Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (2024)

1. Introduction

In 2022, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human activities reached 53.8 GtCO2eq [1], the highest ever recorded level and a 1.4% increase over the emissions from 2021. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion represented 71.6% of the total emissions, while methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and fluorinated gases (F-gases) contributed 21%, 4.8%, and 2.6% to the total, respectively. China (29.2%), the USA (11.2%), India (7.3%), the EU-27 (6.7%), Russia (4.8%), and Brazil (2.4%) are the world’s six largest emitters of greenhouse gases, with a combined share of 61.6% in the total global emissions.

By sectors, power generation is the largest contributor to the global GHG emissions. In 2022, the power generation industry accounted for 38.1% of the total GHG emissions and was followed by industrial combustion and processes (25.5%), transport (20.8%), buildings (8.9%), and fuel exploitation (6.7%). Energy-related GHG emissions, including emissions originating from fuel combustion and fugitive emissions, accounted for 41.5 GtCO2eq or 77.1% of the total global GHG emissions in 2022 [2]. Energy-related emissions comprise emissions from coal combustion (15.5 GtCO2eq), oil combustion (11.2 GtCO2eq), natural gas combustion (7.3 GtCO2eq), methane fugitive emissions (4.0 GtCO2eq), emissions from industrial processes (2.6 GtCO2eq), waste combustion (0.3 GtCO2eq), flaring (0.3 GtCO2eq), and N2O emissions (0.3 GtCO2eq). CO2 from carbon oxidation is the largest contributor to energy-related GHG emissions with a share of around 90%, that is, 36.8 GtCO2 in 2022 and 37.4 GtCO2 in 2023 [3].

According to the Paris Agreement from 2015, global warming could have been limited to 1.5 °C if greenhouse gas emissions were to peak before 2025 and emissions were reduced by roughly 50% by 2030. However, the Climate Action Tracker estimates that global emissions in 2030 will be more than twice the emissions of the target level (27 GtCO2eq) and that the world remains very far from limiting global warming to 1.5 °C with current policies and action [4]. In the EU-27, however, GHG emissions continue their downward trend seen over the last three decades. In 2022, EU-27 GHG emissions were 3.6 GtCO2eq and represented only 6.7% of the global GHG emissions, compared to the 14% share in 1990. Relative to the reference levels from 1990, the EU-27 have reduced GHG emissions by 30.0% [5]. This reduction primarily stems from shifts in energy production methods, declining coal consumption and the increasing use of renewable energy sources, and the further adoption of energy efficiency measures in the industry and buildings. In 2020, the COVID-19 lockdown caused a huge drop in emissions, and despite the 2021 rebound, in 2022, the EU-27 emissions remained below 2019 levels. However, the EU member states will need to further intensify their efforts to reach a 55% GHG reduction by 2030 and achieve climate neutrality by 2050.

Climate neutrality was first proposed in 2019 by the European Climate Law [6], which sets a legally binding target of net zero greenhouse emissions by 2050. The climate neutrality plan includes the following: (1) national long-term strategies for EU member states to cut down GHG emissions; (2) climate funds and social policies to aid vulnerable citizens, regions, and businesses; (3) investment in green technologies, including renewable electricity generation, electric vehicles, energy storage and batteries, biofuels, and hydrogen; and (4) carbon management solutions that include the capture, reuse, and storage of carbon dioxide.

Tertiary oil recovery or EOR improves the recovery factor from mature oil and gas fields by a further 5–20% over that obtained with secondary methods [7]. Gas injection (CO2, N2, natural gas), water-alternating-gas (WAG) injection, thermal recovery (steam huff-and-puff, steam flooding, hot water flooding), and chemical flooding (alkali, surfactant, polymer) are the most common EOR methods. The injection of CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) projects will be discussed more closely in the next sections because it represents the most frequent carbon storage practice globally. Gas injection is also termed miscible flooding, as it introduces miscible gases, such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen, or natural gas, into oil reservoirs. EOR with gas injection facilitates the displacement of oil in the reservoir through the mechanisms of oil swelling and the reduction of oil viscosity. Among various miscible gases, CO2 is the preferred injected gas because of the technical and environmental advantages. CO2 is readily available as a byproduct in the petrochemical and energy industries, it is highly soluble in oil, and it can be stored at high pressures in depleted oil field or saline formations reducing, thus greenhouse gas emissions.

2. Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS)

2.1. Global Review of CCUS

Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) can play a pivotal role in aiding the EU’s efforts to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. CCUS could be essential for capturing and storing CO2 emissions from point sources, such as industrial processes and fossil fuel power plants, which are significant contributors to overall emissions. The EU is planning to put forward a CCUS strategy [8] with the following milestones:

  • By 2030, the total annual CCUS capacity should be at least 80 million tons per year (Mtpa). A CO2 transport network should connect major industrial emitters to storage sites in the North Sea and in the Mediterranean Sea.

  • By 2040, all major point sources of carbon emissions in the EU should have access to CO2 cross-border transport and storage infrastructure. Total annual storage capacity should reach at least 300 Mtpa with the addition of 100 Mtpa of atmospheric and biogenic CO2 removal and permanent storage.

  • By 2050, the total annual storage capacity should be at least 500 Mtpa and 200 Mtpa of CO2 from atmosphere (direct air capture—DAC) and biomass combustion.

CCUS is expected to reduce emissions, especially from ‘hard-to-abate’ industries like the petrochemical industry, waste incineration, cement, and steel production. CCUS will accelerate the decarbonization of the power grid, especially in regions that still rely on fossil fuels. CCUS is also a means to generate negative carbon emissions when coupled with direct air capture for the removal of atmospheric CO2 and with bioenergy processes.

The Global Status Report on Carbon Capture and Storage identified 41 operational CCUS facilities, with a total installed capacity of 49 Mtpa in 2023 [9]. Currently, there are 26 facilities under construction, with a total combined capacity of 32 Mtpa. Figure 1 shows the development of the total global capture capacity of CCUS facilities for the period from 2010 to 2023. Under various stages of development, there are 325 CCUS projects with a total combined capacity of 300 Mtpa. The following industries are implementing CCUS technology: natural gas processing (34.3 Mtpa), chemical industry (10.7 Mtpa), power generation (1.7 Mtpa), oil refining (1.4 Mtpa), and iron and steel production (0.9 Mtpa). The two most common storage practices are enhanced oil recovery (EOR), with 37.8 Mtpa, and permanent storage in geological formations, with 11.2 Mtpa.

In the past, each CCUS facility included a capture unit, a compression unit, a transport pipeline, and a dedicated storage site. More recently, CCUS facilities with shared transport networks and storage systems are becoming the preferred technological solution in the continuing attempt to reduce costs and increase system flexibility. The CCUS shared networks reduce operational costs through economies of scale. The CCUS Report [8] estimates that 4200 Mtpa of CO2 could be captured and stored in 160 CCUS hubs established globally with an estimated cost of 85 USD per ton of CO2. Shared CCUS networks and hubs are expected to become crucial if climate neutrality is to be achieved by 2050.

Among the 41 CCUS facilities worldwide, 21 are operational in the USA and Canada, mostly in the natural gas processing and petrochemical industries. Among these, 17 facilities capture and supply the CO2 to EOR projects, while only 4 facilities use dedicated geological formations. This comes as no surprise since the USA introduced tax credit incentives for carbon capture in 2008. Under the 45Q tax credit program, each ton of captured CO2 is incentivized with 85 USD for permanent storage, 60 USD for use in the industry or EOR, 180 USD for DAC and permanent storage, and 130 USD for DAC and utilization. The eligibility to the 45Q program is determined through the minimum annual capture capacity, which is 18,750 tons for power plants with no less than 75% carbon capture efficiency, 1000 tons for DAC units, and 12,500 tons for any other facility.

Over time, CCUS projects have increased in capacity, costs, and technological complexity. The ExxonMobil’s Shute Creek CCUS project started operation in 1986 for an investment cost of 170 million USD and was expanded in 2010 at a cost of 86 million USD. This facility processes raw natural gas from the gas fields in Wyoming (USA) with high contents of sour gases. The gas composition of the inlet gas stream is 65% CO2, 21% CH4, 7% N2, 6% H2S, and 1% He [10]. The facility uses a single-step cryogenic process that separates CO2 and H2S by solidification at low temperatures. The CCUS capacity of the project is 7 Mtpa, and the captured CO2 is sold and transported to EOR projects. The facility also produces 40 million Sm3 of 99.99% pure helium per year, which represent 20% of the world’s helium production. The Shute Creek project was the world’s largest CCUS facility until it was recently surpassed by the Petrobras Santos Basin project and the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line (ACTL) project.

