Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.

1039/9781847559715-00126

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture in Energy Intensive Industry
DAVID POCKLINGTON* AND RICHARD LEESE

1 Overview 1.1 Greenhouse Gas Reduction/Issues for Energy Intensive Industry

Acknowledgement of the importance of climate change and the need for a global solution gathered momentum in the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, where the developed countries agreed to voluntary reductions in their emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels. Subsequently, the Kyoto Protocol a Treaty of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)laid down legally binding reductions in the emissions of a basket of six greenhouse gasesi (GHG), to be achieved over the period 2008-2012, on the basis of 1990 emissions. The Treaty commits industrialised countries to cap their emissions and reduce their collective emissions of greenhouse gases by 5.2% compared to the year 1990, by 2008-2012. The European Community agreed to reduce its emissions by 8% and the UK by 12.5% within the burden sharing agreement.1 Early ratication of Kyoto was slow and resulted in only small reductions in GHG emissions. By October 2008, 180 nations had ratied
*

Corresponding author. On 2 March 2009 the British Cement Association merged with the Quarry Products Asssociation and The Concrete Centre to become the Mineral Products Association (MPA). The work referred to in this chapter was undertaken by the British Cement Association. i Carbon dioxide, CO2; methane, CH4; nitrous oxide, N2O; hydrouorocarbons, HFCs; peruorocarbons, PFCs; sulfur hexauoride, SF6. Issues in Environmental Science and Technology, 29 Carbon Capture: Sequestration and Storage Edited by R.E. Hester and R.M. Harrison r Royal Society of Chemistry 2010 Published by the Royal Society of Chemistry, www.rsc.org

126

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

127

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

the Kyoto Protocol, including Russia, but not the United States, China, or India. The UK has been in the forefront of climate reduction legislation, introducing the Climate Change Levy in 2001,2 the UK Emissions Trading Scheme in 2002,3 and the Climate Act in 2008.4 These measures were augmented, and to some extent duplicated, by the EU Emissions Trading Scheme,5 the rst phase of which was from 2005 to 2007. Phase II is from 2008 to 2012, to coincide with the rst period of commitment under the Kyoto Protocol, and Phase III from 2013 to 2020. The energy-intensive sectors of industry have played a signicant role in the development of this legislation through:  Detailed technical discussions between industry and government on the UK and EU legislation through the UK Emissions Trading Group (ETG), other government/industry groups,ii and bilateral meetings with government departments and their consultants.  Supporting other initiatives to engage in emissions trading, through commitment to the UK Manifesto on EU ETS initiated by the Secretary of State for the Environment, speaking alongside government representatives at conferences in Prague, Berlin and Paris, and meeting delegations from the US Senate, California, Australia.  Advocacy through National Associations, such as the British Cement Association and the CBI, and European bodies, such as CEMBUREAU (European Cement Association) and Business Europe. In addition to the above legislative measures, the Treasury commissioned Sir Nicholas Stern to undertake an economic review of the potential impacts of climate change, and the resulting inuential report was published in 2007.6 The Stern Report stated that if annual emissions remained at current levels, then greenhouse gas levels would reach around 550 ppm CO2e by 2050. However, the worst impacts of climate change could be avoided if atmospheric GHG levels were stabilised between 450550 ppm CO2e at a cost of ca. 1% of global GDP. Signicantly, the report concluded that immediate action would cost substantially less than action at a later date. A recent analysis by IPCC7 indicated likely temperature rises:iii 1.8 1C rise (range is 1.1 to 2.9 1C) in a low scenario, and 4.0 1C (range is 2.4 to 6.4 1C) in a high scenario. Defras Chief Scientist has stated8 that whereas plans for mitigation should be based upon on a 2 1C rise in global temperatures, those for adaptation should assume a 4 1C temperature rise.

ii

iii

e. g. the Energy Intensive Users Group (EIUG), Ad Hoc Environmental Taxation Steering Group (AHETSG) and the Manufacturers Climate Change Group (MCCG). Global average surface air warming, 1C, at 20902099 relative to 19801999.

View Online

128
th

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

The UNFCCC 15 Conference of the Parties, (COP-15), held in Copenhagen in December 2009, is providing a stimulus for political action with a view to achieving an international agreement in the post-Kyoto period:
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

 26th November 2008: the UK Climate Change Act received Royal Assent, thus introducing the worlds rst long-term legally-binding framework to tackle climate change.  1st December 2008: the UKs Climate Change Committee was established and published its rst report detailing, inter alia, plans to achieve an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The cost of achieving this by 2050 is estimated to be 12% GDP (slightly higher than the estimate provided by Stern). The Committee has proposediv a GHG budget for the tradedv sector of 1233 Mt CO2e (20082012) dropping to 800 Mt CO2e (20182022), which equates to a 35% reduction compared to a reduction of 19% by the non-traded sector.  17th December 2008: the European Parliament approved the EUs Energy package, aimed at reducing EU greenhouse gas emissions by 20% in 2020 relative to 1990, providing 20% of the Communitys energy from renewables and cutting primary energy use by 20%. This is expected to cost up to h90 billion to 2020 and reduce the EUs GDP by 0.350.5% by that year. The Package is underpinned by four Directives on Renewables, Emissions Trading, Fuel Quality, and Carbon Capture and Storage,9 and other measures on new car emissions, energy ecient buildings and energy labelling. Each of these initiatives gives prominence to the role of carbon capture and storage (CCS). Of the options available for the mitigation of emissions in cement manufacturing, carbon capture and storage has been identied by the International Energy Agency (IEA) as the only technique that is likely to be feasible, and scenarios have been developed where by 2050 CCS is incorporated at ca. 50% of the manufacturing capacity of the developed world. Other commentators have suggested that since each element of carbon capture and storage has been demonstrated at a non-trivial scale, CCS is clearly feasible and no fundamental research breakthrough [is] required .10 Whilst, at one level, this statement presents an accurate general summary of the situation, it is not suciently focused to provide a sound basis for the development of government policy or industrial strategy. These demand a rigorous examination of many interrelated issues, and this chapter provides an overview of the factors that an energy-intensive industry must take into consideration when determining whether to install plant for the capture of carbon dioxide emissions.
iv

The intended budget reects a successful international climate change agreement at the United Nations Framework Convention (UNFCCC) Conference of Parties (COP 15) in Copenhagen 2009. v Energy-intensive rms regulated by the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

129

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

As such, the primary focus will be on capture rather than the subsequent transport and storage. Although these are important components of the abatement equation, the main initiatives in these areas are being undertaken by major emitters such as the power sector, and smaller sources such as the steel and cement industries are unlikely to take the lead on the development of a collection infrastructure or storage facilities.

2 Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Cement Manufacture 2.1 Cement Manufacture

There are two basic types of process for the production of Portland cement,vi using a variety of kiln types. Cement is produced by either wet or dry process, depending on the water content of the material feedstock, itself a function of the local geology. The wet process was the original rotary kiln process and is used to process raw materials with high moisture content. However, it has a higher energy requirement due to the slurry water that must be evaporated before calcination can take place. The dry process avoids the use of slurry material and, as a result, uses less energy. Between these two extremes are semi-wet and semi-dry processes, although for each process the basic principles are the same and involve the following steps:  Raw material preparation.  Production of clinker in the kiln.  Production of cement. 2.1.1 Raw Material Preparation (Quarrying and Grinding) Following extraction, limestone/chalk, marl, and clay/shale are crushed at the quarry site and transported to the cement plant, after which the raw material mix is homogenised. If the local rock does not meet the designated raw material requirements in terms of calcium oxide, silicon oxide, aluminium oxide, ferric oxide, and magnesium oxide, then bauxite, iron ore or sand may be required to adjust the chemical composition of the raw mix to the requirements of the process and product specications. In some cases waste-derived (or alternative) raw materials replace naturally quarried material. For the dry (and semi-dry) process, the raw materials are dried and ground together to produce a raw meal in the raw mill. In the wet (and semi-wet) process, the materials are ground with water to produce raw material slurry. Additional steps in the variant processes may be required, such as preparing raw meal pellets from dry meal (semi-dry process) or lter cake by dewatering of the slurry in lter presses (semi-wet process).
vi

The most common grey cement has been given its name because of its resemblance to Portland Stone.

