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

Explore our Publications Library

Discover the latest advances carbon capture and storage research

Technical Report

Summary Report of the 2nd Joint Network Meeting

  • 1 January 2013
  • Event Proceedings
  • Storage

The Joint Network Meeting co-ordinates all four of the geological storage networks: Risk Assessment; Monitoring; Modelling; and Wellbore Integrity; and the Environmental Impacts of CO<strong><sub>2</sub></strong> Storage Workshop Series. The 2<sup>nd</sup> IEAGHG Joint Storage Network meeting was held from the 19<sup>th</sup> to the 21<sup>st</sup> of June 2012 in Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA. It was hosted by Los Alamos National Laboratory and sponsored by Sandia National Laboratories, Los Alamos National Laboratory and Schlumberger Carbon Services. Sixty-eight delegates attended, representing 11 different countries. The aims of the meeting were to: <!-- wp:acf/columns {"name":"acf/columns","data":{"padding_top":"1","_padding_top":"field_columns_fields_padding_top","padding_bottom":"1","_padding_bottom":"field_columns_fields_padding_bottom","margin_top":"0","_margin_top":"field_columns_fields_margin_top","margin_bottom":"0","_margin_bottom":"field_columns_fields_margin_bottom"},"mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:acf/column-content {"name":"acf/column-content","mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:list --><ul> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Ensure the Networks are working in the most efficient way without duplication or gaps,</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Identify cross-cutting issues and their consequences; requiring input from more than one network,</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Set the framework for the future direction of the networks.</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> </ul><!-- /wp:list --> <!-- /wp:acf/column-content --> <!-- /wp:acf/columns -->

Technical Report

Quantification Techniques for CO₂ Leakage

  • 1 December 2012
  • Storage

On the whole, the primary focus of CO₂ storage monitoring techniques has been to monitor plume behaviour in storage formations, and to detect leakage to the biosphere. However, for emissions trading under the EU ETS and for national GHG inventory purposes it is necessary to quantify leaked emissions to the atmosphere should leakage occur, and there is a low level of understanding of the capabilities, accuracies and uncertainties of measurement techniques for this application.

Technical Report

Extraction of Formation Water from CO₂ Storage

  • 1 December 2012
  • Storage

The main aim of the study would be to assess the global potential for extraction of formation waters as part of DSF storage projects. The study would comprise a comprehensive literature review, from published research and industrial analogues (e.g. brine disposal from petroleum and coal bed methane industries) to provide guidance on the following issues: Potential rates of brine extraction required for varying injection rates, across a typical range of DSF storage scenarios; Likely range in chemical composition of extracted brines; Options for disposal of brine, either surface or subsurface, and associated potential environmental impacts; Onshore and offshore considerations, including treatment required for different disposal options. Potential for utilisation of extracted brines, e.g. cooling water for power stations, geothermal energy, and assessment of associated environmental impacts; Potential for surface dissolution of CO₂ in extracted brine and re-injection into storage formations; Regulatory constraints, including for monitoring requirements, potential liability and water quality requirements for different uses. Potential economic implications for CO₂ storage of brine extraction and the various options for disposal/utilisation, to be illustrated by selected case studies.

Technical Review

Microbial Effects on CO₂ Storage

  • 1 December 2012
  • Storage

Microorganisms are thought to be responsible for over half the biomass on the planet, with a substantial fraction of them in the subsurface. Some microorganisms are known to be able to exist in extreme conditions and have been found in the subsurface at depths greater than 3km and can therefore potentially exist at some locations considered for geological storage of CO<sub>2</sub>. In general the chemoautotrophic nature of subsurface ecosystems increases with depth, i.e. microbes in the deeper subsurface are more likely to be using CO<sub>2 </sub>to synthesise necessary organic compounds. Therefore these are what you may expect to find at the depth of a typical CO<sub>2</sub> storage reservoir.

Technical Report

Financial Mechanisms for Long-Term CO₂ Storage Liabilities

  • 1 November 2012
  • Costs of CCUS
  • Storage

The study aimed to review current laws and emerging CCS specific regulations, in different regions of the world and under different legal frameworks, concentrating on long-term liability aspects. The primary work of the study was to investigate and assess the various potential financial mechanisms for supporting CO₂ liability, including an assessment of their applicability and practicality to all parties concerned, and provide recommendations based on the findings. As well as discussion on important issues such as when and how transfer of liability to the government should occur, and what these liabilities could be, the study focuses primarily on how this liability can be supported.

