This website will offer limited functionality in this browser. We only support the recent versions of major browsers like Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge.

Technology Collaboration Programme by IEA

Launch Meeting of the Risk Assessment Network

IEAGHG

Citation: IEAGHG, "Launch Meeting of the Risk Assessment Network", 2006-05, August 2005.

Download The Full Publication Now

Publication Overview

This report summarises the major outcomes of the launch meeting of the Risk Assessment Network which was jointly organised by IEA GHG and TNO with the support of EPRI. It was held at the TNO offices in Utrecht, Netherlands, 23-24 August 2005. This international meeting was attended by 40 delegates from industry and research institutes drawn from nine countries.

Publication Summary

  • This section provides the major points of discussion from the meeting.
  • Identifying the missing groups in the network. Regulators are not well represented, neither are specialists or NGO’s. The working group looking at Environmental Impacts would benefit from more biologists and toxicologists being involved. NGO’s should be approached to join the network, it was suggested that the network provides them a more neutral contact to the subject rather than having to be linked to specific projects.
  • Before any measure of comparing datasets, access to data by a wider audience needs to be facilitated. This could be a role for the network, specifically for IEA GHG.
  • Terminology was a common point for discussion. Commonly referred to as benchmarking there was a consensus from the data management working group that a more suitable term could be ‘Comparison of RA Methodologies’.
  • In order to begin comparing the datasets, the first step should be to establish a protocol of what data is wanted. It needs to be clear and concise.
  • Comparing RA models on a case that was rejected might be less sensitive than using the data available from operating projects.
  • It could be a role for the network to show the reliability of predictive tools. If there are differences then it should be explained why.
  • In the models that are available at the moment, the codes are not written with CO2 injection in mind. Rather than cobble together existing codes, which were not designed for this purpose, could it be a role of the network to develop a model together writing a new code? It might not be the time yet but within 2-3 years of CO2ReMoVe an agreement could be achieved.
  • Comparisons between the models and codes used for RA would be useful and problems could be developed that each model works on individually. The weaknesses in the code could be identified and improved through this type of collaboration.
  • Comparing models could become a dominate part of the network but it should not dominate other important questions raised by the other groups (Regulatory Interactions and Environmental Impacts). Comparison will be very time consuming. There could be a forum to discuss the comparisons, and others in the group go away and get external funding to do the code comparison.
  • Risk assessment is not new. The regulator in the Netherlands has had to look at codes and came up with a list of codes/models that were accepted. The regulators will say which codes/models are allowed to undertake risk assessment. However, they could go to the model with gives the lowest risk.
  • The regulators should be kept informed of the different techniques and the current status. It could be the networks role to communicate this.
  • If you were to choose a dataset based on current models in what format should the data set be in? What size of dataset should be made? And where would it be stored?
  • By stating what is in a dataset you are influencing risk assessment. But it is important to use what ever data is available. The amount of data will vary between different sites. There will be some generic data such as how CO2 behaves but there will be a lot of information that is site specific.
  • It could be possible to define a set of parameters for modelling; therefore, can we define what is needed for risk assessment.
  • At this stage it is not possible to quantify the bare minimum requirements for data. Each model requires generalised data and specific data. Unless there is comparison between the models it will be difficult to increase confidence. One solution suggested was to have access to the most comprehensive dataset available and then test it with different models. Not all models will use all available data. The results will then show how close they compare. Until there has been this type of comparison it will not be possible to suggest a minimum. This type of comparison may still not provide us with a minimum but it is a start and may provide a direction for future developments.
  • It was suggested that the current status of risk assessment allows a definition of a good dataset.
  • All available models should be identified and an inventory should be produced.
  • A question raised was when should the modelling stop and a more practical aspect start? Practical could be in the next few years but is everyone on the same timescale?
  • Is it possible to use the tools currently available and compare how the various projects perform? This would certainly help to identify any gaps.
  • Regulators can permit but at this time it is not possible to guarantee security of storage. However, the risk will decrease with time as the models improve.
  • It was suggested that there were two steps that were important. The first is that it was important to identify the minimum codes that were required to provide information to the regulator in order to give sufficient confidence. The second step is to set the codes for the models themselves.
  • The urgency could be underlined by Otway Basin Project. It was clear the progress of the project was decided by regulatory and liability issues. Authorities are afraid of setting an example that becomes binding for the future. There is an urgent need for progress in this area.
  • IGCC plants with CO2 capture technology are close to being finalised. There are a lot of projects ready to go ahead. Some are close to oil reservoirs where there is money to be made. Others are located close to saline aquifers were there is little known about the structures and information will be required, soon!

Download Publication

Access the complete publication in PDF format.

Download Now

Related Publications

View similar publications.