View Online

130

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

The resulting intermediate raw meal or raw slurry is then fed into the kiln in its homogenised state, the kiln feed.
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

2.1.2 Production of Clinker Typically, cement kilns are red with fossil fuels; however, increasingly, wastederived alternative fuels, such as solvents, tyres, biomass and refuse-derived fuels, are being used to replace coal and petcoke (petroleum coke). As the kiln feed enters the kiln system it is subjected to a thermal treatment process, consisting of the consecutive steps of drying/preheating, calcination, and sintering (formation of clinker). Modern kilns have 45 stages of preheating/precalcining at around 850 1C before the material enters the rotary kiln. In the lower-temperature part of the kiln, calcium carbonate (limestone) decomposes to calcium oxide and carbon dioxide: CaCO3 ! CaO CO2 the calcination process The material travels down the kiln towards the ame due to its slight inclination and rotation. In the high-temperature part of the kiln (up to 1450 1C), calcium oxides and silicates react to form dicalcium silicate (Ca2SiO4; belite). The dicalcium silicate reacts with calcium oxide to form tricalcium silicate (Ca3SiO5; alite). Small amounts of tricalcium aluminate (Ca3Al2O6) and tetracalcium aluminoferrite (4CaO Al2O3Fe2O3) are also formed. The resulting material is referred to as clinker (sintered but not fused lumps). The clinker is cooled with air to around 60 1C in the clinker cooler, and the hot air is recovered for raw material and fuel drying. Cement production is an energy-intensive process. Experience in the EU11 conrms that the specic thermal energy demand ranges from 3000 to o4000 MJ tonne1 clinker, for modern dry process multi-stage pre-heater/precalciner kilns (variations depend on variables such as raw material moisture, fuel mix and operating periods). Consequently, with its high energy requirements and emissions of carbon dioxide, and in view of its widespread use globally, concrete is the second most widely used commodity after water its consumption is a signicant contributor to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. However, 60% of the CO2 directly generated by the process results from calcinations, and only 40% from the combustion of fuels in the kiln. Further indirect carbon dioxide is emitted via the use of electricity and material transport. Recent estimates12 indicate that the cement industry contributes around 3.8% to global GHG and around 5% to global CO2 emission. In the UK, the cement industry emits around 9.7 Mt CO2 per year (about 1.7% of the UK total emission).vii However, signicant improvements have already been made; the 2007 direct emissions of CO2 from the UK cement industry were 27% below
vii

Calculated using National Air Emissions Inventory and British Cement Association Data.

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

131

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

the 1990 level, a year-on-year dierence of 3.7 Mt CO2. The improvements in CO2 emissions relate to: energy eciency improvements, plant rationalisation (the closure of old wet kilns and replacement with new pre-calciner kilns), fuel switching (replacing traditional fossil fuels with waste-derived alternatives) and a fall in production. 2.1.3 Production of Cement from Clinker Portland cement is produced by inter-grinding cement clinker with natural or industrial gypsum (mainly anhydrite) in a cement mill. About 5% gypsum is added to adjust the setting time of the nished cement, and other minor additional constituents are also allowable within limits specied in the European standard.13 Other cements, known as blended or composite cements, may be produced for specic applications and generally contain proportionally less clinker (and therefore less CO2 is emitted in their production). Composite cements contain other cementitious (cement-like) constituents in addition, such as blast-furnace slag, natural or industrial pozzolans, e.g. volcanic ash or y ash from power stations, where available. However, although using slag as a clinker replacement may reduce the CO2 emitted in cements production, it should be noted that blast-furnace slag originates from steel production which is in itself an energy and CO2-intensive process. Discussion is taking place regarding novel cements (low carbon/low energy) that may be based on dierent chemistry and raw materials.14 However, although their credentials concerning CO2 emission reduction are promising, their commercial scale, technical appropriateness and availability in the UK are largely questionable.

2.2

Incentives for Carbon Reduction

2.2.1 Environmental Until recently, the general public could be excused for its lack of awareness of climate change, but now that it is at the top of the media and political agenda it is hard to avoid references to its possible impact. A number of climate change sceptics still remain, yet theirs is a message that is nding less and less acceptance even the (English) courts have acknowledged the scientic basis of global warming.viii There is, however, a signicant dierence between commentators who express their views on global warming but are not required to put these into practice, and sectors of industry that have not been aorded this luxury for
viii

In Dimmock vs. Secretary of State for Education and Skills (2007) EWHC 288, the plainti sought to prevent the educational use of Al Gores lm, An Inconvenient Truth, on the grounds that schools are legally required to provide a balanced presentation of political issues. The court ruled that the lm was substantially founded upon scientic research and fact, and could continue to be shown, but it had a degree of political bias such that teachers would be required to explain the context via guidance notes issued to schools along with the lm. The court also identied nine errors in the lm, and ruled that the guidance notes must address these errors specically.

View Online

132

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

some time, and have needed to modify their business model to respond to the ever-changing legal demands in this area.ix Although in the past, industry (and government) has been resistant to the introduction of environmental legislation,15 within the UK, relatively few sectors have campaigned on the basis that global warming is not occurring, and most consider that this is an issue that is not simply restricted to current legislative requirements. This is particularly so for the so-called energy intensive industries power generation, steel, aluminium, cement, lime, glass, paper where a substantial percentage of the costs of production are associated with energy usage. It has been suggested that nancial issues alone would provide the drivers for emissions reduction/energy eciency legislation improvement, and, in terms of emissions trading, each these industries diers signicantly with regard to the ratio of carbon-to-product cost, and the extent to which emissions reduction costs can be passed through to the customer. Global warming is unlikely to be resolved in the short- to medium-term, and companies must look beyond the current, direct eects and existing climaterelated legislation, towards the controls that are likely to be in operation in 2050 and beyond. In this aspect, the cement industry has been one of the leading sectors. In the UK, the sustainability initiative (see Section 2.2.2) that was drawn up in 2005, contained a carbon strategy that sought to develop a carbon trajectory for the sector that would achieve a 60% reduction in its greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, based upon the level of reduction identied in the 22nd Report of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, Energy The Changing Climate. In 2008, the UK government set a goal of 80% reduction in CO2 for 2050, based on the recommendation of the Committee on Climate Change, a body established under Part 2 of the Climate Change Act 2008, Ch. 27. Nevertheless the principle remains the same industry must identify the means by which it can make the meaningful reductions in its greenhouse gas emissions that will be necessary for it to continue in business. In the case of the European cement industry, a substantial part of the additional reductions necessary to meet such goals will result from the application of carbon capture and storage. The IPCC16 has said that CCS for cement is a key mitigation technology that is projected to be commercialised before 2030, and the International Energy Agency (IEA) has highlighted CCS as the only low-carbon solution for coal, cement, and iron & steel sectors,17 and indicated that by 2050 about 50% of cement manufacturing capacity would include carbon capture and storage.x Against this background, the British Cement Associationxi has been working with the UK-based Carbon Capture and Storage Association (CCSA) in
ix x

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

i.e. since the introduction of the UK Climate Change Levy in 2001. See reference 2. Usage by other sectors was estimated as: iron and steel, 75%; ammonia, 100%; pulp and paper, 30%. xi On 2nd March 2009, the British Cement Association merged with the Quarry Products Association and The Concrete Centre to become the Mineral Products Association (MPA).

