The Quest Facility: Learning from 6 years of Operations Simon O'Brien Global CCS Deployment Lead
The companies in which Royal Duch Shell ple directly and indivedly owns investments are separate load entitles. In this presentation "Shell", "Shell Group" and "Royal Duch S to Royal Duch Shell plc and its subsidiones in general. Likevise, the works "we", "iss" and "our" ore clos used to refer to Royal Duch Shell plc and its subsidiones in gener useful purpose is served by identifying the porticular entity of entitles. "Subxidaries", "Shell subxidaries" and "Shell companies" as used in this presentation refer to ent Entites and unincorporated arrangements over which Shell has joint control are generally referred to as "joint ventures" on "joint operations", repectrely. Entites over whic referred to as "associates". The term "Shell interest" is used for convenience to indicate the direct and/ or indirect ownership interest held by Shell in an entity or uninc This presentation contains forvard-looking statements (vitim the meaning of the U.S. Private Securites Litigation Reform Act of 1995) concerning the financiel condition, res other than statements of historical foct are, or moy be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are b involve known and unbrown risks and uncertainfes that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from from those expressed or implied in these so concerning the potential exposure of Royal Dutch Shell to morket risks ond statements expressing monogement's exposedions, beliefs, estimates, forecast, protections and assu of terms ond phrases such as "aim", "ambition", "anticipate", "ballow", "could", "expect", "gools", "intend", "moy", "objective", "outlook", "plan", "probably", "project", " “will” ond similar terms and phrases. There are a number of foctors that could affect the future operations of Royal Dutch Stell and could couse these results to differ mote this presentorion, including (vvitibut limitation); (o) price fluctuations in crude of ond ndturel gas; (b) clanges in demond for Shell's products; (c) currency fluctuations shore and industry compatition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (b) risks associated with the identification of suitable potented acquiation properties and targets, an doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sencions; (i) legislative, fiscal and regulatory developments including regulatory measures odd various countres and regions; [I] political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of controcts with governmentel entitles, deloys or odv shared coats; (m) riks associated with ithe import of partemics, such as the COVID-19 (coronovirus) outbreak; and (n) clonges in froding conditions. No assurance is provided dividend porments. All forward-looking statements contained in this presentation care expressly qualited in their entirely by the coutionary statements contained or referred looking stotement. Additionel risk factors that more affect future results are contained in Royal Dutch Shell's Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2020 (onclobe at yo expressly audify all forward looking statements contained in this presentation  ond should be considered by the reader.  Each forward looking statement special only as of th ple nor ony of its subsidiones undertake ony obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement os o result of new information, future events or other inf stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation. We may have used certan terms, such as resources, in this presentation that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) atrichy produbis us from including in disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov. 2
■ Refinery (opened in 1984) ■ 100 kbpd nameplate capacity ■ Chemicals plants (Styrene in 1984 and Glycols in 2000) ■ Upgrader (opened in 2003 and expanded in 2011) ■ 255 kbpd nameplate capacity ■ Quest Carbon Capture and Storage ■ 1 million tonnes CO2 capture/yr Copyright of Shelle
◾ Predicted total cost of Quest:  $1.35B CAN (FEED, Capital + 10 years OPEX) ◾ The governments of Alberta and Canada contributed $745M and $120M respectively to Quest, for a total of $865M CAN ◾ Requirements – Quest will: ◾ Only receive direct financial support until a net revenue threshold is reached ▪ Adhere to stringent annual reporting with a comprehensive MMV plan ■ Conduct extensive knowledge sharing
◾ Carbon tax credits provide a long-term commercial incentive for capture and sequestration ◾ Pore space tenure – permission to inject CO2 into the subsurface ◾ Requirements for monitoring, measurement and verification ◾ Quantification protocol – accounting scheme for injected CO₂ ◾ Clarify long-term liability, closure planning
■ Community around pipeline and wells were new to Shell ■ CCS/CO2 pipelines were seen as "unknown" ■ Thorhild County was announced as new location for regional dump ■ Right before Quest announcement ■ Divided community ■ We were seen as “dumping” our waste there as well ■ Significant stakeholder engagement effort required
■ Located at the Scotford Upgrader, north of Edmonton, Alberta (Canada) ■ JV with Canadian Natural Upgrading and Chevron ■ CO2 capture from 3 hydrogen manufacturing units with rates up to 3600 tonnes/day. ■ One million tonnes represents about 1/3 of the Upgrader’s emissions – equivalent to the output of 250,000 cars! ■ 65 km pipeline to storage facility north of Scotford ■ Storage in secure saline reservoir – Basal Cambrian Sands (BCS) ■ Started commercial operations in Oct, 2015
