{"id":2773,"date":"2020-01-01T08:29:15","date_gmt":"2020-01-01T14:29:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/?p=2773"},"modified":"2022-08-17T13:51:20","modified_gmt":"2022-08-17T18:51:20","slug":"us-natural-gas-and-renewables-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/2020\/01\/us-natural-gas-and-renewables-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"US Natural Gas and Renewables – Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"

Part 2 \u2013 If Renewables Can\u2019t Get Us There, What Will?\u00a0<\/strong><\/em><\/h1>\n

INTRODUCTION:\u00a0What are the \u201cOther\u201d Options for Power Generation and Heat?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Part 1<\/a>\u00a0of this Tip of the Month examined how much energy equivalence that the U.S. is currently consuming in the form of hydrocarbons, and applied an energy parity analysis to investigate how renewables compare to the energy density of hydrocarbons. Other challenges of renewable wind and solar energy were reviewed, including negative energy pricing when there is too much wind, the limitation on battery storage for base-load supply, as well as the other \u201chidden\u201d costs associated with local grids that generate a significant amount of their electricity via renewable resources.<\/p>\n

An update to Part 1, is an extreme example of the negative pricing problem that hit European markets in December of last year.\u00a0 According to Cornwall Insight, a period of high wind generation and low demand led to a negative day-ahead price for power in the UK for the first time on December 9, 2019. The prices for delivery from 03:00 – 04:00 local time on the hourly day-ahead auction dropped to minus \u00a32.84 (-$3.34)\/MWh [1].<\/p>\n

At the time of negative day-ahead delivery prices, Great Britain was receiving 1.1 GW of power through two interconnectors from the Netherlands and exporting 1.4 GW through another interconnector to France. The negative value of electricity was also experienced that day in the German, Dutch and Belgian day-ahead power markets.\u00a0 German prices reached a low of -\u20ac16.09\/MWh (-$18.90\/MWh) from 02:00 – 03:00 local time [1].\u00a0 For power generators\/suppliers, this is a serious concern as they are financially at risk due to loss of revenue.\u00a0 This is a much larger scale example of the oversupply \/ negative value pricing issue than the examples highlighted in Part 1.<\/p>\n

Clearly, with the limitations of wind and solar due to intermittency among others, we need other viable alternatives.\u00a0This Tip will focus on the following options:<\/p>\n

1. Hydrogenation of the gas grid<\/strong><\/p>\n

2. CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage)<\/strong><\/p>\n

3. Gas displacing coal and oil (power generation)<\/strong><\/p>\n

4. New Technology and Other Options?\u00a0 What do those options look like?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Part 3 of this tip will cover alternative fuels for transportation and heavy industry, and Part 4 will address the elephant in the closet, and perhaps the greatest challenge to modern society: how to attain net zero emissions.<\/p>\n

Hydrogenation of the Gas Grid \u2013 \u201cBlue\u201d or \u201cGreen\u201d Hydrogen?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The biggest question is if hydrogen is viable.\u00a0 \u201cBlue\u201d hydrogen refers to H2<\/sub>\u00a0that is produced via steam methane reforming using natural gas as the units feed stream.\u00a0 It certainly has positive attributes.\u00a0 When combusted, hydrogen simply produces water.\u00a0 The current natural gas infrastructure could be used, there are plenty of depleted reservoirs around the world available for CO2<\/sub>\u00a0Sequestration, and H2<\/sub>\u00a0has a Wobbe index that is within 10% of natural gas.\u00a0 Steam methane reforming (SMR) is a well understood and commonly applied technology for the manufacture of chemicals (ammonia and methanol), and for refinery operations.<\/p>\n

The uncertainties in the viability of \u201cBlue Hydrogen\u201d lie in the fact that SMR has a relatively low conversion efficiency to create hydrogen (65 \u2013 70%).\u00a0 These numbers do not reflect the energy requirements for the pre-combustion carbon capture, nor the energy required to compress and inject the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0into storage reservoirs.<\/p>\n

