Estonian-Latvian Transboundary Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport and Storage (CCS) Scenario for the Cement Industry

The climate target of Estonia for 2050 is to decrease greenhouse gas emissions by 80% compared to 1990, including 67% from industry and the energy sector. By 2016, 61% of this target has been reached, but an additional 10.2 Mt of annual emissions must be reduced from the industry and the energy sector by 2050. To achieve this goal, two CO2 capture and storage (CCS) scenarios were presented, and for the first time in the Baltic Region, both of the scenarios involve the cement industry (AS Kunda Nordic Tsement). North Blidene and Blidene structures in Latvia were selected for these scenarios, their structure maps, geological sections and 3D geological models were constructed, and CO2 storage capacities were calculated using improved estimation of all the parameters. Minimum, maximum and average capacities were calculated for optimistic and conservative cases for two structures. Their total optimistic capacity (min-max/mean) is 186-380/297 Mt, while the conservative is 33.6-68.0/53.4 Mt. The average optimistic capacity is more than two times higher than the capacities reported previously (132 Mt, Vangkilde-Pedersen, et al., 2009a), explained by estimated larger area and higher CO2 density in the reservoir. The average conservative capacity is lower by 2.5 times, explained by the higher conservative storage efficiency applied before. The first CCS scenario is composed for CO2 emissions produced by AS Kunda Nordic Tsement Plant (KNC), captured using Ca-looping technology and transported to the Blidene structure. According to the EU Emissions Trading System, KNC produced 0.56 Mt/CO2 in 2017 and will produce about 16.8 Mt/CO2 emissions during the next 30 years. For this scenario even the average conservative estimate of the Blidene structure (17.8 Mt) will be sufficient for more than 30 years. Only one borehole at the dome of the Blidene and 750 km of pipelines of 300 mm diameter are planned. However, the costs for this scenario could be relatively high considering high capital costs for the capture, the compression station and the transport pipelines. According to (EPRI, 2015) the costs per one ton of CO2 avoided for transport and storage of small volumes of CO2 over long distances could be from several to ten times higher than transport of large quantities to smaller distances. Also, this scenario does not enable Estonia to reach its 2050 strategical climate targets. The second CCS scenario is proposed for CO2 emissions produced and captured by KNC, Eesti Elektrijaam and Balti Elektrijaam, two of the largest industrial CO2 emission sources in Estonia, and the largest industrial CO2 emitter in Latvia - Latvenergo, TEC-2, all of them collaborating in one joint CO2 transport and storage scenario into North-Blidene and the Blidene structures together. Sharing estimated expenses among project partners will make CCS project more attractive to all parties involved. The share of Estonian CO2 emissions in this scenario will be about 93.4%, including 5% by KNC, and the Latvian emissions will compose 6.6%. Three sources from Estonia and one source from Latvia produce 11.26 Mt/CO2 every year. Seven boreholes at the dome of the North Blidene structure and one borehole at the dome of Blidene structure are planned, considering 1.5 Mt injection rate per one borehole, per year. The construction of about 800 km of pipelines of 800 mm diameter are planned. Considering the Latvian’s 50 years of experience with Inčukalns underground natural gas storage, the optimistic estimated mean value of CO2 storage capacity was applied, supporting CO2 storage for the duration of 26 years for the Estonian-Latvian transboundary project in the second scenario. Compared to the previously modelled Estonian-Latvian CCS scenario for the Balti Elektrijaam and Eesti Elektrijaam, with their estimated eight years storage duration into South-Kandava and Luku-Duku structures (Shogenova, et al., 2011a), this scenario has the advantage of Latvian-Estonian cooperation of four of the largest CO2 producers in the Baltics, including cement industry, it has a longer project duration (26 years), and it will help to both countries to reach their strategical climate targets