Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Pastorek, Nathan.
A report on the use of short-term storage of CO 2 at an intermediate location between source and storage. This stored CO 2 would be used to assure the pipeline between intermediate storage and final storage is optimally utilized.
The analysis presented in this report evaluates the benefits of CO₂ offshore transport via pipeline or ship within the GOM. It takes a top-down framework to estimate the costs. First, this analysis designed a reduced-order model (ROM) based on the cash flows in the FECM/NETL CO₂ Transport Cost Model (also known as CO2_T_COM). The ROM takes capital expenses (CAPEX) and operating expenses (OPEX) to calculate the CO₂ breakeven price based on the cash flows. Second, this analysis developed regression models utilizing published data from other analyses to estimate CAPEX and OPEX. Since the ROM is a simplified cash flow calculation, it is easy to exchange the core regression models to estimate various costs. The ROM and regression models provided a framework that can be easily used by other researchers, decision-makers, operators, and regulators. The objective of this analysis is to assess the CO₂ breakeven cost range for pipeline and ship transport of captured CO₂ given the CO₂ source and storage reservoir located in the GOM.
The purpose of this analysis is to assess the fiscal impact of using risk-based methods to define the area of review (AoR) and post-injection site care (PISC) duration for a geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage project. The Office of Fossil Energy (FE)/National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) CO 2 Saline Storage Cost Model (“cost model”) was utilized to evaluate CO 2 storage economics in this study. The cost model is a widely used tool for evaluating CO 2 storage costs in geologic settings. It estimates costs for storage operations conducted under compliance to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Class VI regulations. This analysis evaluates and compares the costs of storage (on a first-year break-even dollar per tonne [2018$] basis) at the proposed FutureGen 2.0 site as a case study storage location by implementing different approaches to determine AoR and PISC given the prevailing geologic conditions and injection volume and duration considerations. The approaches include the use of 1) risk-based methods to define AoR and PISC duration, 2) an EPA-approved AoR and PISC documented in the FutureGen 2.0 UIC Class VI permit applications, and 3) cost model default settings that utilize uncertainty multipliers to estimate CO 2 plume and pressure front extent as part of AoR determination, as well as a 50-year PISC default. From all three sources, the AoR and PISC specified in the Class VI permit applications for FutureGen 2.0 were the largest and longest relative to the other two sources.
Presented by NETL at the 2021 AAPG-IMAGE Annual Conference and Exhibition