Other challenges include leakage of the hydrogen (H2<\/sub>\u00a0is more likely to leak in current infrastructure), lower energy density (1 kWh requires 0.282 std m3<\/sup>\u00a0of hydrogen vs. 0.091 std m3<\/sup>\u00a0natural gas).\u00a0 One can think of this decrease in energy density as a decrease in pipeline transport capacity of hydrogen by roughly 25% as compared to natural gas.\u00a0 In addition, there may be a risk of possible hydrogen embrittlement for high pressure gas distribution systems.\u00a0 The technical and engineering issues require additional evaluation.<\/p>\n

Two hydrogen projects are being conducted in the UK.\u00a0 The H21<\/sub>\u00a0project started in 2016, by Northern Gas Networks, the gas distributer for the North of England. Based on a blueprint of the city of Leeds, Northern Gas Networks concluded it was technically possible and economically viable to decarbonise the UK\u2019s gas distribution networks by converting them from natural gas to 100% hydrogen, from \u201cblue\u201d hydrogen combined with CCS. \u00a0The project has been ongoing and in 2020 with additional funding and other industry partners, they will complete background testing at the Health and Safety Laboratories, Buxton. These tests will be completed on a large variety of network assets including pipes, valves and joints and \u00a0will confirm potential changes in background H2<\/sub>\u00a0leakage levels. They also aim to complete consequence testing in 2020 at the DNV-GL facility at RAF Spadeadam in Cumbria. This study will involve tests to confirm any changes to safety risk under background conditions, failure and operational repair on a hydrogen gas network. Once the field trials have proven that it is safe to move forward, they are planning to hold a live trial on the gas network in 2021\/2022 [2].<\/p>\n

The other project in the UK is HyNet, also located in Northern England [3]. \u00a0The project is focused on enriching their natural gas network with up to 20% H2<\/sub>\u00a0for use in homes.\u00a0They are studying SMR for H2<\/sub>\u00a0production coupled with Carbon Capture, Usage and Storage at Merseyside. They are also investigating hydrogen transportation opportunities.\u00a0They are forecasting that the full engineering design work is to kick off in early 2020.\u00a0The group estimates that the widespread use of a blend of hydrogen with natural gas could save around 6 million tonnes of CO2<\/sub>\u00a0emissions every year, which is the equivalent of taking 2.5 million cars off the road.<\/p>\n

It should be noted that hydrogen generation via electrolysis of water with wind energy is possible.\u00a0In some circles, this is referred to as \u201cGreen\u201d hydrogen. This technology would fit for small hydrogen demands, but it is not cost effective nor competitive as a technology for use in generation to supply the national grids.<\/p>\n

Carbon Capture (Usage) and Storage?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Carbon capture and storage has been practiced in a number of forms in the Oil and Gas Industry for many years.\u00a0 The first application of this technology is better known as CO2<\/sub>\u00a0Enhanced Oil Recovery, which started in 1972 in the Kelly-Snyder oil field in Texas [4]. \u00a0Figure 1 provides a schematic of CO2<\/sub>\u00a0EOR. Historically the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0supply originated in naturally occurring CO2<\/sub>\u00a0reservoirs.\u00a0 Now, new projects are increasingly utilizing the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0captured from other industrial activities.\u00a0 The CO2<\/sub>\u00a0is injected, dissolves into the oil and carries oil to surface.\u00a0 The CO2<\/sub>\u00a0that is co-produced with the oil is separated and re-injected in a continuous loop.\u00a0 At the end of the CO2<\/sub>-EOR project, the reservoir becomes a CO2<\/sub>\u00a0storage site.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Figure 1<\/strong>.\u00a0Schematic of CO2\u00a0EOR<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In addition, the technology of acid gas injection, as pioneered by our friends in Canada has also been in practice for many years. \u00a0The first acid gas injection project was completed by Chevron near Edmonton, Canada started up in 1989 [5].\u00a0 The technology started out on small volumes, but with today\u2019s technology, very large gas rates with high downhole pressures can be achieved. \u00a0The acid gas (H2<\/sub>S and CO2<\/sub>) are removed from the produced natural gas using an amine contactor, and are collected at the amine regenerator near atmospheric pressure. A schematic of Acid Gas Injection (AGI) is provided in Figure 2. For oil and gas production facilities, this technology has been well established.<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\"Figure
Figure 2<\/strong>.\u00a0Acid Gas Injection Schematic<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The world\u2019s first large-scale carbon storage project was developed in 1996 by Statoil off the Norwegian coast, injecting nearly 50 MMscfd into the North Sea from their Sleipner gas field production [5].<\/p>\n

