CO CO 2 fixation by mineral matter; fixation by mineral matter; the - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 S17 09 11 3 2009 – 11:45 S17.09, 11.3.2009 S17.09, 11.3.2009 – 11:45 S17 09 11 3 2009 11:45-12:05 11:45-12:05 12:05 12:05 CO CO 2 fixation by mineral matter; fixation by mineral matter; the potential of different the potential of different the potential of different the potential of different mineralization routes mineralization routes Ron Zevenhoven, Johan Fagerlund Ron Zevenhoven, Johan Fagerlund Åbo Akademi University, Heat Engineering Laboratory, Åbo / Turku, Finland Åb / T k Fi l d tel. +358 2 2153223 ron.zevenhoven@abo.fi 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 1/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 To be addressed To be addressed  CO 2 mineralization: what, how as CCS option p  CO 2 storage potential  +’s and –’s of the method s and s of the method  State-of-the-art; ongoing development ongoing development  Conclusions 0 100 200 km 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 2/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 CO CO 2 mineralization: what, how mineralization: what, how , , 2 IPCC SRCCS SRCCS 2005 Chapter 7 Overall carbonation chemistry, with M = Mg or Ca (or Fe, ...) y, g ( , ) MO.ySiO 2 .zH 2 O (s) + CO 2 (g) < = > MCO 3 (s) + ySiO 2 (s) + zH 2 O (l) + HEAT 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 3/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 CO CO 2 mineralization as CCS option mineralization as CCS option p 2  Carbon (dioxide) capture and storage (CCS) options – see also IPCC SRCCS : – Carbon capture and geological storage (CCGS) often taken for ”CCS” - see for example EC proposal for a directive on CCGS, January 2008 directive on CCGS, January 2008 – Carbon capture and mineral carbonation (CCMC) – Carbon capture and ocean storage (CCOS) – Carbon capture and export (CCE)  CCGS receives by far the most publicity and industrial support primarily from oil/gas sector industrial support, primarily from oil/gas sector  According IEAs CCS report (2008) ” It is unlikely that mineralization will offer an opportunity for sequestering ff pp y f q g large volumes of CO 2 ” 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 4/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 Mineralization storage potential /1 Mineralization storage potential g p g p /1  Much larger potential than Lackner, Science vol. 300, Science vol. 300, other CCS options 2003, 1677-1678  Could bind all fossil carbon fossil carbon  Available world- wide, hence increasing attention  No ”leakage”  No leakage problems from carbonates 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 5/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 Mineralization storage potential Mineralization storage potential /2 g p g p /2  March 2009 estimate USA: ”more than 500 US : o e t a 500 years of U.S. CO 2 production” (~7 Gt/a)  Finland 2008: 200 - 300 years of Kyoto protocol excess Kyoto protocol excess ~12 Mt/a, i.e. 2.5 – 3.5 Gt CO 2 in central Finland  Worldwide capacity >> 5000 G CO 5000 Gt CO 2 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 6/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 CO 2 mineralization: +’s and CO mineralization: +’s and –’s ’s 2  Enormous capacity,  Large amounts of widely spread material needed: ~ 3 tons per ton CO 2 , ~ 3 CO  Negligible leakage, dissolution produces Mg 2+ + 8 tons per ton coal - ions, post-CCS p HCO 3  Product amounts large Product amounts large 3 monitoring not needed but not problematic; low value MgCO 3  Overall exo-thermic chemistry; potential for chemistry; potential for  Slow chemistry, staged Sl h i d energy-neutral process processing needed  A lot of iron by-product y p  Slow - due to lack of Slow due to lack of manpower, funding and publicity - technology development development 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 7/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 CO 2 mineralization: state CO mineralization: state- -of of- -the the- -art art 2  Aqueous solution-based process (USA): pres. 40 – 150 bar; temp. 100 – 40 150 b t 100 185°C; NaCl, NaHCO 3 for controlling ion strength etc.  