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

133

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

relation to the development of CCS-related legislation; the International Energy Agency GHG R&D Programme (IEA GHG) on the application of CCS to cement manufacture; and other bodies, including the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD). The ndings of the IEA18 work formed the basis of the development programme undertaken by the German trade association representing the cement sector, VDZ, and its research arm, ECRA (European Cement Research Academy). With regard to the developing world, the Lafarge Conservation Partnership in conjunction with WWF has produced a report19 indicating how reductions in greenhouse gas emissions can be made in China. The report considers the options for reducing CO2 emissions in the face of signicant increases in cement manufacture.

2.2.2 Corporate Social Responsibility The UK cement industry has been in the vanguard of industry sectors that have advanced the sustainable development agenda. Following the pioneering work of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders in 2000, the British Cement Associationxii worked with its members to develop a sectoral approach, building upon their own corporate initiatives and involvement in the World Business Council for Sustainable Development Cement Sustainability Initiative (WBCSD CSI). Unlike the SMMT, which based its key performance indicators on those of the initial participants in the scheme, the BCA scheme began with a highly-focussed approach. Commencing with a two-day Masterclass for company MDs and their senior advisors facilitated by Jonathan Porritt, a one-year Task Force was established under the leadership of the MD of a BCA Member Company, to deliver four major objectives: a business case for sustainable development within the cement industry; a carbon strategy; a programme of stakeholder engagement; and a cement makers code. The development of a carbon strategy and CO2 emissions prole to 2050 was identied as a key objective, and a number of options considered for reducing the sectors emissions by 60% in this time frame. Subsequently, UK government has adopted a target reduction of 80% by 2050, and this has been incorporated into the targets. Overall, the Task Forces initiatives were underpinned by the development of the business case for the sector. Building on other sustainability accounting work carried out with other sectors, Forum for the Future provided an estimate of the costs to society of cement manufacture and how to allocate these costs. Its analysis combined the social, environmental and economic benets and costs of cement manufacturing, and attempted to place a monetary valuation onto these. In collaboration with Forum for the Future, BCA made a valuation of these benets and costs using the latest and most reliable sources of
xii

Now incorporated in the Mineral Products Association (MPA).

View Online

134
600 500
Benefits ( Million)

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Business case full cost accounting

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

400 300 200 100 0

to os di sp an th al He m Co fa c n sa d m un fe ty og te ra W su m as m bs te es tit su u te bs fo tit ut rf e ue fo l rm Em a t pl er oy ia m ls en ta Bu nd ilt ta en x vir on m en t W as pr

En e

Figure 1

information available. Values were only been put on the most signicant costs and benets. Forum determined the areas of signicance in discussions with the BCA Sustainable Development Task Force with reference to environmental management systems, sector data reports and external publications. The principal aim of the analysis was to capture the most signicant impacts and aspects of the cement manufacturing, which considered ve stages in the product supply chain, viz., raw material extraction, cement manufacture, construction (concrete and precast), in use (buildings and infrastructure), and end-of-life (disposal or recycling). The output from this work (see Figure 1) gives a semi-quantitative indication of the benets and costs of cement manufacture. On aggregate, there is a strong business case for cement manufacture, but a signicant part of the positive component results from the in use phase of cement-based materials, primarily concrete. Signicant energy-saving reductions can be made from well-designed concrete buildings which compensates for the carbon dioxide emissions during manufacture, using properties of thermal mass.20 Nevertheless, carbon-focused legislation seldom, if ever, takes such an holistic view, and manufacturers are required to reduce emissions from manufacturing, even if these are balanced in the in use phase of the product. Furthermore, processes such as iron making and cement manufacturing are required to reduce process CO2, that results from the decomposition of limestone, in addition to combustion CO2, produced from the burning of fuel. Process CO2 is governed by the chemistry of the reaction and, as such, is essentially irreducible at source.

Costs ( Million)

-100
us ra c nc

W as

Ex t

isa

te

-200

tio

al rg Nu

Cost and Benets of Cement Manufacture. (Source: BCA Sustainable Development Task Force work undertaken by Forum for the Future).50

ity

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

135

2.3

Costs Associated with Carbon Emissions

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

The decision to construct an installation with the potential to capture the CO2 that is generated, or to retrot carbon capture equipment to an existing plant, will be determined by a number of interrelated factors:  Legislation that requires CCS to be installed, or inuences the cost of emitting carbon.  Cost of alternative carbon abatement options (taking into consideration the degree of their technical development and associated operational logistics).  The logistics of transporting and storing the carbon that has been collected.  The long-term commercial strategy of the organisation, globally, as well as domestically.

2.3.1 Legislation The European Commission has stated, Whether CCS is taken up in practice will be determined by the carbon price and the cost of the technology. It will be up to each operator to decide whether it makes commercial sense to deploy CCS.21 Furthermore, it envisages that through providing a stable carbon price, the EU Emission Trading Scheme, and any global counterpart, will provide the main incentive for CCS deployment. Despite the overwhelming environmental requirement for abatement, recent legislative changes relating to the EU Emissions Trading Scheme and CCS have not included a requirement for mandatory CCS for power generators. An early Commission Communication22 envisaged all new post-2020 plants would require CCS, and pre-2020 plants to be capture-ready to enable a rapid retrot post-2020. However, the CCS Directive introduces a modication23 into the Large Combustion Plants Directive (2001/80/EC), whereby new plants of greater than 300 MW capacity must include sucient space for collection and compression of CO2, where CCS is deemed to be technically and economically feasiblexiii by the competent authority. Such a provision was made early in 2009, when planning permission was granted to three new gas-red power stations in the UK.24 Many might regard this approach to capture ready as mere tokenism, demanding very little commitment from the rms involved, but the 2015 review of the CCS Directive will assess the need and practicability of introducing mandatory requirements on new large combustion installations generating electricity. In England and Wales, the permitting of large industrial plant and ensuring Best Available Techniques (BAT) of the IPPC regime is regulated by the Environment Agency. Its Chairman, Chris Smith, has described any attempt to build coal-red power stations without carbon capture and storage technology as unsustainable. Even ensuring that such plants are capture ready would be
xiii

i.e. where suitable storage sites are available, transport facilities are technically and economically feasible, and it is technically and economically feasible to retrot for CO2 capture (new Article 9a of the Large Plants Combustion Directive).

View Online

136

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

wrong, because of the scale of the challenge the world faces in bringing down emissions.25 In terms of the eectiveness of abatement and the logistics of the transport, injection and storage of the collected carbon dioxide, the higher volume CCS users such as coal-red power stations will lead the way, rather than cement and steel manufacture whose CO2 emissions are substantially less a single 2 GW coal-red power station produces more carbon dioxide than all of the UKs thirteen cement works. However, it would be wrong to assume that carbon capture and storage will rst be introduced by the higher volume CCS users, and only then by the lower volume CCS users. The existence of infrastructure for CO2 transport is a critical factor in any decision to install carbon capture, and clearly its development will take into account all potential sources of carbon dioxide. Capture is the major component of the overall cost of CCS, but there are clearly commercial advantages to parties of making provision for the collection of CO2 from all sources within a given region. Whilst a National Grid of CO2 collection and transport would be neither practicable nor cost eective, many of the larger emitters of CO2 are clustered in localised regions and the largest concentration is around the Humber and East Midlands (see Section 3.3.8). Fortuitously, the CO2 large sinks gas elds and saline aquifers are located nearby in the southern North Sea.