In 2022, the Petrobras project injected 10.6 Mtpa into offshore oil and gas layers for EOR operations using WAG [11]. The technology involves separating CO2 from sour natural gas (25% CO2 content) using polymer membranes and subsequently compressing and reinjecting the CO2 stream into pre-salt reservoirs beneath the ocean. According to Petrobras, the oil and gas reserves are found in the Southern Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of Brazil, in water depths of around 2200 m, beneath thick sediments and salt layers between 4000 and 6000 m [12,13]. The oil and gas reserves are thus found between 6000 and 8000 m below sea level, making drilling and extraction very challenging.

The ACTL project is a 240 km long CO2 pipeline operated by Wolf Midstream. The source of CO2 is industrial emitters: the Sturgeon oil and gas refinery and the Redwater Fertilizer plant. The CO2 is compressed and transported to aging oil and gas fields for EOR operations. At the moment, the ACTL transports 0.5 Mtpa from the Redwater Fertilizer plant and 1.3 Mtpa from the Sturgeon Refinery, but in the future, it is expected to reach 14.6 Mtpa at full capacity [14]. The ACTL is designed with multiple entry points, which will collect CO2 from point emitters such as refineries, coal power plants, petrochemical plants, and natural gas processing plants. The project is expected to store 2 billion tons of CO2 and produce 1 billion barrels of crude oil from CO2 EOR alone. In Europe, two large CCUS offshore facilities are operating in the North Sea and Norwegian Sea. These two CCUS projects are operated by the Norwegian state-owned company Equinor at the Sleipner and Snøhvit natural gas fields. The two CCUS projects have been operating since 1996 and 2008, respectively, with a combined annual capacity of 1.7 Mtpa and have stored a total of 25 Mt of CO2 to date. Sleipner is the first large-scale CCUS project in the world. The project motivation was both financial and technical. The natural gas from Sleipner contains 9% CO2, and it had to be reduced to at least 2.5% in order to satisfy transport and customer needs. On the other hand, being a CCUS project, Sleipner is exempt from paying CO2 taxes and receives carbon credits from the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS). Three years into CCUS operation at the Sleipner site, evidence was found that the CO2 had migrated from its original injection point to a higher-up layer in the Utsira sandstone formation. Fortunately, this top layer was proven geologically bound, and no further evidence of leakage was found. Shortly after commencing CCUS operations at the Snøhvit gas field, a geological analysis revealed that the storage capacity was much less than previously thought. Emergency drilling and fracturing of the formation was initiated in 2010 to increase the Snøhvit’s capacity. The targeted storage site is also monitored for any possible signs of CO2 rejection.

The Norwegian experience testifies that each CCUS project has its own specificities, from technical and economic circ*mstances to the storage site properties and behavior over time. This stresses that each CCUS project should be carefully approached to reduce the risk of unforeseen events, and in case of emergencies, contingency plans should be readily available to respond effectively. Scaling up CCUS will become critical for achieving climate mitigation targets. Flexible and feasible CCUS chains should be developed through supportive policies, including tax incentives, fair mechanisms for carbon pricing, stronger interaction between stakeholders in the CCUS chain, raising public awareness, and community engagement.

2.2. Thermodynamic Constraints of CCUS

Any individual CCUS technology is limited by energy constraints. CO2 capture from a gas stream is energy intensive, and substantial energy is necessary for separating the diluted CO2 from an exhaust gas stream. The volume fraction of CO2 (x) can be as low as 0.04% (400 ppm) for DAC working with atmosphere air, 8–15% for flue gases and post-combustion carbon capture (PCC), or up to 80% for exhaust gases of oxy-fuel combustion [15,16]. The thermodynamic minimum energy depends on the CO2 concentration in the exhaust gas stream and is determined from the second-law analysis and the free energy of mixing.

