Co-generation, Ethanol Production and CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery
Model for Environmentally and Economically Sound Linked Energy Systems

Kansas Geological Survey
Open-file Report 2002-6

Conclusions:

Russell’s linked energy systems are unique
When co-generation and the planned CO2 EOR pilot project get underway it will be the first time ever that these three energy systems have been linked.

Linkages should prove highly beneficial
If the full CO2 stream from the ethanol plant is utilized for CO2 EOR over a ten year period significant benefits from the links would be realized:

  • Economic

$88,000,000

  • Energy Gained

31 trillion BTU

  • CO2 Avoided

1.6 million tons


Russell model should be scalable
The current project may represent the approximate minimum size for given assumptions. The maximum size project could be an order of magnitude larger.

Ethanol expansion provides unique opportunity
EOR offers the ethanol industry a potential market for Co2 from new and larger facilities if located close to EOR target reservoirs.

Acknowledgements:

We wish to thank the partners in the CO2 enhanced oil recovery project, U.S. Department of Energy (project manager Daniel Ferguson), MV Energy, LLC, ICM, Inc., USEP, LLC, Kinder-Morgan CO2 Company and the University of Kansas (Kansas Geological Survey and Tertiary Oil recovery Project). Special thanks to William Flanders, Transpetco Engineering, Eric Mork, ICM, Inc., Jeff Nash, USEP, and Don Augustine, City of Russell, for sharing data and knowledge.

References

Augustine, D., 2001. Personal communication, City of Russell.

Beecy, D. and V. Kuuskraa, 2001. The role of geologic options in a national carbon management strategy, (abs); 2001 American Association of Petroleum Geologists Annual Convention, V. 10.

Delucchi, M. A., 1998. Lifecycle Energy Use, Greenhouse-Gas Emissions, and Air Pollution from the Use of Transportation Fuels and Electricity. Davis, CA, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California-Davis: 245.

Dubois, M.K., A.P. Byrnes, R.E. Pancake, G.P. Willhite, and L.G. Schoeling, 2000. Economics show CO2 EOR potential in central Kansas, Oil & Gas Journal, V. 98.23, pp. 37-41

Dubois, M.K., A.P. Byrnes, and W.L. Watney. 2001. Field development and renewed reservoir characterization for CO2 flooding of the Hall-Gurney Field, central Kansas (abs); 2001 American Association of Petroleum Geologists Annual Convention, V. 10, p.
A53. Also KGS Open-file Report 2001-38 http://www.kgs.ku.edu/PRS/publication/OFR2001-38/toc1.html

Eaton Chemical Inc. Bioenergy Conversion Factors; http://echeminc.com/Solvent%20Properties/alcohols.htm

Egbert, R.I. 1996. An investigation of methods for reducing the cost of pumping oil in Kansas, KEURP Project KRD-9409, submitted by Center for Energy Studies, Department of Electrical Engineering, Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas.

Egbert, R.I. 2000. Electric cost savings issues in oil production. Presented a North Midcontinent PTTC seminar, September 12, 2000. Wichita, Kansas.

EIA, 2001. Annual Energy Outlook 2002 With Projections to 2020; DOE/EIA-0383(2002).

EIA, 2001. International Energy Annual 1999. Washington DC, DOE/EIA-0219(99), Energy Information Administration.

EPA, 1985. Appendix A to Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

EPA, 1998. Supplement D to Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

KASS, 2001. Kansas Farm Facts 2001. Topeka, Kansas Agricultural Statistics Service, Kansas Department of Agriculture: 114.

KSU, 1998. Kansas Agricultural Chemical Usage, 1996 Corn Pesticide Summary. Manhatten, Cooperative Extension Service, Kansas State University.

Martin and Erni, 1999. HMC, cement CO2 conversion factor; http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standard/cement.xls

McArdle, P., P. Lindstrom, M. Mondshine, S. Calopedis, N. Checklick, and S. Billups. 2001. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2000; DOE/EIA-0573(2000).

McDonald, T., G. Yowell, and M. McCormack, 2001. U.S. ethanol industry production capacity outlook, California Energy Commission staff report No. P600-01-017.

Mork, E., 2002, ICM, Inc., personal communication.

Pankaj Bhatia, 2000. World Resources Institute, ethanol CO2 conversion factor http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standard/ammonia.xls

Perry, T.W., 1984, The nutritional value of grain alcohol fermentation by-products for beef cattle; North Central Regional Research Publication No. 297, Illinois Bulletin No. 780, June, 1984.

Pimentel, D., 1991. “Ethanol Fuels: Energy Security, Economics, and the Environment.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics: 1-13.

Renewable Fuels Association, 2002) Ethanol industry sets annual production record in 2001; RFA website, http://www.ethanolrfa.org/ereports/er012802.html

Reynolds, R.E., 2002, Infrastructure requirements for an expanded ethanol industry DOE/EIA subcontract No. 4500010570. (http://www.afdc.doe.gov/pdfs/6235.pdf)

Shewbert, K., 2001, Airgas CO2, U.S. Department of Energy ethanol workshop, Des Moines Iowa, August 29, 2001.

Urbanchuck, J.M., 2000. Ability of the U.S. ethanol industry to replace MTBE (prepared for governors' ethanol coalition); RFA website: http://www.ethanolrfa.org/RFAFinalrev.doc

White, S. W., 1998. Net Energy Payback and CO2 Emissions from 3He Fusion and Wind Electrical Power Plants, University of Wisconsin - Madison.

Williams, P., 2000. The Permian Basin; Oil and gas Investor, Vol. 20, No. 9, September, 2000.

top of report


e-mail : webadmin@kgs.ku.edu
Last updated March 2002
http://www.kgs.ku.edu/PRS/Poster/2002/2002-6/P3-07.html