2.3.2 Alternative Abatement Options An analysis undertaken by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)26 indicated a world-wide potential of the cement industry to reduce CO2 emissions by ca. 30% by 2020 using conventional approaches. In the UK, small, progressive reductions in CO2 emissions have been achieved through: improved kiln control systems; high eciency motors and drives; improved energy management procedures; higher eciency crushing and grinding techniques; and optimisation of raw material chemistry.27 Larger step changes in fossil fuel CO2 emissions require substantial investment. To achieve 460% CO2 reductions by 2050, demands new technological solutions and the WBCSD report identied a number of advanced CO2 management approaches, including: the use of non-limestone-based binders; production of cement and electrical energy on hybrid cement-energy facilities; employment of carbon capture and sequestration. As early as 2003 CCS has been recognised as a low-carbon solution for coal, reneries, cement, and iron & steel sectors,xiv and the carbon trajectory

xiv

Carbon dioxide capture would be most eciently applied to large point sources in order to gain economies of scale both in the capture process itself and in subsequent transportation and storage. Examples of such sources include fossil-fuelled power stations, oil reneries, petrochemical plant, cement works and iron and steel plant, G. Marsh, Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage A WinWin Option? Future Energy Solutions, Oxon, Report Number ED 01806012 for DTI, May 2003.

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

137

developed by BCA envisages that further CO2 reductions will occur in three phases:
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

 Short- to medium-term: further energy eciency improvements and increasing use of biomass waste-derived fuels.  Medium-term: incorporation of greater quantities of pre-calcined, wastederived materials with cement clinker.  Long-term: carbon capture. Phase III of the EU Emission Trading Scheme will impose the requirement of a further 21% reduction in emissions, which for the UK cement industry will yield a total of 50% reduction on 1990 levels by 2020. 2.3.3 Logistics of Transporting and Storing Collected Carbon The technical and economic feasibility of carbon capture must be considered holistically, and factors relating to transport to the repository for the CO2 are essential considerations. A sites location in relation to both a distribution pipeline/CO2 sink and other CO2 sources may have a signicant inuence on the feasibility of its use of CCS, particularly for lower volume emitters, such as steel and cement. IEA recognises the need to build regional CO2 pipeline transport infrastructure, and indicates that near-term Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) can jump-start CO2 pipeline infrastructures. However, it believes that saline formations will provide the most likely long-term solution. Whilst the location of CO2 storage sites is determined by geology, it also determines the applicable legislation (see Figure 2) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS): the territorial sea, the Exclusive Economic Zone and the high seas.  Within the Territorial Sea, up to twelve miles from the nations shores, its sovereignty is determined by international law.  The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extends from the end of the Territorial Sea out to 200 miles from a countrys coast (i.e. 188 miles from the end of the territorial sea), and coastal states have sovereign rights to explore and exploit the natural resources of the sea bed and sub-soil of the continental shelf (land which is usually contained within the EEZ).  The high seas are beyond the EEZ and are open to all states. However, they may complain if activities of others cause undue harm to their interests. 2.3.4 Corporate Commercial Strategy Many manufacturers within the energy-intensive industries are part of European or global groups whose domestic investment programmes and investment policies are determined in a wider context than domestic production. An important feature of the third phase of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme was

View Online

138

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

200 miles
12 miles 12 miles
Contiguous Zone

Exclusive Economic Zone

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

Mainland

Territorial Sea

High Seas

Continental Shelf

Note

In some areas the continental shelf, slope or rise may extend beyond the 200 mile exclusive economic zone

Continental Slope

Continental Rise

Deep Seabed

Maritime zones

Figure 2

Legal Zones of the Sea. (Source: r OECD/IEA, 2005).51

the recognition that a number of industries would be at risk of carbon leakage i.e. production being relocated outside the EU to no-carbon constrained counties until a system of global carbon trading had been established. Whilst this is an important short term issue, if by 2050 carbon capture and storage is to be a component of manufacturing in the developed world up to 75% of iron and steel production; 50% cement; 100% ammonia; 30% pulp and paper (see Figure 3) then companies must develop the CCS technologies for worldwide application. Under a scheme of global emissions trading, the proximity of storage sites will assume a much greater importance and as indicated by the sources and sinks research carried out by the British Geological Survey.28 Just as electricity from renewable sources is frequently marketed on the basis of its green credential, it has been suggested that products manufactured from low-carbon sources might be placed to receive a similar commercial advantage. This is a component of responsible sourcing initiatives and, although complex and in their early stages, could become a persuasive factor in purchasing choice.

3 Options for Mitigation 3.1 Mitigation in Cement Manufacture

As described in Section 2.2, 60% of the CO2 emitted from clinker manufacture originates from the calcination process and the remaining 40% from fuel combustion. The thermodynamics of the process mean that opportunities only

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

139

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

Figure 3

Carbon Capture and Storage in 2050. (Source: Presentation entitled CO2 Capture and Storage Legal & Regulatory Update, given at COP 14 in Poznan, Poland r OECD/IEA, 2008, slide 14).52

exist to reduce CO2 from 40% of the total emission. This has signicant implications on any regulatory enforced reduction on the total emission, e.g. a 20% reduction target on the total emission translates into a 50% reduction on the reducible portion. As such, fuel eciency and renewable fuel measures only provide a partial solution to CO2 reduction in the cement industry and thus illustrates the attractiveness of carbon capture and storage. Further improvements in energy eciency by replacing inecient kilns with newer kilns will only be partially eective in addressing the UK contribution to climate change, because much of the investment has already been made. Figure 4 illustrates some of the abatement options available to the industry against the sources of emission from cement production. There is, however, further scope to fuel switch from nite fossil fuels to regenerable waste-derived alternatives in particular, biomass. In 2007, the thermal replacement of kiln fuel with waste-derived fuels (WDF) was 18.6% in the UK (around 333 kilotonnes of coal equivalent), of these WDF, 4.2% comprised 100% biomass. The waste-derived fuels comprised used solvents, waste tyres, paper and packaging waste, refuse-derived fuel (RDF), processed sewage pellets (PSP) and meat and bone meal (MBM). This means that, in a life-cycle context, around 790 000 tonnes of CO2 emissionxv has been avoided if those wastes were land-lled and/or incinerated.
xv

Based on a coal equivalent emission factor.

View Online

140

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Carbon Dioxide Emissions and 'Step Change' Abatement Options Associated with Cement Production
100% 90%

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

80% 70% Percentage 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Calcination (Process) CO2 Combustion (Fuel) CO2 Electricity (CO2 Delivered basis)
2007 typical UK cement 49.67 31.94 7.98

Clinker replacement with other cementitous materials (GGBS - ground granulated blast furnace slag; fly ash from power stations) will only make a small impression on the Process carbon dioxide portion of the emission. CCS will be needed to make step change reductions.

Beyond technology replacement i.e. switching from wet kiln technology to modern dry pre-calciner kiln technology, fuel switching provides the greatest opportunity for the reduction of CO2. Where available, biomass waste derived fuels can assist in reducing the combustion carbon dioxide portion of the emission. Biomass firing with CCS could potentially result in a net negative emission. When considered on a delivered basis the carbon dioxide emission associated with electricity use is relatively small. However, on a primary basis (accounting for generation inefficiencies and grid loss) CO2 emissions could be 2.6 times greater. Renewable energy such as wind turbine feasibility could be considered but this may only be attractive at higher electricity prices or at greater economies of scale where the electricity can be supplied to other consumers.