View All Publications
Technical Review

7th Post-Combustion Capture Conference Summary

  • 1 April 2024
  • Capture
  • Event Proceedings

The 7th edition of the Post Combustion Capture Conference (PCCC-7) was held on the 25?28 September 2023 and was jointly hosted by the IEAGHG, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and sponsored by Worley, Shell, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. (MHI).

Technical Review

Monitoring Network Meeting Report

  • 1 December 2023
  • Event Proceedings
  • Storage

The IEAGHG Monitoring Network aims to assess new technologies and techniques in the monitoring of CO2 storage, determine the limitations, accuracy and applicability of monitoring techniques, disseminate information from research and pilot storage projects around the world, develop extensive monitoring guidelines for the different sub-categories of geological storage; oil and gas fields, unmineable coal seams, and saline aquifers covering the differing conditions and reservoir properties encountered globally as well as to engage with relevant regulatory bodies.

Technical Review

6th International Workshop on Offshore Geologic CO2 Storage

  • 1 December 2023
  • Event Proceedings
  • Storage

The 6th International Workshop on Offshore Geologic CO2 Storage was held in Aberdeen on 13-14 September. Organised with the University of Texas and hosted by the University of Aberdeen. The loca on was very appropriate as we were co-hosted and sponsored by Storegga who leads the Acorn project nearby in Scotland. This project had been recently announced by the UK government as a Track 2 Cluster project. This 6th workshop had 190 delegates (60 in-person and 130 virtual) from 35 countries, with a good mix of industry, researchers and regulators.

Technical Report

Components of CCS Infrastructure – Interim CO2 Holding Options

  • 27 November 2023
  • Storage
  • Transport

This work, undertaken on behalf of IEAGHG by TNO and SINTEF, provides an overview of temporary / interim CO2 storage, or ‘holding’, options (also called buffers) and investigates the role of buffer storage and its potential to create flexible and robust carbon capture and storage (CCS) chains. The report looks at current and emerging buffer technologies, conducts simulations to demonstrate the temporary storage required for given flow-rate scenarios and discusses the impact of buffer capacity on transport costs. In the report, the storage requested in the chain for normal operation is presented as " temporary storage" and storage to give buffer capacity is presented as " buffer storage". This report has focussed on buffering at the emitter site. The results of this study will benefit CO2 storage site project developers, operators, financiers and regulators.

Technical Review

Cost Network Proceedings

  • 1 November 2023
  • Costs of CCUS
  • Event Proceedings

The 7th edition of the IEAGHG CCS Cost Network Workshop was hosted at the University of Groningen, Netherlands, on 12-13 April 2023. The purpose of the workshop was to share and discuss the most current information on the costs of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in various applications, as well as the outlook for future CCS costs and deployment. For the first time, this workshop also included a session on the direct capture of CO2 from the atmosphere. The workshop also sought to identify other key issues or topics related to CCS costs that merit further discussion and study.

Technical Report

Classification of Total Storage Resources and Storage Coefficients

  • 1 November 2023
  • Storage

The CO2 Storage Resources Management System (SRMS) is a classification scheme to quantify, classify and categorise CO2 storage resources. It comprises ‘total storage resources’, which are understood as maximum (theoretical) storage quantities that could ever be accommodated in the subsurface. Comprising maximum mobile CO2 in structural/stratigraphic traps, maximum residually trapped CO2 in other parts of the formation, and maximum dissolution potential in remaining formation water. ‘Storable quantities’ are understood as accessible from one or several current or future projects. It is the sum of capacity, contingent and prospective resources. The concept of ‘storage coefficient’ ‘E’ is the ratio of the subsurface volume of CO2 storable quantities to either the total storage resources or the pore volume. The calculation is arguably complicated as E is impacted by lithological heterogeneity, trapping structures, boundary conditions, injection rates, well spacing, fluid properties etc. Due to its complexity, there is much controversy on how to estimate E, with some arguing it should not be used at all and that reservoir simulation is a better path. However, estimates for E are used in most regional mapping studies. This study explores storage resource classification schemes and their evolution in understanding, the calculation of storage resources and the storage co-efficient. This is explored in terms of calculating E for CO2 storage sites, through flow modelling and analytical solutions.

Technical Review

Risk Management Network Meeting Report

  • 29 September 2023
  • Event Proceedings
  • Storage

The Risk Management Network meeting was held as an in-person event with a particular focus on the risk of wells (particularly legacy wells) in a CCS project, looking at the topic from basin scale through to detailed characterisation of well materials and monitoring. Attended by over 75 delegates from 15 countries, the two day meeting was held at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, UK. It was kicked off by a welcome reception in the Lyell Centre (home to both BGS and the Institute for GeoEnergy Engineering) and was followed by a field excursion to explore the geological history of Arthur’s Seat in Edinburgh and a tour of a very new distillery located in an old train station within stone’s throw of Holyrood Park.