E capture = R T 0 x x ln ( x ) + ( 1 x ) ln ( 1 x )

In the above equation, the number of moles of the inlet gas stream is 1/x. For instance, DAC technology operates with CO2 concentrations of 400 ppm in the atmosphere, attempting to capture 1 mole of CO2 out of 2500 moles of inlet gas. The minimum energy for CO2 capture is 480 kJ/kg for DAC technology, 166 kJ/kg for PCC working on a gas stream with 12% CO2, and 34 kJ/kg for oxy-fuel combustion with a gas stream with 80% CO2, taking that the ambient temperature is T0 = 288.15 K and the specific gas constant of CO2 is R = 188.9 J/kgK. Besides capture energy demands, CCUS needs compression energy for converting CO2 into supercritical states, which are suitable for transport in pipelines and storage in deep geological formations. The minimum compression energy is the one obtained with the isothermal process, which for an ideal gas is expressed as follows:

The above equation overpredicts the compression energy in the region of high pressures, where real gases significantly deviate from the behavior of ideal gases due to compressibility effects. Therefore, the minimum energy for the compression of a real gas involves calculating the exergy difference between the end state and the initial state:

E comp , real = e end e start = h end h start T 0 ( s end s start )

The minimum energy for real CO2 compression is 213 kJ/kg, assuming a final pressure of pend = 200 bar and an initial pressure of pstart = 1 bar. The overall minimum (capture + compression) is then 693 kJ/kg for DAC, 379 kJ/kg for PCC, and 247 kJ/kg for oxy-fuel. Generally, CCUS systems are designed to achieve CO2 capture rates of η = 0.80–0.90 relative to the inlet gas stream, a reasonable trade-off between capital costs of the equipment and operating costs of energy and materials [17]. If so, the thermodynamic minimum is calculated by subtracting the free energy of the inlet stream, containing an x mole fraction of CO2, with the free energy of the outlet stream, containing a y mole fraction of CO2:

E capture = R T 0 x η x ln ( x ) + ( 1 x ) ln ( 1 x ) 1 η x y ln ( y ) + ( 1 y ) ln ( 1 y )

Mass conservation dictates the balance of total moles and the balance of CO2 moles between inlet and outlet gas streams of the carbon capture unit:

total mole balance : n cap = n inlet n outlet

CO 2 mole balance : n cap = x n inlet y n outlet

The CO2 capture rate is the ratio between the number of captured CO2 moles, which is assumed a pure CO2 stream, and the number of CO2 moles in the inlet stream:

η = n cap x n inlet

The number of moles in the outlet stream (8) is determined by substituting (7) into (5), while the mole fraction of CO2 in the outlet stream (9) is determined by substituting (7) into (6) and using the relation between the inlet and outlet number of moles (8).

n outlet = n inlet ( 1 η x )

y = x η x 1 η x

Assuming a CO2 capture rate of η = 0.85 and taking that the mole fractions of CO2 in the inlet streams of DAC, PCC, and oxy-fuel are x = 0.04%, 12%, and 80%, respectively, from (9), the mole fractions of CO2 in the outlet streams become y = 0.006%, 2%, and 37.5%, respectively. The minimum energy for a CO2 capture rate of 85% is determined from (4), and it is equal to 462 kJ/kg for DAC, 149 kJ/kg for PCC, and 23 kJ/kg for oxy-fuel. Relative to the energy requirements for an ideal CO2 capture rate (η = 1.0), a more reasonable capture rate of η = 0.85 reduces the minimum energy requirements by 3.8% for DAC, 10.6% for PCC, and 32.1% for oxy-fuel. Again, this proves that carbon capture from gas streams with higher CO2 concentrations is more advantageous in terms of energy expenditure.

At present, real-world CCUS technologies achieve second-law efficiencies that are not even close to the thermodynamic minimums. Second-law efficiencies are about 5% for DAC, 14–21% for oxy-fuel combustion, and 19–25% for amine-based PCC [18].

3. CCUS in Croatia

3.1. The EOR Project in Northern Croatia

At present in Croatia, there is one CCUS project using CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), which was developed by the oil and gas company INA and started operations in 2014. The CO2 source is at the natural gas processing plant (NGPP) Molve, serving the gas fields of Molve, Kalinovac, Stari Gradac, Gola, etc., in northern Croatia. The process chart of the CO2 EOR project is shown in Figure 2. These natural gas fields in northern Croatia contain high volume fractions of CO2: from 9% in Stari Gradec up to 23.8% in Molve and 53.6% in Gola. The wet sour gas is dehydrated and sweetened in the NGPP Molve. The CO2 stream is compressed up to 30 bar and transported through an 88 km long and DN500 size pipeline to the compression and liquefaction unit CLU Etan, which is 14 km from the site of the EOR project (Ivanić Grad and Žutica-North). The pressure drop across the pipeline is less than 1 bar. At the CLU Etan, the CO2 stream is compressed to 90 bar, liquefied, and finally pumped to 200 bar. The liquid CO2 is distributed to water-alternating-gas (WAG) injection wells and pumped into the oil fields. The injection capacity is 600,000 standard cubic meters of CO2 per day (Sm3/day), which is equivalent to 0.41 Mtpa.