Figure 4

Abatement options.

However, even if extensive waste-derived fuel supplies were available, fuel switching would still only address less than half of the direct CO2 impact of cement manufacture. Although incremental technological improvements have made signicant reductions in CO2 emission in order the meet the domestic and international requirements, step changes are needed. The following section describes the potential technologies, costs and environmental potential of CCS in the cement industry.

3.2

Carbon Capture and Cement Manufacture

3.2.1 Technology There are three potential technologies that could be used to assist the capture of carbon dioxide from the waste gas stream of clinker production:  Pre-combustion capture.  Oxy-fuel ring.  Post-combustion capture. 3.2.1.1 Pre-combustion Capture. Pre-combustion capture involves the pretreatment of the primary fuel. In the case of cement manufacture, this would mean steam treatment or gasication of the coal/petcoke fuel to generate hydrogen to be used as a kiln fuel and, following separation and the catalytic reaction of carbon monoxide, a concentrated CO2 gas stream for capture. The applicability of pre-combustion capture to the clinker production process strongly depends on the technical possibility of using hydrogen as a main

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

29 30

141

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

fuel in the kiln, particularly given its explosive properties. Research has identied that, unlike a power station, a cement plant does not have an existing waste steam cycle that could be utilised for the gasication, further adding to cost and complexity. However, the most signicant limitation is that this method would only capture fuel CO2 during pre-treatment and before kiln ring, and therefore overlook the 60% calcination emission and thus not exploit the full potential of CO2 capture in the cement industry. As such, pre-combustion capture is not considered the most viable option for the cement industry.31 3.2.1.2 Oxy-Combustion. Oxy-fuel or oxy-combustion means that combustion in the kiln takes place in oxygen instead of ambient air. Nitrogen is removed from the air mix using a cryogenic air separation unit to distill the oxygen, and the oxygen-rich stream is then fed into the kiln or pre-calciner, depending on the conguration. The result from combustion in the oxygen-rich environment is a high CO2 concentration exhaust gas. The higher concentration of CO2 makes its separation for storage more cost eective. The benet of an oxygen enhancement is that the exhaust gas CO2 concentration rises above 80%, compared to 1433% for ambient air combustion.32 Two studies33,34 have looked at the possibility of using oxy-combustion in the manufacture of cement. IEAGHG (2008) used a model in their study that focuses on the oxygen-enhanced combustion in the pre-calciner, although Zeman and Lackner (2006) proposed modications to the kiln in their model for a Zero Emission Kiln. However, there are limitations to both approaches; rst, there is the potential for air intrusion; second, the cost of air separation; and third, the eects of the oxygen-rich environment on burnability, reaction kinetics and additional stress on the fabric of the kiln from the increased heat. However, it is promoted that a greater ue-gas recycling and enhanced fuel pre-processing are key features of a Zero Emission Kiln, despite the potential energy penalty associated with separating oxygen from air. 3.2.1.3 Post-combustion Capture. Post-combustion technology is already in operation in power plants.xvi As the name suggests, CO2 is captured postcombustion, i.e. from the exhaust gas. This end-of-pipe technology lends itself to retrotting, as less process intrusion is required. Current technologies use an aqueous amine (possibly monoethylamine) which undergoes a reversible reaction with CO2. However, oxides of sulfur and oxides of nitrogen also react with the amine, and the concentrations of these impurities in the ue gas need to be carefully controlled, as does the ue-gas temperature, primarily to avoid degradation of the amine.
xvi

Mongstad (Norway) natural gas CHP, post combustion with separate hydrogen production, providing 1.3 Mt p.a. CO2 for North Sea-based o-shore aquifer storage in the Johansen formation. http://www.dynamis-hypogen.com/

View Online

142

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

Under the post-combustion model, equipment additions to a normal kiln system therefore include a ue-gas desulfurisation (FGD) unit, to pre-treat the exhaust gas before amine scrubbing to remove the CO2. The need for an FGD also increases the power demand, and further fuel use is needed in an additional steam boiler or CHP plant for the regeneration of the amine. Compression also requires additional power, but the use of a CHP plant could mean that the postcombustion-tted cement plant could be a net exporter of power. 3.2.2 Investment and Operation The most detailed research to date provides an indication of both the capital and operational costs of a cement plant with carbon capture. In the study,35 the researchers have assumed a 1 Mt yr1 cement output from a modern ve-stage pre-calciner kiln based in the UK, with a base-case capital cost of h 263M. The capital cost estimates for post-combustion and oxy-combustion tted plants are h558M and h327M, respectively. The capital and operating cost summary is provided in Table 1. From this summary, it can be seen that for a post-combustion plant there is a signicant increase in fuel consumption, mainly due to the need for a CHP plant providing steam for amine absorbent Table 1 Summary of Cement Plant Costs with and without CO2 Capture for a 1 Mt yr1 Cement Plant. (Source: r IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, 2008).54
Unit Capital Costsa Operating costs Fuel Power Other variable operation costs Fixed Operating Costs Capital charges Total Costs Cement Production Cost CO2 abatement costs Cost per tonne of cement product Cost per tonne of CO2 captured Cost per tonne of CO2 emission avoidedb
a

Base Case (no capture) 263 6.7 4.0 6.1 19.1 29.7 65.6 65.6 -

Post-combustion Capture 558 21.5 1.1 10.6 35.3 63.1 129.4 129.4 63.8 59.6 107.4

Oxy-combustion Capture 327 6.9 6.4 6.4 22.8 36.9 81.6 81.6 16.0 34.3 40.2

hM hM yr1 hM yr1 hM yr1 hM yr1 hM yr1 hM yr1 h t1 h t1 h t1 h t1

Note that the capital costs include miscellaneous owners costs but exclude interest during construction, although this has been taken into account in the calcualtion of the overall production costs. b The costs per tonne of CO2 emissions avoided take into account the emissions associated with imported and exported power

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

143

regeneration and power to drive an FDG (Flue Gas Desulfurisation) unit, although this is partially o-set by the reduction in externally sourced power. The consequence for the post-combustion plant is a doubling of the cement production cost, due to an annual capture cost of h63M, which leads to a cost per tonne of CO2 avoided of h107.4 and a cement production cost of h129.4 tonne1. This means that in order to equalise the additional cost of abatement, CO2 allowance costs, under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, would need to be around h63.8 t1 CO2. The criticality for domestic cement manufacture will be one of competitiveness. Before EU allowance prices reach such a level, it will be much more cost eective to import clinker from non-carbon constrained economies than to invest in post-combustion capture-ready plant. Of course, the importation of the CO2-intensive intermediate product does nothing to combat climate change, so this in turn creates a dilemma for policy makers: drive hard for clean technology transfer and place domestic manufacture at a cost disadvantage, encouraging imports, or, delay and face failure of domestic climate-change targets. By comparison, the oxy-combustion model demands much less increase in fuel use, but more than doubles the power demand, mainly due to the need for an Air Separation Unit. The result is a cement production cost of h81.6 t1, 24% greater than the base case. As a consequence, the lower CO2 abatement cost of h16 t1 CO2 which leads to h40.2 t1 CO2 emissions-avoided cost, or 57% lower than the post-combustion equivalent. Supercially, this makes the oxy-combustion model potentially the preferred approach, but the fundamental redesign of the kiln needs to be considered. For comparison the estimated36 cost of CO2 capture and compression (excluding CO2 transport and storage) is $2739 tonne1 of CO2 emissions avoided for coal-red plants, and $48102 tonne1 for natural gas combinedcycle plants. The environmental integrity of post-combustion is also debatable. In terms of absolute CO2 emission it can be seen from Table 2 that the base-case plant would normally emit 770.4 kt CO2 yr1 (overall net) and, due to the additional fuel and power consumption, the post-combustion plant would generate more CO2(1244.3 kt CO2 net). However, with a high capture eciency (1067.7 kt CO2) the overall CO2 emissions avoided could be up to 77%. On the other hand, the oxy-combustion model generates only 9% more CO2 (overall net) than its base-case equivalent, but only captures 465 kt CO2, which results in a net emissions avoided (including power imports and exports) gure of 396.8 kt CO2 (52%). If the technical constraints on the use of both post-combustion and oxycombustion were equal (which they are not), then the line of reasoning for a cement company is essentially balanced between two poles. First, the high cost, high energy demand but better emissions-avoided potential of the post-combustion model, compared with the comparatively lower generation of CO2, lower cost but less potential for emissions avoided for the oxy-combustion approach.

