for carbon capture. “On a global scale, there is a need to capture 2.4Bn tonnes of CO2 per year to meet the emissions reduction targets. That means a 60-times growth is required compared with today’s capacity,” he said.
One interesting aspect is that while there is potential, at the moment there is no commercial market for carbon capture and storage, although clearly there is an urgent need. Mr Wettland described three business models:
In a poll, delegates were asked: Who do you think should own and operate the infrastructure and ships for CO2 transport? 42% felt it should be a regulated CO2 transport and storage company and 28% chose today’s ship operators. Governments were nominated by 15% and the emerging clusters and projects (ie emitters) were chosen by 13%. Only 2% thought that commodity traders should own and operate the ships and infrastructure.
So what happens next? Mr Fjell said, “During 2021, we will finalise the technical concept for the Stellar Maris logistical solution and deliver the framework. We are marketing our solution to individual companies, to industry clusters, and national authorities. Our joint ambition is to become a one-stop-shop provider of competitive and cost-efficient CO2 solution from collection to storage.”
In a poll, delegates were asked, What do you think is the main requirement for your company to see an investable business case for CO2 shipping? Economic incentives for building and operating the ships were required by 39% and 29% wanted to see government goals for CO2 shipping capacity in Mtpa for 2030 and beyond. 20% needed higher maturity of required technologies or technological breakthrough (eg impossible to make an investment decision with today’s technology). 8% required proof of concept in the form of a large-scale demonstrator project in operation. Significant private investment was required by 4%.
Mr Munko described the design and construction of CO2 carriers. As a provider of liquified gas processing and transport systems for the shipping industry, CO2, hydrogen, or ammonia hold no surprises for TGE Marine, and noted Mr Munko, liquified CO2 is already covered by the IGC Code.
Mr Munk noted that while the traditional emitters of CO2, such as coal-fired power stations, will be suppressed by or replaced by low-carbon activities, the production of low-carbon fuels like ammonia and hydrogen involve the production of CO2 and this will require CCS.
CO2 has specific characteristics that make it different from other liquified gases. At the triple point of 5.13 bar pressure, CO2 becomes solid. It is also denser, at around 1,170 kg/m3 than the current heaviest cargo VCM, which adds to the transportation challenge, noted Mr Munko.
The storage system on the carrier is a key aspect. Mr Munko said, “The storage system is one important aspect because we have to transport the CO2 under pressure, which means we have to use type C pressure vessel type of tanks.”
Other aspects that need consideration include dynamic positioning for mooring and unloading the liquified CO2 gas. Mr Munko noted that for longer voyages, consideration has to be given to CO2 boil off and onboard reliquefication.
What is needed for large-scale CCS to enter the maritime mainstream? In a poll, 37% wanted to see a higher carbon price and 26% stricter EU emissions legislation with 16% wishing to see stricter national legislation. Another 16% felt that a drop in CCS costs was required, but 5% said forget it - CCS is not the solution for reaching the goals in the Paris Agreement.
“We cannot forget the safety systems,” said Mr Munko, “CO2 is not an explosive or a toxic cargo, but there is a risk of suffocation from CO2 because it displaces oxygen.”
Then there is the value of the cargo. “What we need to consider when we design a CO2 carrier is that we are talking about a waste product. In essence, we will be transporting nothing of value,” he said.
In a poll, delegates were asked: What level do you believe the CO2 ETS price will be at in 2030? Between €100 (US$122) and €175 per tonne was chosen by the majority (59%) while lower than €100 per tonne was favoured by 22%. Higher than €175 per tonne was chosen by the remainder (19%).
He also noted that this waste product is also going to cross borders and attention has to be paid to the regulatory regimes.
Regarding the tank structures, there are no easy answers, and that includes the idea of converting or adapting LPG or LNG or ethane carriers. The density of CO2 is so high, far higher than the design of most tanks in current vessels, that it would limit filling and make the carriage uneconomical except in a dedicated tank arrangement. The tanks could be cylindrical or bilobe, but high-pressure tanks would stress the mechanical properties of steel.
Mr Munko said the thickness of the steel for a high-pressure tank would make fabrication difficult. “It is easier for the low-pressure tanks, which allows us to build bigger tanks and more efficient larger vessels,” he said.
However, he offered the notion of a combined ethylene, LPG and CO2 carrier that used separate tanks for the CO2 waste but could transport other cargoes, reducing the risk for early movers.
In a poll, delegates were asked: When will we see the first CO2 carrier newbuilding for a CCS project in the water? Nearly half (49%) replied in five years and 24% replied in 10 years. Another 20% thought the time scale would be two years. 6% thought it would be longer than 10 years and 1% thought it would never happen.
Left to right: Altera Infrastructure shuttle & storage sustainability manager Christian Fjell, Altera Infrastructure study manager Frank Wettland, Höegh LNG senior advisor - business development Tore Lunde, Element Energy senior consultant Michael Joos, TGE Marine Gas Engineering head of business development & sales Björn Munko.
Did you miss the latest series of the free Tanker Shipping & Trade Webinar Week? Register here to access all the webinars in the Riviera webinar library.
© 2023 Riviera Maritime Media Ltd.