Between 2014 and 2019, about 300,000 Sm3/day of associated gas was resurfacing from the EOR fields, containing a 40% volume fraction of CO2. The resurfaced CO2 (120,000 Sm3/day) represented 20% of the originally injected CO2 and was vented into the atmosphere [19]. In 2019, the EOR project was upgraded with a recompression unit (CLU Etan), which separates the CO2 from the associated gas, compresses it, and reinjects it into the EOR fields. The separation of CO2 from the associated gas is performed in membrane separators and in an amine unit. The total separation capacity is 500,000 Sm3/day of associated gas, which is intentionally oversized to accommodate for possible future upgrades in the EOR project. The membrane separators and the amine unit are each sized at 180,000 Sm3/day of CO2 (total 360,000 Sm3/day or 0.24 Mtpa). The associated gas is first treated in the membrane separator unit, the principal function of which is to maintain constant CO2 fraction at the inlet of the amine unit and ensure its optimum operation.

The CO2-enriched stream is processed in the amine unit, which uses an aqueous solution with the gas sweetening agent methyldiethanolamine (MDEA) to remove sour gases such as CO2 and H2S. In the absorber column, the lean amin solution absorbs sour gases at high-pressure and low-temperature conditions (40 bar and 40 °C) in counterflow with the incoming gas stream. Sweetened natural gas exits the absorber column and is further processed, including dehydration, fractionation, and compression, prior to being supplied to transport pipelines. The fractionation includes isolating individual hydrocarbon products, such as ethane, propane, butane, and pentane. The rich amine solution is regenerated in the stripper column at low-pressure and high-temperature conditions (1.5 bar and 120 °C). Wet sour gases from the stripper column are dehydrated and compressed up to 200 bar in a four-stage compression and intercooling process.

Figure 3 shows the pressure–enthalpy charts for the five-stage compression–intercooling process of the primary CO2 stream and the four-stage compression–intercooling process of the secondary (resurfaced) CO2 stream implemented for the EOR project in northern Croatia.

The primary CO2 stream (Figure 3-left) from the NGPP Molve plant is compressed to 30 bar using a three-stage compression (1.5–4.5 bar, 4–12 bar, and 11.5–30 bar); then, it is transported for 88 km to the location of CLU Etan. The pressure drop in the pipeline is less than 1 bar because the DN500 pipeline is oversized, making the CO2 velocity and flow friction rather low. At the CLU Etan, the primary CO2 stream is compressed to 90 bar, then converted into a supercritical dense liquid phase and finally pumped to 200 bar and injected into the EOR fields of Žutica and Ivanić-North. The specific compression work is equal to 354 kJ/kg, and the cooling requirement is 602 kJ/kg. Taking that the capacity of the CO2 primary stream is 600,000 Sm3/day, the compression duty turns out 4.6 MW and the cooling duty 7.8 MW. It was assumed that the CO2 is cooled to 35 °C in each intercooling stage (C1out–C2in, C2out–C3in, C3out–C4in) except for the liquefaction stage (C4out–P5in), which needs to be cooled down to 22 °C. The isentropic efficiency of all compressors and the pump is constant and equal to 0.80.

The secondary CO2 stream (Figure 3-right), which is obtained by separation from the associated gas, is recompressed in the vapor state until reaching the supercritical conditions necessary for EOR injection. Low-pressure gas compression is performed by screw compressors in two stages, which increase the pressure from 1.5 bar to 6 bar in the first stage and from 6 bar to 26 bar in the second stage. High-pressure compression is performed by reciprocating compressors, which increase the pressure from 26 bar to 70 bar in the first stage and from 70 bar to the final 200 bar in the second stage. The specific recompression work is equal to 387 kJ/kg, and the cooling requirement is 635 kJ/kg. The CO2 recompression capacity of 360,000 Sm3/day turns into a total compression duty of 3 MW and a cooling duty of 5 MW. CO2 cooling between compression stages is performed by wet cooling towers.

The other possible pathway for CO2 recompression would be compressing it up to a pressure either lower or higher than the critical pressure of CO2 (pcrit = 73.77 bar) and then refrigerating and converting it into the liquid state. In that case, the final compression stage would be performed by a pump rather than a compressor. The CO2 pump would reduce the compression work, but cooling requirements would increase, and the installation of an additional refrigerating unit would be also necessary [20].

