GEOLOGICAL STORAGE OF INDUSTRIAL CO 2 EMISSIONS IN THE BALTIC STATES: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS Alla Shogenova 1, Saulius Sliaupa 2,3, Kazbulat Shogenov 1 Rasa Sliaupiene 2, Rein Vaher 1 and Angelina Zabele 4 1 Institute of Geology, Tallinn University of Technology, 2 Institute of Geology and Geography, Lithuania 3 Vilnius University 4 Latvian University

Problem  Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), emitted largely from the burning of fossil fuels, is the main agent causing global warming.  According to the Kyoto protocol signed by the Baltic countries in 2002, the level of air-polluting greenhouse gases should be reduced by 8% compared to the 1990 level.  Reduction of carbon dioxide could be reached using different measures including : 1.the improvement of energy efficiency and demand, 2.use of renewable energy sources 3.capture and geological storage of CO2 (CCS).

CO 2 capture and storage process

 In 2006 the Baltic States, together with other European countries, started an inventory of major CO 2 emission sources, assessment of CO 2 geological storage capacity and dissemination of information about CO 2 capture and storage in the frame of  EU GEOCAPACITY (25 countries) project and  CO2NETEAST (8 countries) project supported by EU Commission Framework Programme 6. Programme 6.  Both project were organized by GEO ENeRG – European Network for research in GEOENERGY European Network for research in GEOENERGY

 Compared to the other European countries, the Baltic States are in a rather unique geological setting. Most of the countries contain a number of small basins that have different characteristics.  Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are situated within one common Baltic sedimentary basin. Therefore, a joint study is required for the assessment of the geological sinks.  The source types and emission amounts differ considerably in the Baltic countries, depending on the socio-economic conditions.  Geological conditions are also different, as these countries represent different parts of the Baltic basin.

Baltic States 1990 – 2005 GHG emissions in CO 2 equivalents  1990: Reduction in 2005  48 Mt in Lithuania 53%  42.6 Mt in Estonia 51%  26.4 Mt in Latvia 59%

Energy Sector  89% of GHG in Estonia  72% in Latvia  58% in Lithuania

GHG (%) by sectors SectorsEstoniaLatviaLithuania Energy Agriculturte Industrial processes Waste Transport

All registered industrial sources (European Trading Scheme)  12.7 Mt (42 sources) % of total GHG in Estonia  2.98 Mt (92 sources) % in Latvia  6.6 Mt (89 sources) % in Lithuania

Emissions per capita  Estonia tonnes  Lithuania tonnes  Latvia tonnes  6.6 tonnes in Europe and Central Asia (data of the World Bank).

Baltic industrial emmisions  24 big emissions (+ 3 in Lithuania and +2 in Estonia close to 100kt)  2005:  11,5 Mt in Estonia  5,6 Mt in Lithuania  1,9 Mt of CO2 in Latvia

Industrial CO 2 emissions in the Baltic States

Industrial CO 2 emissions in Estonia COMPANYNAMEPLANTNAMECITY REGION CO 2 tons YEAR Eesti Energia AS (AS Narva Elektrijaamad)Eesti ElektrijaamAuvere küla North- East Eesti Energia AS (AS Narva Elektrijaamad)Balti Elektrijaam Auvere küla,Elektrijaama tee 59 North- East AS Kunda Nordic Tsement Kunda, Jaama 2 North- East Eesti Energia AS (AS Iru Elektrijaam)Iru Elektrijaam Maardu, Peterburi tee 105North VKG AS (OÜ VKG Energia) OÜ VKG Energia Lõuna SEJ Kohtla-Järve, Keemia 2A North- East Eesti Energia AS (AS Kohtla-Järve Soojus)Ahtme ElektrijaamKohtla-Järve, Ritsika 1 North- East AS Silmet Grupp (AS Sillamäe SEJ)AS Sillamäe SEJSillamäe, Kesk 2 North- East Viru Keemia Grupp AS (OÜ VKG Energia) OÜ VKG Energia Põhja SEJ Kohtla-Järve, Elektriku 3 North- East Kiviõli Keemiatööstuse OÜ Kiviõli, Turu 3 North- East Viru Keemia Grupp AS (Viru Õlitööstus AS) VKG Oil AS, Järveküla tee 14Kohtla-Järve, Järveküla tee 14 North- East Dalkia International (AS Tallinna Küte)Mustamäe katlamajaTallinn, Punane 36North Dalkia International (AS Tallinna Küte)Kadaka katlamajaTallinn, Kadaka tee 181North

