Proceedings of ESCAPE 35ISSN: 2818-4734
Volume: 4 (2025)
Table of Contents
LAPSE:2025.0296
Published Article
LAPSE:2025.0296
Pipeline Network Growth Optimisation for CCUS: A Case Study on the North Sea Port Cluster
Victoria Brown, Joseph Hammond, Diarmid Roberts, Solomon Brown
June 27, 2025
Abstract
By 2050 around 12% of cumulative emissions reductions will come from Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS) making it an essential component in the path towards net zero [1]. Focus will initially be on the retrofitting of fossil fuel power plants, which will shift to hard-to-decarbonise industries such as iron, steel, and concrete [1]. Such industries are often grouped together in industrial clusters. Comprising both large and small point sources concentrated over a defined geographical area, industrial clusters offer an opportunity to maximise the impact of CCUS whilst also improving economic feasibility [2]. The North Sea Port (NSP) cluster an example of this. Within the NSP cluster an initial set of five emitters are to join a capture, conditioning, and transport network by 2030. From there other emitters within the area will be able to join incrementally to 2050 [3]. However, the emitters who join and the timing of their connection will have a significant effect on the evolution the network. The pipeline network design will balance design requirements for initial emitters in a backbone network, with requirements for encouraging and enabling expansion. This study builds on scenarios defined between 2030 and 2050 [3] and applies a multi-period evolutionary-based approach (Steiner tree with Obstacles Genetic Algorithm (StObGA)) to predict pipeline year-on-year network growth in the NSP cluster. This provides a novel approach to the problem. The results are used in an examination of the potential growth of the pipeline network and an investigation of trade-offs necessary in the infrastructure design.
Keywords
Suggested Citation
Brown V, Hammond J, Roberts D, Brown S. Pipeline Network Growth Optimisation for CCUS: A Case Study on the North Sea Port Cluster. Systems and Control Transactions 4:900-905 (2025) https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.187046
Author Affiliations
Brown V: School of Chemical, Materials, and Biological Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S1 3JD, England, UK
Hammond J: School of Chemical, Materials, and Biological Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S1 3JD, England, UK
Roberts D: School of Chemical, Materials, and Biological Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S1 3JD, England, UK
Brown S: School of Chemical, Materials, and Biological Engineering, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S1 3JD, England, UK
Journal Name
Systems and Control Transactions
Volume
4
First Page
900
Last Page
905
Year
2025
Publication Date
2025-07-01
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: 0900-0905-1597-SCT-4-2025, Publication Type: Journal Article
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2025.0296
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.187046
Article DOI
Download
Files
Jun 27, 2025
Main Article
License
CC BY-SA 4.0
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
547
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Jun 27, 2025
 
Verified by curator on
Jun 27, 2025
This Version Number
v1
Citations
Most Recent
This Version
URL Here
https://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2025.0296
 
Record Owner
PSE Press
Links to Related Works
Directly Related to This Work
Article DOI
References Cited
  1. The International Energy Agency (IEA). https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2020
  2. Realise CCUS. https://realiseccus.eu/ccus-and-refineries/industrial-clusters
  3. J. O. Ejeh, S. Brown and D. Roberts. D4.8. Report on Techno-Economic Evaluation of the 2030 North Sea Port cluster. C4U. (2023a)
  4. Geske J, Berghout N, van den Broek M. Cost-effective balance between CO2 vessel and pipeline transport - Part 1. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 36:175-188 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.01.026
  5. Geske J, Berghout N, van den Broek M. Cost-effective balance between CO2 vessel and pipeline transport - Part 2. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 33:122-134 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2014.12.005
  6. Mechleri E, Brown S, Fennell P, Mac Dowell N. CO2 capture and storage (CCS) cost reduction via infrastructure right sizing. Chemical Engineering Research and Design 119:130-139 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2017.01.016
  7. D'Amore F, Romano M, Bezzo F, Optimal design of European supply chains for carbon capture and storage from industrial emission sources including pipe and ship transport. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 109, 103372. (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103372
  8. Romano M, Anantharaman R, Arasto A, Can Ozcan D, Ahn H, Wilco Dijkstra J, Carbo M, Boavida D. Application of advanced technologies for CO2 capture from industrial sources. Energy Procedia 37: 7176-7185 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.655
  9. Grant T, Guinan A, Shih C, Lin S, Vikara D, Morgan D, Remson D. Comparative analysis of transport and storage options from a CO2 source perspective. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 72:175-191 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2018.03.012
  10. Knoope M, Ramírez A, Faaij P. A state-of-the-art review of techno-economic models predicting the costs of CO2 pipeline transport. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 16, 241-270 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.01.005
  11. Wilkes M, Mukherjee, S, Brown, S. Linking CO2 capture and pipeline transportation: sensitivity analysis and dynamic study of the compression train. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 111: 103449 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103449
  12. BS EN 10208-2 Steel pipes for pipelines for combustible fluids. Technical delivery conditions - Pipes of requirement class B. (2009)
  13. ISO 6708:1995(en) Pipework components - Definition and selection of DN (nominal size)
  14. Heijnen W, Ligtvoet A, Stikkelman M, Herder M. Maximising the worth of nascent networks. Networks and Spatial Economics: 14, 27-46 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-013-9199-1
  15. André J, Auray S, Brac J, Wolf D, Maisonnier G, Ould-Sidi M, Simonnet A. Design and dimensioning of hydrogen transmission pipeline networks: European Journal of Operational Research229, 239-251 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.02.036
  16. Parolin F, Colbertaldo P, Campanari S. Development of a multi-modality hydrogen delivery infrastructure: An optimization model for design and operation. Energy Conversion and Management: 266 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2022.115650
  17. Rosenberg M, French T, Reynolds M, While L. A genetic algorithm approach for the Euclidean Steiner tree problem with soft obstacles. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference 618-626 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1145/3449639.3459397
  18. Kruskal J. On the shortest spanning subtree of a graph and the traveling salesman problem. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 7:48-50 (1956) https://doi.org/10.2307/2033241
  19. Ejeh J, Martynov S, Brown S. An MINLP model for the optimal design of CO2 transportation infrastructure in industrial clusters. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 52:3085-3090 (2023b) https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-15274-0.50492-3
  20. Hammond J, Rosenburg M, Brown S. Understanding Costs in Hydrogen Infrastructure Networks: A Multi-Stage Approach for Spatially-Aware Pipeline Design. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 102:430-443 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.12.273
  21. Abrell J. EUETS.INFO
  22. Hammond J, Rosenburg M, Brown S. A Genetic Algorithm-Based Design for Hydrogen Pipeline Infrastructure with Real Geographical Constraints. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 53:631-636 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-28824-1.50106-X