■ Standard amine technology (Shell's ADIP-X) utilized for CO2 removal from raw H 2 ■ CO, compression via an 8 stage, integrally geared compressor ■ 9-11 MPa discharge, ■ 12-16 MW power consumption: 1/3 of Quest emissions ■ CO2 dehydration via tri-ethylene glycol (TEG) to 4 lb H2O/MMScf water content spec ■ Integrated facility design in excess of 1.2 Million tonnes per annum(Mtpa) radity (operations sophies United Mu Cog (Compressor a Wit | Copyright of Shell ---

Compressor Reverse Rotation
■ First compressor shutdown in May 2015 resulted in reverse rotation up to 500 rpm after rapid deceleration ■ Additional blow-off capacity added to 4th, 5th, and 6th compressor stages ■ Successful test of the new blow-off arrangement in August 2015
Other Issues
■ Some furnace issues on HMU3 limiting capture ■ Carbon steel in low pH water service ■ Discharge to water treatment not properly scoped ■ Foaming/flooding in the amine absorbers tied to carbon filters
■ 65 km, 12″ CO₂ pipeline with 6 block valves (every 4-15 km) ■ Route selected to meet stakeholder requirements ■ Over 330 ROW crossings ■ 30+ re-routes to accommodate landowner input ■ Design pressure: 14.8 Mpa ■ Material – Z245.1 Carbon Steel ■ High strength and high toughness at low temperature to prevent long running ductile fracture
■ Pipeline Pigging Receiver Design – not able to accommodate all pig sizes, including cleaning, maintenance and smart pigs for inspection. ■ Pig Receiver Locations - only allow pigging up to LBV3 when the final wellsite is not in use ■ Solar Panel Reliability - not functional during winter days with limited sunlight, required additional fuel cells ■ Analyser reliability – created regulatory issue and required additional sampling
Stratigraphy Reservoir Quality Fractures/faults 3rd Party Interference
■ High Quality Reservoir: Basal Cambrian Sands (17% porosity, 1000 mD permeability) at a depth of 2000 m ■ Seals: thick, regionally extensive: Middle Cambrian Shale (70m) and Lotsberg Salts (100m) ■ Existing fluid: saturated saline brine ■ Very secure storage – the only possible leaks sites are at the wells ■ Comprehensive Measurement, Monitoring and Verification (MMV) Plan
Storage Facility consists of three well pads: ◾ Each pad has 1 injection well, 1 deep monitoring well and multiple shallow ground water wells ◾ Conventional drilling methods ◾ Multiple steel casings for injection wells, 3 in the freshwater zone, all cemented to surface: very secure
◾ Addresses Containment and Conformance ◾ First of a kind – conservative approach ◾ Comprehensive: from atmosphere to geosphere ◾ Risk-based, site-specific and independently reviewed ◾ Combination of new and traditional technologies ◾ Considerable baseline data collected before start-up . Extensive: expensive ◾ Adaptive – updated every 3 years, learning from experience
Migration of CO2 or BCS brine above the Upper Lotsberg Salt Monitoring Systems: Monitoring Systems: . DHPT, Logging, Annulus Pressure DHPT, Seismic, MSM, InSAR Top Event Legend Passive barriers or mitigations; these are always present (A=Aquitard, B= Baffle, S = Seal, AU = Auxiliary Storage) Active barriers or mitigations – Informed by MMV data and responses to reduce containment risk to ALARP
◾ Focus on addressing key risks: drive towards ALARP ◾ Reduce or eliminate those technologies that do not drive decisions ◾ Focus on well integrity and near well-bore ◾ Tiered approach – much of the data analysis is on as needed basis: ◾ Tier 1: early warning system – continuous monitoring near well-bore ◾ Tier 2: periodic monitoring near well-bore ◾ Tier 3: longer time-frame risks and contingent data that can be analysed in case of Tier 1/2 triggers
Tier 1: Tubing Head and Annular Pressures Jan-20  Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20 Aug-20 Sep-20 Oct-20 Nov-20 Dec-20 ◾ Essential well integrity monitoring ◾ Production casing by tubing annulus contains Drillsol with a nitrogen (N2) cushion above ▪ Stable pressures and Drillsol levels confirm annular integrity Distribution of microseismic events in depth, 2016-2020 ◾ Geophone array in monitoring well ◾ Continuous recording, daily analysis and reporting ▪ Event locations in the basement and small magnitudes confirm no risk to containment
◾ Time lapse Vertical Seismic Profiles used to image the change in lateral extent of the CO2 plume over time ◾ Pulse Neutron Logs used to verify the vertical distribution of CO2 in the reservoir ◾ Model has been refined with improved reservoir properties – good history match achieved ◾ Pressure build-up (∆P) in the BCS forecast to be less than 2 MPa over the life of the project
◾ Declining injectivity due to halite precipitation: Notable drops following well interventions ◾ Not a concern for first four years of injection ◾ Remediation with water flush successfully reversed decline in 2019 ◾ Remediation with water flush successfully reversed decline in 2019   > 250% increase in injectivity! ◾ Subsequently applied to all 3 wells – all had excellent results
◾ Hydrate formation during first post-injection logging operation, caused operational delays ◾ “CO₂ compatible” elastomers swelled during depressurization, making retrieval difficult ◾ Weeping well head seals - looks like possible issues with material coatings or grease compatibility ◾ Subsurface operational processes were new to Downstream – getting them established was difficult ◾ Onboarding wells/MMV technologies to a DS site was very challenging ◾ Seismic imaging/monitoring below multiple coals and salt took several iterations 24
◾ Operations are continuing smoothly: >98% reliability ◾ Capture and monitoring costs well below expectations ection Rate ◾ Amine and TEG recycle has been very high ◾ Well performance has been good, more than enough capacity with 3 wells running ◾ Measuring Monitoring and Verification system working well – well logging and seismic confirm CO₂ plume developing as expected ▪ Through the end of 2021, Quest has captured and safely stored more than 6.5 M tonnes of CO2