The technology for CCS on industrial facilities, however, is still a relatively \u201cnew\u201d industry and has been slow in market uptake due to the capital and operating costs associated with it.\u00a0 Amine technology to remove acid gases from produced natural gas is well established.\u00a0 Amine technology to remove CO2<\/sub>\u00a0from combustion off-gas has a number of challenges due to the presence of oxygen (degrades solvent), SOx, and NOx.\u00a0 There are only two power plants in the world that utilize CCS.<\/p>\n

The Boundary Dam Power Station Unit 3 is the world\u2019s first operating coal-fired power plant to implement a full-scale post-combustion carbon capture and storage system started up in 2015 [6]. \u00a0In the U.S., the Petra Nova facility, a coal-fired power plant located near Houston, Texas, the largest carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the world.\u00a0 The post-combustion carbon capture process started up in 2017.\u00a0 The CO2<\/sub>\u00a0that is removed from the power plants flue gas is then used for enhanced oil recovery [7].<\/p>\n

The Netherlands is undergoing a major project to collect and capture the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0from three of the largest industrial ports in Europe; Rotterdam, Antwerp and Ghent.\u00a0This is the first project of this type in the world and represents a major investment in CCS.\u00a0The project’s plan is to construct the CO2<\/sub>\u00a0pipeline network in the port of Rotterdam by 2026.\u00a0 Once that is completed, they are planning on constructing a cross-border pipeline to Antwerp and the North Sea port by Ghent. The CO2<\/sub>\u00a0will be injected into two depleted gas fields in the North Sea [8].\u00a0This will be a project to keep an eye on in terms of progress and success.<\/p>\n

The biggest challenge facing CCS is the costs associated with the carbon capture, and the compression, in particular, if the process is post-combustion due to the low operating pressures.<\/p>\n

Gas displacing coal and oil (power generation)?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Natural gas is now becoming recognized as the best transition fuel whilst the necessary technologies and concepts for renewable or other technologies improve and mature.\u00a0 Secondly, gas in the form of LNG is developing a strong position in marine and transportation fuels, and this will impact on oil consumption.\u00a0 Natural gas in the form of CNG or LNG as a transportation fuel will be addressed in a separate Tip of the Month later in 2020.<\/p>\n

For power generation, natural gas or LNG replacing coal can result in 50% less GHG emissions.\u00a0 But recognize that if one is using LNG, then 8% of the inlet gas must be combusted to liquefy LNG\u00a0 Natural gas provides roughly 80% of the world\u2019s heat demands.\u00a0 If not planned for properly, that is not a number that will be easily or quickly replaced without severe standard of living consequences.<\/p>\n

New Technology and Other Options: What do these look like?<\/em><\/strong><\/h3>\n

Biofuels and Nuclear<\/strong><\/h3>\n

There are other options for power generation.\u00a0Nuclear is an obvious choice, in that it is arguably cheaper than renewable options.\u00a0 It is more expensive than gas or coal, but it eliminates the concerns over CO2<\/sub>\u00a0emissions.\u00a0 The capital costs of the projects are high, and there is uncertainty around permitting and decommissioning.\u00a0 Germany has made the decision to opt-out of nuclear energy, France currently derives roughly 75% of its electricity from nuclear, but is planning to scale that back to 50% by 2035.\u00a0 The Middle East are considering nuclear options, with United Arab Emirates implementing the GCC\u2019s (Gulf Cooperation Countries) first nuclear plant.\u00a0 A recent study conducted by Lazard [10], in the U.S., concluded the following range in costs levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for different energy alternatives presented in Table 1.<\/p>\n