 In Lithuania -Latvian–Lithuanian border  (Mazeikiai–Akmene area),  oil-processing factory Kt  EPS Kt of CO2  In Latvia, - western part of the country.  Liepaja metallurgical enterprise Kt of CO2,  Liepaja EPS Kt of CO2  cement factory in Broceni Kt of CO2.  Three EPSs emit 619, 381 and 136 Kt of CO2 in the Riga area  Cement production - northern Lithuania.  The Naujoji Akmene Boiling Plant for Cement Plant produces 783 Kt of CO2.  southeastern Lithuania - EPS in Elektrenai (715 Kt of CO2),  two EPSs in Vilnius (701 and 260 Kt of CO2)

Only industrial sources >100 kt CO 2 will be captured  After capture, CO 2 can be either stored or re-used.  CO 2 can be stored in geologic formations including  depleted oil and gas reservoirs  deep saline aquifers and (salinity >100g/l)  unminable coal seams and abandoned coal mines  CO 2 can also be fixated in the form of minerals.

Geological storage for CO 2

Baltic Emissions and natural gas pipelines Russia – Estonia – Latvia – – Lithuania (WP1)

Depths of top of the Cambrian aquifer. The P-T fields of gaseous and supercritical state of CO 2 (P = 73.8 bars, T = 31 o C) are shown. The line of the geological cross-section is indicated.

Geological cross-section across Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania Major siliciclastic aquifers are shown in yellow Geological cross-section across Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania Major siliciclastic aquifers are shown in yellow

Prospective for undeground gas storage structures in Latvia (LEGMA, 2007)

Incukalns local structure in Latvia (LEGMA, 2007)

General Geology of Estonia Top of the Precambrian basement is shown by contours. Flexures above the basement fault are shown by yellow lines. General Geology of Estonia Top of the Precambrian basement is shown by contours. Flexures above the basement fault are shown by yellow lines. Section lines are shown by green..

General Geology of Estonia  Section along Valga-Letipea line is modified after Puura & Vaher, 1997.

Stratigraphy and properties of Cambrian reservoir rocks

Hydrogeology of Estonia  Hydrogeological cross-section of Estonian bedrock (compiled by R.Perens, 1997, prepared for GEOBALTICA project by IG TU, edited for EU GEOCAPACITY project)

Ordovician-Cambrian Aquifer System  Compiled by R.Perens,  Prepared for GEOBALTICA project by IG TU, edited for EU GEOCAPACITY project.

Cambrian-Vendian (Ediacaran) Aquifer System  Compiled by R.Perens,  Prepared for GEOBALTICA project by IG TU, edited for EU GEOCAPACITY project by IGTUT.

Baltic Emissions and natural gas pipelines Russia Estonia – Latvia – – Lithuania

CONCLUSIONS  The Middle Cambrian siliciclastic reservoirs are considered prospective formations for CO 2 trapping in the Baltic region.  The structural trapping is an option in Latvia having number of large anticlinal structures with a total potential of more than 500 Mt in the Middle Cambrian aquifer.  The shallow sedimentary basin (100–500 m), small depth of the closed oil-shale mines (60–65 m) and use of all aquifers for drinking water supply make geological conditions in Estonia unfavourable for CO2 geological sequestration.  Lithuania has a potential for CO 2 solubility storage in Devonian and Middle Cambrian saline aquifers, but without possibilities for structural trapping (Šliaupa et al. 2005).

CONCLUSIONS  The Inčukalns underground gas storage operating in Latvia, which is used for the supply of natural gas to Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, is a positive example of collaboration in the region.  The existing infrastructure of pipelines, already connecting the large Baltic CO 2 sources with Latvian prospective anticlinal structures, provides a possibility of reducing the price of the future CO 2 pipelines and a good prospect for geological storage of the substantial Baltic industrial CO2 emissions in the most favourable geological conditions available in Latvia.

Other options in Estonia  Eesti Energia is utilizing a process for neutralizing alkaline ash transport water through a reaction with liquid CO 2.  In June of this year Eesti Energia launched a research project to study the potential for CO 2 capture by the alkaline ash that is generated as a residue during power generation. This solution will be an alternative to the many developing CO 2 sequestration technologies.