Design and Operation of CCS Networks withShipping: A Full-Chain View
March 2024

CCS: full-chain design and operation
The CCS industrial hub:• Shared transport & storage
infrastructure for CO2disposal• CO2 sourced from industrial
emitters and hydrogenproducers• Transport via a combinationof pipelines and shipping

How does shipping operate incombination with capture,pipeline and disposal
infrastructure?

CCS is a new industry
There are about 30 CCS projects inoperation (data from the GCCSI).
All of them are either:•EOR (which isn’t CCS);•a pilot or small-scale project;•Gorgon LNG CCS (a historicallytroubled project), or;•Qatar LNG CCS (which we don’tknow much about).

None of them are shipping projects.
We are still learning.

Integrating shipping into CCS
Project drivers• Cost• Safety• Operability

A simple project is an operableproject.

Some early assumptions
around shipping don’t always
hold true.

Case Study 1: Blue hydrogen to offshore storage
This case study is “based on a true story”.
The map is fake – I’m showing blue hydrogen being
produced at the Pace CCS London office.

• A new blue hydrogen plant, producing H2 fromgas, with CO2 capture.
• Dedicated shipping shuttles to offshore disposal,
with minimum infrastructure floating buoy at thepoint of injection.

Project assumption: MP shipping (for minimum ship
cost and alignment with Northern Lights)

Case Study 1: Blue hydrogen to offshore storage
This a pressure-enthalpy chart, for Northern
Lights CO2 (February 2024 updatedspecification).

Wellhead conditions• Pressure is on the y-axis• Enthalpy – heat – is on the x-axis

The green star shows the minimum
temperature (0 °C), or minimum enthalpy, atthe injection wellhead.
• MP shipping has lower enthalpy thanneeded. Heating at the point of injection isrequired.
• EP shipping has higher enthalpy thanneeded. Heating is not required.

EP shipping

MP shippingCase Study 1: Blue hydrogen to offshore storage
What have we learned:• About 100 MW of heating is required for the MP
shipping case (based on the planned injectionrate).
• The cost and practicality of providing this heat isa showstopper.
• The true cost of the project required review of fullchain operability and design.

Project status: MP shipping dropped. Projectreturned to concept stage.

Case Study 2: CCGT with CO2 export by ship
This case study is also “based on a true story”.
The map is also fake – I’m showing CO2 capture
from a gas turbine at the Pace CCS London office,with export to Scotland.

• An existing large CCGT, with retrofitted CO2
capture, with export via shipping to a third-partyproject.
• Interim CO2 storage required at a busy harbour.
• No local pipeline or disposal infrastructure.

Project assumption: LP shipping (for maximum ship
size and economies of scale)Case Study 2: CCGT with CO2 export by ship
This the pressure-enthalpychart.

The green star shows theambient air conditions. Thisis the enthalpy where theCO2 will disperse in theevent of a release.
• A release from LPshipping storage requires
about 50% more heat
before it will disperse.

• EP shipping storage
containers are muchsmaller.

EP shipping

LP shipping

Environmental / airconditions

Case Study 2: CCGT with CO2 export by ship
This a CO2 MP release event, in
Mainz Germany in 2015.

Released CO2 from low enthalpy
conditions is very cold. It forms
cold CO2 fog and dry ice.
• A release from EP storage
containers is lower volume.
• A released from EP shippingstorage disperses more quickly,
because less environmental
heat is required.

Case Study 2: CCGT with CO2 export by ship
Captured CO2 always comes withimpurities.
For brownfield CCS, the CO2 capture
unit is usually the most expensive itemin the full-chain design.
Non-polar impurities are more solubleat EP conditions compared with MP orLP conditions.
• EP shipping allows for less pure CO2.
• Less pure CO2 allows for cheaper,
simpler capture technologies, with noliquefaction process needed.

Specification

EP Conditions

LP or MPCO2 content(minimum)95%

99.81%

N2 (maximum)

2.2%

H2 (maximum)

0.8%

CH4 (maximum)

4.7%

Major and common non-polar shown only.
LP/MP specification as per Northern Lights(February 2024.)

0.19%

Case Study 2: CCGT with CO2 export by ship
What have we learned:• EP shipping is safer than other options due to thehigher enthalpy of the harbour storage conditions,and the smaller size of the storage vessels.
• EP shipping enables lower cost capture.
• The true cost of the project required review of fullchain operability and design.

Project status: LP shipping assumption underreview.

Summary
CCS is a new industry.
We are still learning.

Pace CCS have been asked toindependently review shipping
conditions on about 15 CCS projects
in Europe & Asia.
• When we started, none of thoseprojects were considering EPshipping.
• Now, all those projects consider
EP shipping as an option, or as
their base case design.

Our lesson: consider the full chain.

Thank YouMatthew Healey
matt@paceccs.com