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

View Online

144

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Table 2

Summary of Cement Plant Performance with and without CO2 Capture for a 1 Mt yr1 Cement Plant. (Source r IEA GHG R&D Programme, 2008).54
Unit Base Case (no capture) 63.3 32.9 96.8 10.2 10.2 Post-combustion Capture 291.6 32.9 304 42.1 45 2.9 Oxy-combustion Capture 72.1 27.1 97.8 22.7 0.7 22

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

Fuel and Power Coal Feed Petroleum coke feed Total Fuel Consumption (LHV basis) Average Power Consumption Average on-site power generation Average net power consumption CO2 emitted and captured CO2 captured CO2 emitted on-site CO2 emission avoided at the cement planta CO2 associted with power import/ export Overall net CO2 emissions CO2 emissions avoided including power import and export
a

kt yr1 kt yr1 MW MW MW MW

kt yr1 kt yr1 kt yr1 % kt yr1 kt yr1 kt yr1 %

728.4 42 770.4

1067.7 188.4 540 74 11.8 176.6 593.8 77

465 282.9 445.6 61.0 90.8 373.7 396.8 52

The CO2 emission avoided are the emissions of the base case plant without carbon capture minus the emission of the plant with CO2 capture.

3.2.3 Future Work The work commissioned by IEA GHG programme was based upon the current state-of-the-art technology most likely to be developed into full-scale operational plant. In a fast-growing area such as CCS, new developments are frequently reported, and more ecient post-combustion capture may be possible through the use of advanced amines or amine/carbonate mixes, or a chilled ammonia process (CAP).xvii Similarly the potential benets of oxy-combustion are likely to initiate further work to extend this option to existing as well as new plant congurations. In addition, other capture technology, such as that based upon algae, has been identied as a potential alternative to amines, although this is in an early
xvii

ALSTOM is installing this cutting edge technology in the Pleasant Prairie Power Plant owned and operated by We Energies. The pilot project will capture CO2 emissions from a slipstream from one of the two boilers operating at the plant. The aim is to demonstrate the technologys capabilities on actual ue gas, gather eld operating data and evaluate system energy consumption.

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

145

stage of development, and questions about scale remain for high-volume emitters such as cement.
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

3.3

Removing Barriers to Development

3.3.1 Legislation The tranche of law associated with carbon capture and storage is a complex mix of international and domestic provisions, and the relatively recent priority assumed by the technology has necessitated the modication of existing legislation, in addition to the introduction of CCS-specic measures. Addressing the regulation of capture processes has been relatively straightforward since, as an industrial process, no new concepts have had to be addressed and, within the EU, this has been achieved by modication of existing legislation. However, the control of transport, injection and storage has been more complex, particularly in the case of o-shore injection, where transboundary transport of CO2 and other international measures are involved. With regard to trans-boundary issues between Member States, the competent authorities are jointly required to meet the requirements of the CCS-specic and all other general Community legislation relating to CO2 transport, storage sites and storage complexes. The Commissions Energy Package agreed on 17th December 2008 contained two measures of relevance to CCS the Directive amending the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, and the Directive on the Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide. Whereas the EU Emissions Trading Directive is essentially a driver for the introduction of CCS through carbon cost considerations, the Carbon Capture and Storage Directive covers the geological storage of carbon dioxide. It was introduced to address the issues within Europe associated with storage, and much of its content is concerned with these issues. However, Chapter 7 makes amendments to a number of existing legal instruments in order to make them compatible with the regulation of the capture process for on-shore storage.37 These are discussed in more detail, below. 3.3.2 Scope of the CCS Directive The Directive applies within the territory of the Member States, their exclusive economic zones and on their continental shelves (see Figure 2). 3.3.3 Regulation of Capture Operations Within the EU, the permitting and regulation of capture operations falls within the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive,38 to which only a minor change was necessary to bring these into the ambit of the IPPC regime.39 A further issue to be addressed to the operator of the capture facility is the composition/purity of the CO2 stream that is collected. In practical terms this is likely to be academic for post-combustion capture, since current amine technology requires a low level of impurities in the collected gas stream to retain a

View Online

146

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

high degree of capture eciency. However, CO2 purity has been identied as one of the concerns of stakeholders concerned that CCS may be used as an alternative disposal route for conventional air pollutants. Specic provisions relating to CO2 composition are not included in the modication to the IPPC Directive, on the premise that compositional requirements will be ensured through the application of its BAT provisions.40 In addition, a pipeline/storage facility operator may only accept and inject CO2 streams subject to a satisfactory risk analysis and analysis of the composition of the gas streams, which must include corrosive substances, and demonstrate that the contamination levels satisfy the composition criteria referred to in the CCS Directive. The Commission has identied a possible need to modify the BAT Reference Documents (BREFs) for a number of manufacturing processes: those falling within the Large Combustion Plant Directive; cement and lime; mineral oil and gas reneries. It has also indicated the possibility of introducing a horizontal BREF for CO2-capture technologies. Reference has been made to the modication of the Large Combustion Plants Directive 2001/80/EC41 in relation to current and future requirements for new plant to be capture ready. 3.3.4 Waste Issues Whilst it was envisaged42 that the revision of the Waste Framework Directive (WFD) would remove captured carbon from its ambit through an addition to the provision relating to waste regulated elsewhere,xviii this was not included in the nal version, Directive 2008/98/EC (ref. 43), of 19th November 2008. The Preamble to the Waste Framework Directive states: (21) Disposal operations consisting of release to seas and oceans including sea bed insertion are also regulated by international conventions, in particular the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, done at London on 13 November 1972, and the 1996 Protocol thereto as amended in 2006 and Annex I-D 7 includes Release to seas/oceans including sea-bed insertion as a Waste Disposal Operation. However, through Article 35 of the CCS Directive, the Waste Framework Directive was subsequently amended by modifying of Article 2(1)(a) to become: gaseous euents emitted into the atmosphere and carbon dioxide captured and transported for the purposes of geological storage and geologically stored in accordance with the provisions of Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon
xviii

CO2 streams that are transported for the purpose of storage, injected, or stored in accordance with the provisions of Directive 2008/98/EC are not considered to be waste . . .