Technical Report

Summary Report of the 3rd IEAGHG SRN Meeting

  • 1 October 2012
  • Event Proceedings
  • Public Perception

The overall aim of the Social Research Network is “to foster the conduct and dissemination of social science research related to CCS in order to improve understanding of public concerns as well as improve the understanding of the processes required for deploying projects”. The objectives of the Network are as follows: <!-- wp:acf/columns {"name":"acf/columns","data":{"padding_top":"1","_padding_top":"field_columns_fields_padding_top","padding_bottom":"1","_padding_bottom":"field_columns_fields_padding_bottom","margin_top":"0","_margin_top":"field_columns_fields_margin_top","margin_bottom":"0","_margin_bottom":"field_columns_fields_margin_bottom"},"mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:acf/column-content {"name":"acf/column-content","mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:list --><ul> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Ensure high quality social science research <!-- wp:acf/columns {"name":"acf/columns","data":{"padding_top":"1","_padding_top":"field_columns_fields_padding_top","padding_bottom":"1","_padding_bottom":"field_columns_fields_padding_bottom","margin_top":"0","_margin_top":"field_columns_fields_margin_top","margin_bottom":"0","_margin_bottom":"field_columns_fields_margin_bottom"},"mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:acf/column-content {"name":"acf/column-content","mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:list --><ul> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Elevate reputation and acceptance of social science research</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Consistency of research</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> </ul><!-- /wp:list --> <!-- /wp:acf/column-content --> <!-- /wp:acf/columns --> </li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Identifying gaps</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Promoting a learning environment</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Building capacity within the Network</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Translate information from studies into tools or applied lessons <!-- wp:acf/columns {"name":"acf/columns","data":{"padding_top":"1","_padding_top":"field_columns_fields_padding_top","padding_bottom":"1","_padding_bottom":"field_columns_fields_padding_bottom","margin_top":"0","_margin_top":"field_columns_fields_margin_top","margin_bottom":"0","_margin_bottom":"field_columns_fields_margin_bottom"},"mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:acf/column-content {"name":"acf/column-content","mode":"preview"} --> <!-- wp:list --><ul> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Apply insights to actual projects</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Interact with technical experts</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Communicate results to policy makers</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Ensure application is grounded in theory</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> </ul><!-- /wp:list --> <!-- /wp:acf/column-content --> <!-- /wp:acf/columns --> </li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> <!-- wp:list-item --><!-- wp:list-item --><li>Create a clearing house of social science research</li><!-- /wp:list-item --><!-- /wp:list-item --> </ul><!-- /wp:list --> <!-- /wp:acf/column-content --> <!-- /wp:acf/columns -->

Technical Report

CO₂ Capture at Gas Fired Power Plants

  • 1 July 2012
  • Capture

The study considers five scenarios, selected to examine the implications of capture technology type, configuration and plant operation, on the metrics outlined above. These scenarios are: 1. A CCGT power plant (Reference Plant); 2. Scenario 2 not used 3. A CCGT power plant with post-combustion capture; 4. A CCGT power plant with post-combustion capture and flue-gas recirculation; 5. A Combined cycle power plant with Natural Gas reforming and pre-combustion capture; and 6. A Natural Gas Reforming plant with pre-combustion capture, providing hydrogen to a remote combined cycle power plant or intermediate storage. 7. Scenario 7 not used

Technical Report

Barriers to Implementation of CCS: Capacity Constraints

  • 1 July 2012
  • Capture

The study tried to be as comprehensive as possible but to limit the scale of the study some compromises had to be made. The study was based on global requirements and essentially used a high level approach and did not consider regional differences in skills, manufacturing bases etc., The study considered the full CCS chain, i.e. capture, compression, transport and storage of CO<sub>2 </sub>but excluded the power/industry equipment prior to the capture plant.

Technical Report

Operating Flexibility of Power Plants with CCS

  • 1 June 2012
  • Capture

IEAGHG has commissioned Foster Wheeler Italiana to carry out a study to review the operating flexibility of the current leading power generation technologies with CCS and to assess performance and costs of some techniques for improving flexibility. This overview of the report was written by IEAGHG.

Technical Report

Gaseous Emissions from Amine Based Post Combustion CO₂ Capture Processes and their deep removal

  • 1 May 2012
  • Capture

This report evaluates the emission from the PCC technology that uses amine based inhibitor-free solvents, particularly MEA, ammonia and amino acid salt based solvents. It identifies shortcomings in terms of the environmental performance of existing PCC technology.  It also evaluates various emission control methods that may be applied to minimise the emissions particularly from MEA and other amine technologies.  All these aspects of the study are covered in the four sections of this report.  A complete evaluation of environmental impact of the amine based process would involve assessment of all direct discharge of waste material from the process and the fates of these compounds, including chemical transformations that occur after their discharge.  However, it is to be noted that only gaseous emissions are evaluated in this report and liquid and solid emissions are considered as beyond the scope of this study.

Technical Report

Emissions of Substances Other than CO₂ from Power Plants with CCS

  • 1 March 2012
  • Capture

The emissions of CO₂ from power plants equipped with carbon dioxide capture systems are reduced by upwards of 85% compared to equivalent plants without capture. However the full environmental impact of a plant fitted with CO₂ capture will depend also on what changes are induced in emissions of other substances in gaseous, liquid and solid form. Furthermore due to the increase in fuel and chemicals consumption typical for a CCS plant emissions due to the “upstream” and “downstream” processes and particularly those associated with increased fuel use, will also increase. Both these effects need to be taken into account if the technology is to be assessed on a life cycle basis. This study focuses only on the changes which are to be expected in the direct emissions, discharges and solid wastes of substances other than CO₂ from within the boundary of power plants fitted with CO₂ capture

Explore our resources

Discover everything that IEAGHG has to offer, from the latest publications to exciting events.

Publications

Discover our expansive library of leading CCS research covering a wealth of topics. From DACS to BECCS and Carbon Markets to Carbon Capture.

Discover More

Events

We are committed to sharing the latest CCS knowledge worldwide. Learn how you can join our global conferences, expert networks, workshops and webinars.

Experience More

News & Insights

Get the latest IEAGHG news, discover our impact, and uncover essential analyses of global CCS developments.

Stay Updated

Discover membership

Access to restricted publications is just the beginning. IEAGHG membership has unlocked CCS potential for government and industry around the world. Discover what it can do for you.

Discover More

Get the latest CCS news and insights

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

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