Technical Review

9th HTSLCN Meeting Report

  • 21 September 2023
  • Capture
  • Event Proceedings

The 9th High Temperature Solid Looping Cycles Network (HTSLCN) Meeting took place from 14th to 15th March 2023 at Palazzo Farnese in Piacenza, Italy, hosted by the CLEANKER consortium. 82 attendees enjoyed a two-day programme with a total of 28 presentations, the official closure of the CLEANKER project with a visit to the pilot plant, a relaxing dinner and a guided tour in the museum of Palazzo Farnese about the millennial history of the city of Piacenza and its territory, from the preRoman age to the XX century.

Technical Report

Prospective Integration of Geothermal Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage

  • 23 August 2023
  • Storage
  • Utilisation

The aim of the study is to provide a dispassionate review and overview of scenarios where geothermal energy and CO2 utilisation and storage technologies can be combined for mutual benefit and contribute to Net Zero targets. Sourced from a rich body of literature from global research institutes and some demonstration projects many of the concepts identified have been conceptualised over the past 20 years and are still in the early concept stage. These concepts have been categorised, described and evaluated using qualitative and quantitative methods. And a map based screening exercise useful for initial evaluation of areas suitable for combined synergies has been undertaken.

5th International Workshop on Offshore Geologic CO2 Storage

  • 17 October 2022
  • Event Proceedings
  • Storage

This 5th Workshop on Offshore Geologic CO<sub>2</sub> Storage covered multiple subjects, including: summary of multiple CCS projects worldwide, subsurface considerations for depleted hydrocarbon fields, containment/ pressure management, and saline formations to store CO<sub>2</sub>, as well as considerations on regulating offshore CCS, monitoring offshore CCS projects, CO<sub>2</sub> shipping and infrastructure for CO<sub>2</sub>. Importantly, this is the first hybrid in-person and virtual workshop, which represents a milestone to bring this knowledge sharing to multiple people interested on CCS worldwide

Our most recent publications

Our authoritative, peer-reviewed publications cover topics that include carbon capture, transport, storage, monitoring, regulation, and more.

View All Publications
Technical Review

7th Post-Combustion Capture Conference Summary

  • 1 April 2024
  • Capture
  • Event Proceedings

The 7th edition of the Post Combustion Capture Conference (PCCC-7) was held on the 25?28 September 2023 and was jointly hosted by the IEAGHG, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and sponsored by Worley, Shell, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. (MHI).

Technical Report

Techno-Economic Assessment of Small-Scale Carbon Capture for Industrial and Power Systems

  • 1 March 2024
  • Capture
  • Costs of CCUS

This study, undertaken on behalf of IEAGHG by Element Energy (now a part of ERM), explores the role of CCS in decarbonising small-scale industry and power generation applications. While relatively under investigated compared to their larger scale counterparts, reaching net zero will be dependent on successfully addressing the emissions from small-scale facilities. The findings from the study will be of interest to the broader energy community but, in particular, should benefit project developers, the finance community and policymakers.

Technical Report

Clean steel an environmental and technoeconomic outlook of a disruptive technology

  • 1 March 2024
  • Capture
  • Costs of CCUS

This study primarily presents a comparative analysis of steelmaking pathways to cost-effectively decarbonise a steel mill, taking a life-cycle perspective on associated environmental impacts. The roll-out of clean steel technologies is envisioned to have a significant implication for support infrastructure. Therefore, a secondary objective of the study is to gain insights into the primary energy and infrastructure implications associated with large-scale deployment of different steel decarbonisation pathways. Clean steel production will likely be more expensive than steel produced today; this poses additional economic strains on steel producers and consumers. Consequently, a third objective is to estimate the price premium that clean steel could command in existing and future markets. Further, this study formulates recommendations for key stakeholders to support the sector and outlines recommendations for further work.

Technical Report

The Role of Indices in Assessing the Maturity of CCUS Technologies and their Readiness for Deployment

  • 1 February 2024
  • Industry Insights

This study was undertaken on behalf of IEAGHG by Foresight Transitions Ltd. While a technology may be technically mature, it has become increasingly clear that the technology may not necessarily be considered commercially ‘bankable’ by investors. In this study, the potential for an index or indices to provide that confidence was explored. The findings from the study will be of interest to the broader energy community but, in particular, should benefit technology developers, CCUS end users, investors and policymakers.