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

147

dioxide, [OJ L140 5.6.2009, p114] or excluded from the scope of that Directive pursuant to its Article 2(2).
Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

It is signicant that this modication removes captured CO2 from the scope of the WFD, rather than identifying it as a waste regulated elsewhere, as initially envisaged. This is important in relation to on-shore storage and transboundary issues, although o-shore storage will be governed by the relevant international provisions. Similarly, shipments of CO2 for the purposes of geological storage in accordance with the provisions of Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide, [OJ L140 5.6.2009, p114] are excluded from the provisions of the Regulation on the transboundary shipments of waste, Article 36 of the CCS Directive. 3.3.5 Water The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) is of relevance to on-shore injection, and through Article 32 has been modied to permit injection of carbon dioxide streams for storage purposes into geological formations which for natural reasons are permanently unsuitable for other purposes, provided that such injection is made in accordance with of Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide,[OJ L140 5.6.2009, p114] or excluded from the scope of that Directive pursuant to its Article 2(2). xix The conditional nature of this modication is interesting and it is dicult to envisage how permanent unsuitability for any other purpose will be determined. As with the modication relating to waste, the nal version of the CCS Directive contains an exclusion rather than an exemption from the Directive referred to: i.e. not within the ambit of these Directives, as opposed to within their ambit but not subject to their provisions. 3.3.6 Environmental Assessment and Post-Closure Issues In the EU, major projects cannot proceed unless a satisfactory environmental impact assessment has been undertaken, and a requirement to carry out such an assessment for capture, transport and storage operations was introduced through a modication of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (85/ 337/EEC).44 However, Member States retain the right to determine the areas within their territory from which storage sites may be selected. With regard to environmental liability, the operation of storage is brought within the controls of the Environmental Liability Directive, Directive 2004/35/ EC, under Article 35 of the CCS Directive. 3.3.7 O-shore Operations Although the CCS Directive does not address international issues associated with transport and storage, the Preamble notes45 that legal barriers to the
xix

This modication is inserted after third indent Article 11(3)(j).

View Online

148

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

geological storage of CO2 in sub-seabed geological formations have been removed through the adoption of related risk-management frameworks, both under the 1996 London Protocol to the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (1972 London Convention), and under the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention). Amendments to the 1996 London Protocol to the 1972 London Convention in 2006 were adopted by the Contracting Parties which allow and regulate the storage of CO2 streams from CO2 capture processes in sub-seabed geological formations. The Contracting Parties to the OSPAR Convention in 2007 adopted amendments to the Annexes of the Convention to allow the storage of CO2 in geological formations under the seabed, a Decision to ensure environmentally safe storage of carbon dioxide streams in geological formations, and OSPAR Guidelines for Risk Assessment and Management of that activity. They also adopted a Decision to prohibit placement of CO2 into the water-column of the sea and on the seabed, because of the potential negative eects. 3.3.8 Transportation Infrastructure Pipeline authorisations are specic to the substance conveyed, and the licensing of re-use for existing pipelines is uncertain. Indications are that a CO2 pipeline transport system is unlikely to use any existing pipes, and the cost of a new, dedicated CO2 pipeline infrastructure system will be considerable. Research46 into CO2 transport suggests that costs depend on the diameter, length and cost of the pipe and how many boosters are needed. Two potential congurations for a CO2 transport network are suggested:  Direct Connect Network: where dedicated pipes transport the CO2 to terminal sites from where it is transported to a storage site.  Hub & Spoke Network: where CO2 is transported to dedicated hubs, where it is aggregated and transported to terminal sites in larger pipes. An example of the latter is given in Figure 5, and comparison with the legal zones of the sea (see Figure 2) indicates the complexity of the relevant legislation. There are a number of other potential scenarios that may involve transport to temporary on-shore storage sites, before being transferred to larger o-shore sites. This may be attractive to smaller volume CO2 producers in the non-power generating sector. 3.3.9 Demonstration Projects The UK Committee on Climate Change has stated47 that it is now essential to invest in projects that demonstrate the eectiveness of various CCS technologies in large-scale installations, and which identify the feasible timescales and likely costs of extensive deployment.

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

149

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

Figure 5

Indicative Transport Network. (Source: Po yry Energy Consulting).53

View Online

150

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

The IEA has identied only four full-scale CCS demonstration plants which are operating worldwide, none with a coal-red power plant. Within the UK there are ca. ten proposals for power projects incorporating CCS, ranging from technologies using pre-combustion, as well as post-combustion capture and advanced oxy-fuel combustion. These would account for total power generating capacity of 12 500 MW and an annual CO2 storage of ca. 60 million tonnes. To realise the potential of these 10 UK projects, a source of external funding is required and there are currently three sources:  UK CCS Competition. Launched by the Prime Minister on 19th November 2007; under this the government will cover all of the capital costs of the winning plant and its operating costs for at least 15 years. The requirements of the demonstration plant are that it must be: of commercial scale; capture 90% of the CO2 emitted by a coal-red power station of the equivalent of 300 MW generating capacity; operational by 2014; and use post-combustion capture.xx However, the competition progress was marred by a high prole application withdrawal.48  EU Energy Package. As part of the EU Energy Package agreed on 17th December 2008, supra, the Council agreed to the use of 300 million allowances from the New Entrant Reserve of the Emission Trading Scheme for funding CCS demonstration projects. This could provide between h6bn and h9bn support for capital investment, i.e. depending upon the market value of the allowances.  Possible Additional Funding from Unspent EU Budget. On 28th January 2009, the European Commission presented proposals for the reallocation of h5bn unspent 2008 EU from agriculture funding to energy and broadband infrastructure projects as part of the EU recovery plan. This reallocation included h1.25bn for investment in ve CCS demonstration projects, and a provisional list of projects that could benet had been drawn up.xxi However, this created a number of legal issues and at the time of writing the Commissions redrafted proposal was receiving further consideration. Regardless of the nal outcome, it is clear that the Commission acknowledges that, in addition to the nancial provisions within the EU Energy Package, signicant levels of external funding will need to be provided in order to encourage the rst CCS projects to be undertaken.

4 Conclusions
Cement and concrete are essential materials with the capability of providing sustainable solutions to modern society for a range of long-lasting structures:
xx

However, the denition of post-combustion has been extended to cover oxy-fuel plants that burn pulverised coal in pure oxygen to produce a stream of very pure CO2. xxi Under the proposal, projects in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain (with Portugal) and the UK would each benet from a contribution of d250 million. Potential projects in the UK include: Kingsnorth, Longannet, Tilbury and Hateld.

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

151

domestic, public and commercial buildings; transport infrastructure; essential utilities, as well as their use in renewable energy facilities, and coastal and river protection schemes. Their use is based upon their basic properties of durability, security, ood/re resistance, service life and thermal mass energy eciency. The whole-life evaluation of cement and concrete products demonstrates a positive environmental benet, but within this it is nevertheless important to reduce the emissions from the cement manufacture component. Not only does this contribute to the governments necessarily ambitious climate change targets, but reduction of manufacturing CO2 emissions also improve indirectly the carbon footprint of the resulting products. Carbon capture and storage is one of the few options available to the industry to achieve these goals in the long term, and has the potential to provide signicant reductions in the direct emissions from cement manufacture, leading towards a net zero-emission production when combined with the extensive use of biomass and waste-derived fuels. Oxy-fuel combustion and post-combustion capture have been identied as the two most likely processes that could be applied to cement manufacturing, although to date only desk-top studies have been undertaken. Whilst the oxyfuel option has the lower abatement cost, current technology is more applicable to new cement kilns, and unlike post-combustion capture, there are more technical uncertainties that need to be resolved at a laboratory scale. Nevertheless, oxy-fuel plant congurations dierent from that in the current research49 are being considered as a potential development of this technology, and more ecient post-combustion capture work may be possible through the use of advanced amines or amine/carbonate mixes or a chilled ammonia process (CAP). In addition, other capture technology, such as that based upon algae, is in the early stages of development and questions over its applicability to high volume sources such as cement are yet unanswered. Cost remains a major barrier both to the development and future application of CCS techniques to cement manufacture but, equally, access to a CO2 transport infrastructure will be a major consideration, and this issue is yet to be resolved for the UK development project in the power sector due to be on stream in 2015. The application of CCS to cement manufacture now requires laboratory work to resolve the technical issues relating to ue-gas composition identied in the desk-top studies (i.e. importance of SOx, NOx and particulate levels). It is likely that this will be followed by work on a pilot-plant scale before the rst cement demonstration plant is built. However, the issues facing CCS as a whole are ones that only a multi-actor approach will resolve:  Practical experience on the operation of CCS at a commercial scale, which will require substantial government involvement in the establishment of demonstration projects and a collection infrastructure.  The establishment of a stable carbon price, based upon international agreement on emissions trading.

