New Synergy Concept of CO2 and Green Hydrogen Geological Storage in the Baltic Offshore Structure

New techno-economic and techno-ecological concept of a synergy of CO2 geological storage (CGS), CO2 use, hydrogen (H2) production from different eco-friendly renewable energy recovery technologies and underground H2 storage (UHS) in Cambrian Deimena Formation sandstones in different compartments of the E6 structure offshore Latvia is presented for the first time. The Baltic offshore scenario is ambitious and innovative, proposed new technologies, synergy with renewable energy (geothermal, solar, wind and sea current), large storage capacity, including CO2 storage and use captured by a CCUS clusters of emission sources from energy production, cement industry and bio-emissions from Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The concept aimed to decrease the artificial impact of climate change by avoiding CO2 emissions to the atmosphere and implementing circular economy principles. It will increase public and policymakers’ acceptance of new underground CO2 and energy storage technologies. The proposed synergy solution for CGS and energy storage projects will make such a business economically feasible and attractive for investors. Our study demonstrates a new era, the next generation of cost-competitive, self-supporting conceptual techno-ecological examples of a possible synergy of storage concepts with renewable energies combined using circular economy approaches

The Baltic Basin: structure, properties of reservoir rocks, and capacity for geological storage of CO2

Baltic countries are located in the limits of the Baltic sedimentary basin, a 700 km long and 500 km wide synclinal structure. The axis of the syneclise plunges to the southwest. In Poland the Precambrian basement occurs at a depth of 5 km. The Baltic Basin includes the Neoproterozoic Ediacaran (Vendian) at the base and all Phanerozoic systems. Two aquifers, the lower Devonian and Cambrian reservoirs, meet the basic requirements for CO2 storage. The porosity and permeability of sandstone decrease with depth. The average porosity of Cambrian sandstone at depths of 80–800, 800–1800, and 1800–2300 m is 18.6, 14.2, and 5.5%, respectively. The average permeability is, respectively, 311, 251, and 12 mD. Devonian sandstone has an average porosity of 26% and permeability in the range of 0.5–2 D. Prospective Cambrian structural traps occur only in Latvia. The 16 largest ones have CO2 storage capacity in the range of 2–74 Mt, with total capacity exceeding 400 Mt. The structural trapping is not an option for Lithuania as the uplifts there are too small. Another option is utilization of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR). The estimated total EOR net volume of CO2 (part of CO2 remaining in the formation) in Lithuania is 5.6 Mt. Solubility and mineral trapping are a long-term option. The calculated total solubility trapping capacity of the Cambrian reservoir is as high as 11 Gt of CO2 within the area of the supercritical state of carbon dioxide

The Role of CCUS Clusters and Hubs in Reaching Carbon Neutrality: Case Study from the Baltic Sea Region

The cross-border case study for the Baltic Sea Region includes the large emission sources from energy production, the cement industry, refineries, waste-to-energy plants and other large bio-emissions, identified in the Baltic States. The need to combine CO2 emission sources from three countries into large CCUS cluster projects is explained by geological and regulatory limitations. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are situated within the common Baltic sedimentary basin. The best geological conditions for CO2 geological storage are available in Latvia. In 2021 three countries produced about 15.9 Mt of large CO2 emissions, including more than 2.2 Mt of bio-CO2 emissions, located not far from the existing gas pipelines, which could connect emitters with storage sites and ports. The average optimistic storage capacity of the Cambrian Deimena Regional stage sandstones in the E6 structure, located 80 km from the Port of Klaipeda, is about 365 Mt CO2. The largest onshore storage sites Dobele, North-Blidene and Blidene have a total average optimistic storage capacity of about 402.6 Mt. CO2 emissions from three countries, including bio-emissions, could be captured, transported, used and stored in geological structures during more than 50 years. The regulatory process to permit CO2 storage in Latvia has been started, initiated by Latvian largest CO2 producers. Considering that 14% of the reported emissions are of biological origin, carbon neutrality could be reached in the Baltic States. Hydrogen production and storage and geothermal energy recovery using CO2 could be combined in the proposed CCUS clusters, using for H2 storage small E6-B compartment of the E6 structure offshore and Blidene structure onshore