Costs 55 – 75 US$/ton CO 2 C 55 75 US$/ CO  Energy input 10 – 400 kWh /ton CO 2 (preheat, crush/grind)  Increased rates with KHCO 3 reported recently  Dissolution chemistry and silica  Dissolution chemistry and silica Gerdemann et al., G d l layers still hot issues Env. Sci. & Technol. 41 (2007) 2587-2593  Note: reported energy needs see also are grossly over-estimated: l ti t d IPCC IPCC heat ≠ power !!! SRCCS 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 8/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 Technology deployment projects /1 Technology deployment projects gy gy p y p y p p j j /1  Injection of CO 2 into basaltic rock (300-800 m depth) near the H lli h idi Hellisheidi geothermal power h l plant (300 MW e + 400 MW th ), Iceland  Spreading fine olivine powder on land  Trapping CO 2 T i CO from the air; demo 100 kg/h ”synthetic trees” (concentrates the CO 2 , no CCS) CO CCS) Lackner, ACEME-08, 2008 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 9/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 Technology deployment projects /2 Technology deployment projects gy gy p y p y p p j j /2  Olivine-containing rock in Oman (350 × 40 x 5 km, ~30% olivine) : enhancing natural sequestration ~ h i l i 0.1 Mt/a CO 2 100 x  Estonian Mg, Ca - containing oil Estonian Mg, Ca containing oil shale ashes (10-15 Mt/a) can be Steelmaking Steelmaking carbonated Uibu, PhD slag slag thesis TU Tallinn 2008 thesis TU Tallinn, 2008 Residual Residual Calcium Calcium  Production of valuable calcium Solvent Solvent slag slag extraction extraction step step carbonate (PCC) for use in paper Calcium Calcium containing containing industry from (for example) i d f solution solution steelmaking slag is becoming CO 2 CO 2 Precipitation Precipitation mature technology in several gy step step countries. Limited CCS potential. CaCO 3 CaCO 3 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 10/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 CO CO 2 mineralization: Finland mineralization: Finland (2000 (2000 + ) ( ) 2  Mg(OH) 2 production from serpentinite mineral followed by gas-solid carbonation g Fagerlund et al. g GHGT-9, 2008 Gas-solid mineral carbonation reactor setup Gas-solid mineral carbonation reactor setup • FB (length 0.5 m, diameter 9/16” = 1.43 cm) • FB (length 0.5 m, diameter 9/16” = 1.43 cm) ( ( g g , , ) ) • For up to 100 bar, 600-650 °C • For up to 100 bar, 600-650 °C • CO 2 + Mg(OH) 2 = MgCO 3 + H 2 O • CO 2 + Mg(OH) 2 = MgCO 3 + H 2 O High-pressure fluidized bed fluidized bed set-up for gas-solid carbonation 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 11/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND

Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions Copenhagen (Denmark) March 10-12, 2009 Conclusions: CO 2 mineralisation Conclusions: CO mineralisation 2  Important leakage-free alternative for geological storage of CO 2 (CCGS) at many locations  CCGS deployment is slow: a CCS portfolio is needed. CCGS d l i l CCS f li i d d  Potential for energy-neutral operation important benefit  Progress suffers from lack of resources and publicity; support Progress suffers from lack of resources and publicity; support from mineral, metal, pulp & paper industry  Slowly-but-surely progress is being made in an increasing number of countries projects are becoming larger CCMC number of countries, projects are becoming larger, CCMC researchers are joining forces.  Spin-off technologies like PCC production from steelmaking slags is profitable; gives infra-structure l i fi bl i i f  Cost estimates suffer from energy-use analysis errors; no data on raw material and by-product (iron!!) value y p ( )  Large-scale: 0.1 – 1 Mt CO 2 /a commercial 2015 - 2020 17.3.2009 Åbo Akademi University - Heat Engineering Laboratory 12/12 Piispankatu 8, 20500 Turku FINLAND