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

View Online

152

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

 Further legislative changes to facilitate the introduction of CCS, particularly in relation to planning, which should be part of a nationally coordinated strategy. Public acceptance to the need for CCS is necessary as a transition to a low carbon economy. In order to accelerate the deployment of CCS in the cement industry, public funding will be needed. This funding could be usefully sourced from hypothecated revenues from CO2 allowance auctions carried out under the EU ETS regime, i.e. without direct cost to the public nances.

References
1. 2002/358/EC: Council Decision of 25 April 2002 concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the joint fullment of commitments there under, Ocial Journal L 130, 15/05/2002, P. 0001 0003. 2. D. N. Pocklington, Eur. Environ. Law Rev., 2001, 10(7), 220. 3. Framework for the UK Emissions Trading Scheme, Defra, 2001. See also: Appraisal of Years 14 of the UK Emissions Trading Scheme A Report by ENVIROS Consulting Limited, December 2006, Defra. 4. D. N. Pocklington and R. Leese, in The Finance of Climate Change, ed. K. Tang, Risk Books, 2005. 5. D. N. Pocklington, Eur. Environ. Law Rev., 2002, 11(7), 210. 6. N. Stern, The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2007. 7. IPCC, in Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L. Miller, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 2007. 8. Reported by J. Randerson, The Guardian, 7th August 2008. 9. Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide, [OJ L140 5.6.2009, p114,]; and Directive 2009/29 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme of the Community, [OJ L140, 5.6.2009, p140]. 10. Building a Low-Carbon Economy The UKs Contribution to Tackling Climate Change, Climate Change Committee, December 2008, 47. 11. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Draft Reference Document on Best Available Techniques in the Cement, Lime and Magnesium Oxide Industries, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technologies, European IPPC Bureau, 2009, 47.

View Online

Towards Zero Emission Production Potential of Carbon Capture

153

12. K. A Baumert. T. Herzog and J. Pershing, Navigating the Numbers Greenhouse Gas Data and International Climate Policy, World Resources Institute, 2005, 57. 13. BSI, BS EN 197-1 Cement Part 1: Composition, Specications and Conformity Criteria for Common Cements. 14. M. T. Taylor, Fact Sheet 12: Novel cements: Low Energy and Low Carbon Cements, British Cement Association. http://www.cementindustry.co.uk. 15. C. Rose, The Dirty Man of Europe, Simon & Schuster Ltd, March 1991. 16. IPCC, in: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L. Miller, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 2007, 13. 17. T. Kerr, A Call to Action on CO2 Capture and Storage, IEA Day, UN FCCC COP, Poznan, 2008. 18. IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEA GHG), CO2 Capture in the Cement Industry, 2008/3, 2008. 19. N. Mu ller and J. Harnisch, A Blueprint for a Climate Friendly Cement Industry - How to Turn Around the Trend of Cement Related Emissions in the Developing World, a report prepared for the WWFLafarge Conservation Partnership, 2008. 20. T. de Saulles, Thermal Mass Explained, The Concrete Centre, 2009. 21. European Commission, MEMO/08/798, Questions and Answers on the Directive on the Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide, 17th December 2008. 22. Commission Communication, Sustainable Power Generation from Fossil Fuels: Aiming for Near-Zero Emissions after 2020, COM(06) 843, 10th January 2007. 23. Article 33, (reference 9). 24. Green Light for Three New Power Stations to Power 4 Million Homes, DECC Press Release, 2009. 25. L. Smith, The Times, 25th September 2008. 26. Towards a Sustainable Cement Industry Study 8: Climate Change, WBCSD CSI, March 2002. 27. D. N. Pocklington and R. Leese, in The Finance of Climate Change, Risk Books, ed. K Tang, July 2005. 28. S. Holloway, C. J. Vincent and K. L. Kirk, in the UK Report No. COAL R308, DTI, 2006. 29. Carbon Capture Technology Options and Potentials for the Cement Industry Technical Report, TR 044/2007, European Cement Research Academy (ECRA) GmbH, 2007. http://www.ecra-online.org/ecra/. Accessed 3.9.2009. 30. IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEA GHG), Reference 18. 31. D. J. Barker, S. A. Turner, P. A. Napier-Moore, M. Clark and J. E. Davison, in Energy Procedia 1, Elsevier, 2009, pp. 8795.

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

View Online

154

David Pocklington and Richard Leese

Downloaded by UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE on 05 November 2012 Published on 22 December 2009 on http://pubs.rsc.org | doi:10.1039/9781847559715-00126

32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37.

38. 39.

40. 41. 42.

43.

44.

45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54.

ECRA, 2007, p27. Reference 29. IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEA GHG), Reference 18. F. S. Zeman and K. S. Lackner, Int. Cement Rev., 2006, May, 5558. IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme (IEA GHG), Reference 18. J. Davison, Energy, 2007, 32(7), 11631176. Directive 85/337/EEC, (Environmental Impact Assessment); Directive 2000/60/EC, (Water Framework); Directive 2001/80/EC, (Large Combustion Plant); Directive 2004/35/EC, (Environmental Liability); Directive 2006/12/EC, (Waste Framework); Regulation (EC) 1013/2006, (Transfrontier Shipment of Waste); Directive 2008/1/EC, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control). Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive, 2008/1/EC[ 0]. Under Article 37 of the CCS Directive, Annex I to Directive 96/61/EC has been modied through the addition of point 6.9: 6.9 Capture of CO2 streams from installations covered by this Directive for the purposes of geological storage pursuant to Directive 2009/. . ./EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ... [on the geological storage of carbon dioxide]. See Recitals 16, 27 and 45 of the CCS Directive, (reference 9). Through Article 33 of the CCS Directive. See also Recital 47. S. Brockett, Regulatory and Legal Issues: Development of an Enabling Framework for Carbon Capture and Storage in the EU, Stakeholder Consultation Meeting, 8th May 2007. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and Council on waste and repealing certain Directives, 19th November 2008, Ocial Journal 22nd November 2008, L312/3. Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the eects of certain public and private projects on the environment was modied through Article 31 of the CCS Directive, (reference 9). Recitals 12 to 14 inclusive of the CCS Directive, (reference 9). Analysis of Carbon Capture and Storage Cost-Supply Curves for the UK, DTI, Po yry Energy Consulting, Oxford, January 2007. Reference 10, Executive Summary, page xvi. R. Van Noorden, RSC Chemistry World, July 2007. www.rsc.org. Accessed 9.3.2009. IEA GHG R&D Programme, Reference 18. D. Aeron-Thomas, The UK Cement Industry - Benet and Cost Analysis, 2005. Legal Aspects of Storing CO2, OECD/IEA, 2005, 22. IEA, Reference 17. Po yry Energy Consulting, Reference 46. IEA GHG R&D Programme, Reference 18.