It should be noted that the costs in Table 1 are for generation only. It excludes the cost of integration and any costs associated for intermittent technologies.\u00a0\u00a0 It also does not take into account reliability or intermittency-related considerations (transmission and back-up generation costs associated with wind and solar). \u00a0The assumption for the Solar Thermal Tower with Storage includes a battery with only 10 hours of storage.\u00a0 The Solar PV (photovoltaic) Utility-Scale cost options assume a 30 MW system with no storage capacity.<\/p>\n

Biofuels could be an option as well, but the supply of biofuels is insufficient to meet baseload energy demands.\u00a0 It can fit in the appropriate locality, but it is not a slam dunk alternative to natural gas.<\/p>\n

Table 1.<\/strong>\u00a0LCOE ($\/MWh) for Alternative and Convention Power Production Options [10]<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\n

New Technology and Other Options: What do these look like?<\/strong><\/em><\/h3>\n

Pyrolysis, Carbon Hub and NetPower<\/strong><\/h3>\n

<\/h3>\n

Scientists of Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) and the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS) in Potsdam have succeeded in using natural gas in a climate-neutral way. Their process is based on methane splitting, \u201cpyrolysis\u201d, using a liquid metal tin catalyst.\u00a0Methane is continuously fed from below into a column of liquid tin kept at very high temperatures, up to 1200 \u00b0C [~2200 \u00b0F]. \u00a0Pyrolysis is the thermal cracking of methane to produce hydrogen and solid carbon, effectively eliminating the need for CCS.\u00a0This represents significant cost savings and makes hydrogen generation possible in locations, such as Spain, that do not have access to depleted gas reservoirs. Pyrolysis technology has been known for years, but with the older technologies, the reactors would plug with the produced carbon fines making the technology impractical for commercial applications.\u00a0The new process developed by KIT does not plug and provides a carbon by-product that is valuable which can be re-used and repurposed [11].\u00a0In December of 2019, KIT announced that it is partnering with Wintershall Dea to further develop this process to an industrial scale, with the goal of having this work completed within the next three years [12].<\/p>\n

Solid carbon or natural graphite is on the EU\u2019s critical raw materials list and has been since the list\u2019s creation in 2011. Europe imports nearly all of its graphite. China is the worlds\u2019 largest supplier of graphite.\u00a0Primary purposes are for steel making, but it also feeds into high-tech industries such as Li-ion battery production. In addition, graphene is becoming of great interest to many countries. Graphene s a two-dimensional atomic crystal made up of carbon atoms arranged in a hexagonal lattice. It can be thought of as a giant molecule that can be chemically modified, with potential for a wide variety of applications, ranging from electronics to composite materials. The Graphene Flagship project, worth \u20ac1bn ($1.12bn) in the EU is the largest research and development initiative to date [12].<\/p>\n

Rice University has launched Carbon Hub, which was inaugurated by Shell with a $10 million dollar commitment.\u00a0Carbon Hub will fund $100 million on research to efficiently deploy energy technologies that result in zero-emissions.\u00a0The research team includes more than 70 researchers from 20 universities, national laboratories and research institutes.\u00a0The research is focused on splitting hydrocarbons to produce hydrogen fuel, and solid carbon materials that can be used as building materials, components for cars, clothing, and more [14].\u00a0This research sounds very much like the work being conducted by KIT and Wintershall Dea. These two organizations will be ones to watch in the future, as this technology appears to be very competitive and can supply not only clean energy, but also a source for petrochemical feed stocks that the modern world has grown dependent upon.<\/p>\n