Techno-economic modelling of the Baltic CCUS onshore scenario

Techno-economic modelling of the Baltic onshore CO2 transport, storage, and utilization scenario included HeidelberCement-owned Kunda Nordic Cement (KNC) plant, the main Estonian cement producer, four Estonian and one Latvian power plant and CO2 mineral carbonation of the oil shale ash, as possible CO2 use option. In 2019 nearly 6.5 Mt of oil shale ash (OSA) was produced in Estonia from energy production. Estonian OSA could be used as an effective sorbent in the proposed CO2-mineralization process, using CO2 from flue gas and producing precipitated CaCO3 (PCC) of high quality. Mineral carbonation of 0.42 Mt CO2 using 3.8 Mt of fresh OSA and about 6.33 Mt CO2 produced annually by five Estonian and one Latvian plant transported by pipeline for storage into the North-Blidene structure in western Latvia are combined in the CCUS scenario. Cambrian Deimena Formation reservoir sandstone is located at the depth of 1035-1150 m in the selected saline aquifer. The average optimistic storage capacity of about 270 Mt allows planning CCUS project for 30 years. The share of the Estonian emissions avoided and stored in Latvia is 86.5 %, including 8.2 % by KNC, while Latvian stored emissions will compose 13.5 %. Annually 6.8 Mt CO2 could be captured, transported and injected, including 6 Mt CO2 avoided using transport and storage and 0.42 Mt CO2 avoided using MC of Estonian OSA. During 30 years nearly 204 Mt CO2 will be captured, used and stored, while 193 Mt CO2 could be avoided. The total average transport and storage (T&S) cost of the scenario is 18.4 €/t CO2 injected. This cost depends on the transport distance, according to the applied methodology, and it is the most expensive for the Eesti Energia PPs. The lowest T&S cost of 5.54 €/t CO2 injected will have Latvenergo TEC-2 PP located at a smaller distance from the storage site. At the price of EEAP (CO2 Emission Allowance Price in EU ETS) of 40 €/t CO2 and 50 €/t PCC, the CCUS scenario could be beneficial for three Eesti Energia and Latvenergo TEC-2 power plants. For the KNC and VKG Energia plants without CO2 use options, the higher EEAP of about 48-50 €/t CO2 is needed to cover all CCUS costs including capture, compression, transport, storage and monitoring. The transport and storage costs are distance-dependent, as pipelines are the most expensive part of the transport, storage and monitoring costs. At the present EEAP of about 90 €/t CO2, all the participating plants will get benefits from the proposed scenario. This study is supported by CLEANKER project, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement n. 764816

Implementation of the EU CCS Directive in Europe: results and development in 2013

Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament on the geological storage of carbon dioxide, entered into force on June 25th 2009. By the end 2013 the CCS Directive has been fully transposed into national law to the satisfaction of the EC in 20 out of 28 EU Member States, while six EU countries (Austria, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Sweden and Slovenia) had to complete transposing measures. In July 2014 the European Commission closed infringement procedures against Cyprus, Hungary and Ireland, which have notified the EC that they have taken measures to incorporate the CCS Directive into national law. Among other three countries Sweden has updated its legislation and published a new law in their country in March 2014, permitting CO2 storage offshore. The evaluation of the national laws in Poland, which were accepted at national level in November 2013, and Croatia, which entered the EU on 7 July 2013 and simultaneously transposed the CCS directive, is still ongoing in 2014. The first storage permit under the Directive (for the ROAD Project in the offshore Netherlands) has been approved by the EC. While CO2 storage is permitted in a number of European countries, temporary restrictions were applied in Czech Republic, Denmark and Poland. CO2 storage is prohibited except for research and development in Estonia, Finland, Luxembourg, two regions in Belgium and Slovenia due to their geological conditions, but also forbidden in Austraia, Ireland and Latvia. The size of exploration areas for CO2 storage sites is limited in Bulgaria and Hungary. In Germany, only limited CO2 storage will be permitted until 2018 (up to 4 Mt CO2 annually)

Routing Deployment of CC(U)S in the Baltic Sea Region

Much potential exists in the Baltic Sea region (BSR) regarding CC(U)S and at least on the research side, there has been a steady stream of activities over the years. Potential storage sites are localized in the Baltic Basin within several countries such as Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia. However, the BSR is still lagging behind in deploying a large-scale CC(U)S due to the national policy and regulatory frameworks which create unfavorable conditions for the technology, as well as the low public awareness and acceptability in most of the countries in the region. Consequently, CO2 injection is forbidden in Lithuania, CO2 storage on an industrial scale is banned in Estonia, Latvia and Finland and some federal states of Germany, while in Denmark, Poland and Sweden is permitted with limitations. However, it should also be noted that some positive developments and attitudes towards CC(U)S have also taken place recently in some of the BSR countries. This paper provides an overview of the current CC(U)S status and development in the BSRpublishedVersio