Primary oil recovery at the oil field of Ivanić and Žutica started in 1963 and lasted for 10 years. Between 1965 and 1967, oil production exceeded 2 million barrels of crude oil (bbl) per year, but these numbers were halved after 1971. Subsequently, secondary recovery started in 1973 with water injection, and by 1975, oil production rates went once again above 2 million bbl. After 20 years of secondary recovery, oil production rates fell below 0.5 million bbl and further decreased below 0.2 million bbl in the following 20 years of exploitation. Tertiary recovery with CO2 EOR started in 2015, and by 2020, oil production rates already increased threefold to above 0.5 million bbl. The oil recovery factor of the primary stage was only 9%, and the secondary stage was able to increase it to around 35%. The CO2 EOR project is expected to further increase the recovery factor to around 50% [21], as shown in Figure 4.

Over a 5-year period, from October 2014 to October 2019, around 1 billion Sm3/day of CO2 was injected in the oil fields of Ivanić and Žutica-North. The Ivanić oil field produced 1,579,429 barrels of oil equivalent (boe), and the contribution of the EOR is estimated at 43%. At the Žutica-North field, oil production was 390,136 boe, and the EOR share was 77% [22]. The Žutica-North field achieved better relative results than the Ivanić field because of a higher reservoir pressure at the start of the EOR project. The minimum miscibility pressure of CO2–oil was estimated at 200 bar, while the reservoir pressure was 190 bar at the Žutica-North site and only 120 bar at the Ivanić site.

During the first few years of the EOR project, the share of CO2 in the associated gas increased more rapidly than previously expected. As a remedy, a water-alternating-gas (WAG) injection process was implemented, aiming for an improved control of oil mobility and for a reduced problem of viscous fingering. After the success at the Ivanić and Žutica-North oil fields, the EOR project was expanded to the Žutica-South and Šandrovac oil fields, with further expansions being planned in the future.

3.2. Future CCUS Projects in Croatia

New CCUS facilities are expected to enter operation by 2030 in Croatia, with a combined capacity of 1.433 Mtpa of CO2. Two CCUS projects involve cement plants. The CO2ntessa project will capture 0.7 Mtpa of CO2 at the cement plant in Našice after converting the kiln to an oxy-fuel technology [23]. The captured CO2 will be stored in a deep saline aquifer. The CO2ntessa project is valued at 400 million EUR and is funded by the EU Innovation Fund. The project will be managed by the NEXE Group, and its main goal is to achieve carbon-neutral cement production by implementing advanced CCUS technology. The project will use pure oxy-fuel combustion, which results in a flue gas composed primarily of water vapor and CO2. The water vapor can be easily condensed by cooling the flue gases, leaving a stream with a high CO2 concentration. This ensures that the CO2 capture is less energy intensive and more cost-effective than CCUS projects involving combustion with regular air. In addition, the combustion chamber is less ventilated, and higher flame temperatures can be achieved with pure oxygen combustion. This improves the thermal efficiency of the combustion process and reduces the fuel consumption. Another advantage is the absence of nitrogen (N2) in the combustion process, thus avoiding NOx emissions and the need for installing DeNOx systems, which are associated with traditional combustion processes.

Another CCUS project in the cement industry is the KOdeCO project, managed by Holcim Croatia. The goal of this project is to achieve net-zero emissions at the Koromačno cement plant by 2028. The carbon capture capacity of the project is 0.367 Mtpa, and the project is valued at 237 million EUR, with 50% support from the EU Innovation Fund [24]. The core technology involves CCUS, specifically using Air Liquide’s Cryocap FG technology, which captures CO2 directly from the flue gases generated by clinker production. This technology achieves CO2 capture rates between 85 and 95% from flue gas streams, with CO2 volume fractions as low as 15%. The technology combines pressure swing adsorption (PSA) with a condensation process. The benefits of the PSA-assisted CO2 condensation include enhanced efficiency, energy savings, and applicability to various industries, such as cement production, power generation, and the petrochemical industry. The PSA unit adsorbs CO2 from a gas stream at high pressures by means of an adsorbent material that selectively captures CO2. Once the adsorbent is saturated with CO2, the pressure is rapidly reduced (hence, the “swing” in pressure), causing CO2 to desorb from the adsorbent. The main function of the PSA unit is to separate flue gases into a CO2-rich stream and an N2-rich stream. The CO2-rich stream is condensed for easier transportation and storage. The liquefied CO2 will be stored in an offshore geological formation under the Mediterranean Sea. The exact site of the CO2 storage has not yet been disclosed, but depleted gas fields in the Northern Adriatic Basin are candidate locations. The KOdeCO project will also integrate advanced water treatment and desalination to minimize freshwater usage.

