20120630-IEA-Joint_IEA‐OPEC_workshop_on_CO2‐enhanced_oil_recovery_with_CCS_29页_746kb

Summary of Joint IEA-OPEC Workshop on CO₂-Enhanced Oil Recovery with CCS

Core Content

The Joint IEA-OPEC workshop on CO₂-enhanced oil recovery (EOR) with carbon capture and storage (CCS) was held in Kuwait City from 7–8 February 2012. The workshop aimed to explore the potential of CO₂-EOR with CCS as a means to address energy security and climate change concerns. It brought together experts from OPEC member countries and international CO₂-EOR specialists to discuss the commercial, economic, technical, regulatory, and political aspects of the technology.

The workshop focused on differentiating between "pure" CO₂-EOR projects and those that integrate CCS, highlighting the latter as a more complex and potentially more impactful technology for climate change mitigation. The discussion also considered the factors influencing the adoption of CO₂-EOR with CCS, including preconditions that support its implementation and barriers that hinder it.

Key discussion points included the benefits and challenges of CO₂-EOR with CCS, the importance of measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) in demonstrating climate benefits, and the need for standardised greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting frameworks.

Main Objectives

• To examine the role of CO₂-EOR with CCS in supporting early demonstration of CCS.
• To identify factors affecting the uptake of the technology in different regions.
• To assess the potential for CO₂-EOR with CCS in OPEC member countries.
• To explore possible policy interventions that could support its deployment.

Key Points and Discussions

2.1 Benefits of CO₂-EOR with CCS

• Approximately 50% of CO₂ injected during CO₂-EOR operations is retained in the reservoir due to geological trapping, even if not intended.
• CO₂-EOR can serve as a "win-win" technology, both increasing oil recovery and reducing GHG emissions.
• Existing regulatory frameworks for fluid injection into subsurface can be adapted for CO₂ storage, reducing the need for new legislation.
• Communities near oil fields generally accept EOR practices, which may lower public resistance to CCS.

2.2 Challenges for CO₂-EOR with CCS

• Increasing CO₂ storage can lead to higher reservoir pressure, increasing the risk of cap rock fracturing and fluid displacement.
• Legacy wells may not be suitable for CO₂ storage due to the use of non-CO₂-resistant cements.
• Phased flooding operations can make incremental storage difficult once wells are abandoned.
• Economic considerations may lead operators to prioritize CO₂ storage over oil production if the latter is less profitable.
• The Weyburn-Midale project in Canada was noted as an example where both WAG and pure CO₂ flooding are used to access different pay zones.

2.3 Importance of Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV)

• MRV is essential to demonstrate the effectiveness of CO₂-EOR as a climate mitigation tool.
• Lack of dedicated MRV programmes has led to the climate benefits of CO₂-EOR being largely unrecognized.
• The Weyburn project in Canada is a rare exception where CO₂ injection is reported as sequestered.
• MRV is also critical for carbon finance mechanisms, ensuring that the environmental benefits are verifiable.

2.4 Greenhouse Gas Accounting Issues

• There is uncertainty about whether CO₂-EOR can be optimized for enhanced storage.
• Differences in GHG accounting frameworks between countries (e.g., Norway vs. the USA) affect how CO₂ injection is reported.
• The IPCC has proposed standardized approaches for CO₂ storage accounting, but these are not uniformly adopted.
• Participants emphasized the need for clarity in GHG accounting and MRV to validate the "win-win" claims of CO₂-EOR.

Factors Affecting Uptake

3.1 Preconditions Supporting Uptake

• Presence of oil fields with suitable reservoir properties (depth, pressure, temperature, oil saturation, etc.) for CO₂ flooding.
• Availability of affordable and reliable CO₂ sources, such as natural CO₂ reservoirs and gas processing plants.
• Favorable economic conditions, including government incentives and support for CO₂-EOR.
• The existence of a well-developed infrastructure for CO₂ transportation and injection, particularly in the US.

Drivers for CO₂-EOR Uptake in OPEC Member Countries

• Abu Dhabi: Interest in CO₂-EOR with CCS is growing, driven by the need to increase oil recovery and reduce emissions.
• Ecuador: Potential for CO₂-EOR with CCS is seen in the context of improving oil recovery from mature fields.
• Kuwait: The country has a strategic interest in using CO₂-EOR to enhance oil production while supporting CCS.
• Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA): Discussions focused on the potential for CO₂-EOR with CCS to contribute to long-term energy security and climate goals.

Policy Interventions

• The report suggests that policy interventions are necessary to support the adoption of CO₂-EOR with CCS, including:
  • Developing standardized GHG accounting frameworks.
  • Implementing MRV programmes to ensure the long-term isolation of CO₂.
  • Providing regulatory clarity and support for CO₂ storage.
  • Encouraging public-private partnerships and financial incentives.

Key Projects Discussed

Conclusion

The workshop highlighted the potential of CO₂-EOR with CCS as a viable technology for both energy security and climate change mitigation. However, it also identified significant challenges, including the need for robust MRV systems, standardized GHG accounting, and regulatory frameworks. The lack of widespread adoption of CO₂-EOR with CCS globally, despite its benefits, underscores the importance of further research and policy development to support its implementation. The report serves as a foundation for future discussions and actions on this technology.