The last new technology that I would like to review is NetPower.\u00a0The process uses the Allam cycle, named after the technology\u2019s lead inventor, Rodney Allam.\u00a0The process flow sheet is shown in Figure 3.\u00a0Natural gas is combusted with pure oxygen, and uses super-critical CO2<\/sub>\u00a0as a working fluid in a semi-closed loop to drive a combustion turbine. Its byproducts are liquid water, pipeline-ready CO2<\/sub>, and argon and nitrogen, which could also be sold as commodities [14].<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Figure 3.<\/strong>\u00a0Net Power Schematic, Courtesy of Net Power<\/em><\/p>\n

In 2018, the company has a started up a pilot plant near Houston, which can generate 50 MW of electricity.\u00a0 They have plans to scale this facility up to commercial power plant capacity of 300 MW as soon as 2021.\u00a0 This is another alternative technology that has significant potential in terms of the equivalent energy density of hydrocarbons and eliminating CO2<\/sub>\u00a0emissions [14].<\/p>\n

SUMMARY<\/strong><\/p>\n

This tip of the month explored some of the current options being investigated to provide a clean energy solution in light of the global concerns over climate warming.\u00a0It focused only on the aspects for heating and power generation.\u00a0Two additional tips will be forthcoming that will review alternative solutions for transportation, and what can be done to improve our dependence on the Petrochemical industry.<\/p>\n

To learn more about the global natural gas economy, we suggest attending our\u00a0G2<\/strong>\u00a0(Overview of Gas Processing)<\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

By: Kindra Snow-McGregor, P.E.<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. Negative Auction Prices Hit European Generators,\u00a0Natural Gas News<\/em>, 18 December 2019.<\/p>\n

2.\u00a0www.H21.green<\/a><\/p>\n

3.\u00a0https:\/\/hynet.co.uk\/<\/a><\/p>\n

4. Hyne, Norman, Ph.D. Nontechnical Guide to Petroleum Geology, Exploration, and Production, Pennwell, 1995.<\/p>\n

5. Acid Gas Injection \u2013 The Next Generation, John J. Carrol, Gas Liquids Engineering, Ltd., Calgary, Alberta Canada.<\/p>\n

6. The Pursuit and Advancement of Carbon Capture and Storage, J. Romeo, Power, 3 March 2019<\/p>\n

7. Petra Nova is one of two carbon capture and sequestration power plants in the world, EIA, 31 Oct 2017<\/p>\n

8. Empty North Sea gas fields to be used to bury 10m tonnes of CO2<\/sub>, D. Boffey, The Guardian, 9 May 2019<\/p>\n

9. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2019, 68th<\/sup>\u00a0Edition<\/p>\n

10. Lazard\u2019s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis \u2013 Version 11.0,\u00a0https:\/\/www.lazard.com\/media\/450337\/lazard-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-110.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

11, Pyrolysis lifts prospects for hydrogen from natural gas [Brussels Conversation], Natural Gas News, 27 June 2019.<\/p>\n

12. KIT and Wintershall Dea collaborating to develop industrial-scale methane pyrolysis for CO2-free production of hydrogen, Green Car Congress, 05 December 2019.<\/p>\n

13. Shell and Rice University partner on hydrocarbon-based zero-emissions technologies, World Oil, 11 December 2019.<\/p>\n

14.\u00a0https:\/\/www.netpower.com\/technology\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Part 2 \u2013 If Renewables Can\u2019t Get Us There, What Will?\u00a0 INTRODUCTION:\u00a0What are the \u201cOther\u201d Options for Power Generation and Heat? Part 1\u00a0of this Tip of the Month examined how much energy equivalence that the U.S. is currently consuming in the form of hydrocarbons, and applied an energy parity analysis to investigate how renewables compare […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"coauthors":[17],"class_list":["post-2773","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1pQc4-IJ","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2773","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2773"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2773\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3060,"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2773\/revisions\/3060"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2773"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2773"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2773"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jmcampbell.com\/tip-of-the-month\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=2773"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}