Technical Review

6th International Workshop on Offshore Geologic CO2 Storage

  • 1 December 2023
  • Event Proceedings
  • Storage

The 6th International Workshop on Offshore Geologic CO2 Storage was held in Aberdeen on 13-14 September. Organised with the University of Texas and hosted by the University of Aberdeen. The loca on was very appropriate as we were co-hosted and sponsored by Storegga who leads the Acorn project nearby in Scotland. This project had been recently announced by the UK government as a Track 2 Cluster project. This 6th workshop had 190 delegates (60 in-person and 130 virtual) from 35 countries, with a good mix of industry, researchers and regulators.

Methologies and Technologies for Mitigation

  • 1 December 2023
  • Industry Insights

The driver behind this study is to develop a report built on the on the previous IEAGHG report on methods of leakage mitigation (2007/11). The proposed study should focus on current mitigation and remediation methods that may be applied or considered in site specific conditions in the event of unpredicted CO2 migration. Each geological storage site will have an adaptive site specific monitoring plan, based on a risk assessment. Detection of a significant irregularity may involve supplementing the monitoring program, in order to detect a possible leak and if necessary engaging mitigation measures.

Technical Report

International Standards and Testing for Novel Carbonaceous Building Materials

  • 1 December 2023
  • Policy & Regulation
  • Utilisation

Over 4 billion tonnes of cement are produced each year, equating to approximately 8% of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions, and this industry will continue to grow with the expansion of the built environment at a time that emissions need to be reduced. The utilisation or reduction of CO2 within cement, concrete and building materials could be a valuable way to contribute to emissions reductions in the sector , but there are several barriers, including the current state of standards, regulations and policies. This study will provide useful information for the technical and research community, the CCUS industry, the construction industry, and policymakers, providing an unbiased and non-prescriptive evaluation of international standards and testing relevant to novel carbonaceous building materials to address some of those barriers. The market potential for CO2 utilisation processes in the construction industry is also investigated, and the methods for certifying and measuring embodied carbon content of carbonated building materials is evaluated and the challenges therein.

Technical Review

Monitoring Network Meeting Report

  • 1 December 2023
  • Event Proceedings
  • Storage

The IEAGHG Monitoring Network aims to assess new technologies and techniques in the monitoring of CO2 storage, determine the limitations, accuracy and applicability of monitoring techniques, disseminate information from research and pilot storage projects around the world, develop extensive monitoring guidelines for the different sub-categories of geological storage; oil and gas fields, unmineable coal seams, and saline aquifers covering the differing conditions and reservoir properties encountered globally as well as to engage with relevant regulatory bodies.

Technical Report

Components of CCS Infrastructure – Interim CO2 Holding Options

  • 27 November 2023
  • Storage
  • Transport

This work, undertaken on behalf of IEAGHG by TNO and SINTEF, provides an overview of temporary / interim CO2 storage, or ‘holding’, options (also called buffers) and investigates the role of buffer storage and its potential to create flexible and robust carbon capture and storage (CCS) chains. The report looks at current and emerging buffer technologies, conducts simulations to demonstrate the temporary storage required for given flow-rate scenarios and discusses the impact of buffer capacity on transport costs. In the report, the storage requested in the chain for normal operation is presented as " temporary storage" and storage to give buffer capacity is presented as " buffer storage". This report has focussed on buffering at the emitter site. The results of this study will benefit CO2 storage site project developers, operators, financiers and regulators.

Technical Report

Classification of Total Storage Resources and Storage Coefficients

  • 1 November 2023
  • Storage

The CO2 Storage Resources Management System (SRMS) is a classification scheme to quantify, classify and categorise CO2 storage resources. It comprises ‘total storage resources’, which are understood as maximum (theoretical) storage quantities that could ever be accommodated in the subsurface. Comprising maximum mobile CO2 in structural/stratigraphic traps, maximum residually trapped CO2 in other parts of the formation, and maximum dissolution potential in remaining formation water. ‘Storable quantities’ are understood as accessible from one or several current or future projects. It is the sum of capacity, contingent and prospective resources. The concept of ‘storage coefficient’ ‘E’ is the ratio of the subsurface volume of CO2 storable quantities to either the total storage resources or the pore volume. The calculation is arguably complicated as E is impacted by lithological heterogeneity, trapping structures, boundary conditions, injection rates, well spacing, fluid properties etc. Due to its complexity, there is much controversy on how to estimate E, with some arguing it should not be used at all and that reservoir simulation is a better path. However, estimates for E are used in most regional mapping studies. This study explores storage resource classification schemes and their evolution in understanding, the calculation of storage resources and the storage co-efficient. This is explored in terms of calculating E for CO2 storage sites, through flow modelling and analytical solutions.

Get the latest CCS news and insights

Get essential news and updates from the CCS sector and the IEAGHG by email.

"*" indicates required fields

Can’t find what you are looking for?

Whatever you would like to know, our dedicated team of experts is here to help you. Just drop us an email and we will get back to you as soon as we can.

Contact Us Now