Three other CCUS pilot projects are planned in Croatia. The first pilot project involves upgrading the fertilizer factory of Petrokemija Kutina with CCUS technology. This project will capture CO2 directly from ammonia production, compress the CO2, and then inject it underground [25]. The capture capacity is estimated at 0.19 Mtpa; the CO2 will be transported and injected into the EOR fields of Ivanić Grad. The second pilot project is developed by the oil and gas company INA and involves an advanced bioethanol production plant in Sisak. The plant will produce bioethanol from the giant grass miscantus and will use CCUS to capture the CO2 at an estimated capacity of 0.055 Mtpa [26,27]. The captured CO2 will be injected into depleted oil reservoirs, ensuring long-term storage and contributing to carbon neutrality. The third project is a closed carbon geothermal energy (CCGeo) power plant that will produce power and heat with near-zero emissions at the location of Draškovec in northern Croatia. The power plant is valued at 81 million EUR and will have a capacity of 18.6 MWe in electricity and 60 MWth in heat. The annual energy generation is estimated at 121 GWh of electricity and 137 GWh of thermal energy [28]. The methane dissolved in the geothermal water will be separated using a low-pressure desorption process and burned for running a gas turbine. The CO2 dissolved in the geothermal water and the CO2 generated by the gas turbine will be captured and reinjected in the geothermal reservoir. Specific CO2 emissions from the geothermal power plant are estimated at 1000 kgCO2/MWh, reflecting the high CO2 and CH4 contents in the geothermal fluid [29]. Thus, the annual capture capacity of the Draškovec geothermal power plant would be 0.121 Mtpa. Geothermal waters in the Pannonian Basin are characterized by elevated gas contents, with high fractions of CO2 and methane. The CO2 is the result of vertical and horizontal gas migration from carbonate minerals, which are thermally decomposed in the deeper parts of the geothermal reservoirs. The methane originates in a process called bacterial methanogenesis, which occurs at depths between 600 and 1200 m and at temperatures between 40 and 60 °C [30].

