Linking the Effect of Reservoir Injectivity and CO 2 Transport Logistics in the Nordic Region

Paper in proceeding, 2017

We compare the cost for CO 2 -transport by ship with cost for pipeline transport in the Nordic region as a function of transport volume and distance. We also calculate the pipeline volumetric break-even point yielding the minimum CO 2 volume required from a specific site for pipeline to become the less costly transport option and finally, we investigate the effect injectivity may have on the choice of reservoir and transport mode. Most stationary CO 2 -emissions in the Nordic region originate from emission intensive industries such as steel, cement and chemical plants and refineries. Typically, their emissions are modest (less than 1 Mt per year) compared to large coal fired power plants, while distances to potential storage sites are considerable, often 300 km or more. Hence, build-up of clusters of emission sources and CO 2 -volumes is likely to take time and be costly. At the same time, many of the emission sources, both fossil based and biogenic, are located along the coast line. The results imply that due to modest CO 2 -volumes and relatively long transport distances CO 2 transport by ship is the least costly transportation option for most of the sources individually as well as for most of the potential cluster combinations during ramp-up of the CCS transport and storage infrastructure. It is furthermore shown that cost of ship transport increases modestly with increasing transport distance which, in combination with poor injectivity in reservoirs in the Baltic Sea, indicate that it may be less costly to transport the CO 2 captured from Finnish and Swedish sources located along the Baltic Sea a further 800-1300 km to the west by ship for storage in aquifers with higher injectivity in the Skagerrak region or in the North Sea.