4. Conclusions

Croatia is actively exploring CCUS technologies for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. CCUS projects are currently being developed across different sectors: in the petrochemical industry, for power generation, in cement production, and in biofuel refineries. At present in Croatia, one CCUS project is operational, with a capacity of 0.41 Mtpa. Two major CCUS projects in the cement industry, with a combined capacity of 1.0 Mtpa, are expected to enter operation by 2030. Another three smaller projects would bring the total planned CCUS capacity to 1.433 Mtpa. The overall (existing + planned) CCUS capacity could reach 1.843 Mtpa by 2030, equivalent to removing 7.9% of the present GHG emissions in Croatia (23.4 MtCO2eq in 2022). Several factors are contributing to the promising CCUS future in Croatia. Croatia is actively participating in EU initiatives related to climate change mitigation and is taking advantage of the EU funds to accelerate investments in CCUS projects. The national policies and regulations in Croatia are aligned with the EU directives, which are promoting the transition to a carbon-neutral economy by mid-century. In 2021, Croatia adopted the low-carbon development strategy, which sees CCUS as key technology for the decarbonization of the power section and of cement production by 2050. Likewise, further research into potential storage sites will be necessary, along with the development of a national CO2 pipeline, which is expected to become part of the larger European CO2 transport and storage network.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: P.B. and I.W.; methodology, P.B. and T.S.; software, I.B. and T.S.; validation, I.W., I.B. and T.S.; formal analysis, P.B. and I.B.; investigation, P.B. and I.B.; resources, I.W.; data curation, I.W. and T.S.; writing—original draft preparation, P.B. and T.S.; writing—review and editing, I.W. and I.B.; visualization, P.B.; supervision, I.W. and T.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Crippa, M.; Guizzardi, D.; Pagani, F.; Banja, M.; Muntean, M.; Schaaf, E.; Becker, W.; Monforti-Ferrario, F.; Quadrelli, R.; Martin, A.R.; et al. GHG Emissions of All World Countries—2023; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2023; Available online: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/0cde0e23-5057-11ee-9220-01aa75ed71a1/language-en (accessed on 1 July 2024).
  2. International Energy Agency (IEA). CO2 Emissions in 2022, IEA Publications, France. 2023. Available online: https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/3c8fa115-35c4-4474-b237-1b00424c8844/CO2Emissionsin2022.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  3. International Energy Agency (IEA). CO2 Emissions in 2023, IEA Publications, France. 2023. Available online: https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/33e2badc-b839-4c18-84ce-f6387b3c008f/CO2Emissionsin2023.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  4. Climate Action Tracker. Climate Action Tracker. 2030 Emissions Gap: CAT Projections and Resulting Emissions Gap in Meeting the 1.5 °C Paris Agreement Goal. December 2023. Available online: https://climateactiontracker.org/global/cat-emissions-gaps/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  5. European Energy Agency (EEA). Total Net Greenhouse Gas Emission Trends and Projections in Europe. 2023. Available online: https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/total-greenhouse-gas-emission-trends (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  6. European Commission. European Climate Law. 2021. Available online: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/european-climate-law_en (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  7. Wang, L.; Tian, Y.; Yu, X.; Wang, C.; Yao, B.; Wang, S.; Winterfeld, P.H.; Wang, X.; Yang, Z.; Wang, Y.; et al. Advances in Improved/Enhanced Oil Recovery Technologies for Tight and Shale Reservoirs. Fuel 2017, 210, 425–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. CCUS Vision Working Group. A Vision for Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage in the EU. 2023. Available online: https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/31163741/ccus-europe-vision-report.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  9. Global CCS Institute. The Global Status Report of CCS 2023, Melbourne, Australia. 2023. Available online: https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Global-Status-of-CCS-Report-1.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  10. CCS Project Database (MIT). LaBarge Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project. Available online: https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/la_barge.html (accessed on 7 August 2024).
  11. Petrobras. Petrobras Santos Basin Pre-Salt Oil Field CCUS, CSLF 2023 Technical Group Mid-Year Meeting, June 2023, Poland. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/6a.%20CCUS%20at%20Petrobras%20-%20CSLF%20meeting%202023%20_%20final%20version%20PDF.pdf (accessed on 7 August 2024).
  12. Formigli, J. Pre-Salt Reservoirs Offshore Brazil: Perspectives and Challenges, Bank of America Energy Conference, November 2007. Available online: https://mz-filemanager.s3.amazonaws.com/25fdf098-34f5-4608-b7fa-17d60b2de47d/apresentacoescentral-de-downloads/0c9c1c9aeb496a23b4c48c824346d8fc156bb0353ca671726e4fe684f012a897/presalt_reservoirs_offshore_brazil_perspectives_and_challenges.pdf (accessed on 7 August 2024).
  13. Abelha, M.; Petersohn, E. The State of the Art of the Brazilian Pre-Salt Exploration, AAPG Annual Convention & Exhibition, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 20–23 May 2018. Available online: https://www.searchanddiscovery.com/documents/2018/30586abelha/ndx_abelha.pdf (accessed on 7 August 2024).
  14. CCS Project Database (MIT). Alberta Carbon Trunk Line Fact Sheet: Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Project. Available online: https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/alberta_trunk_line.html (accessed on 7 August 2024).
  15. Long-Innes, R.; Struchtrup, H. Thermodynamic Loss Analysis of a Liquid-Sorbent Direct Air Carbon Capture Plant. Cell Rep. Phys. Sci. 2022, 3, 100791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Tramošljika, B.; Blecich, P.; Bonefačić, I.; Glažar, V. Advanced Ultra-Supercritical Coal-Fired Power Plant with Post-Combustion Carbon Capture: Analysis of Electricity Penalty and CO2 Emission Reduction. Sustainability 2021, 13, 801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Socolow, R.; Desmond, M.; Aines, R.; Blackstock, J.; Bolland, O.; Kaarsberg, T.; Lewis, N.; Mazzotti, M.; Pfeffer, A.; Sawyer, K.; et al. Direct Air Capture of CO2 with Chemicals: A Technology Assessment for the APS Panel on Public Affairs, POPA Report, American Physical Society. 2011. Available online: https://www.aps.org/publications/reports/direct-air-capture-co2 (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  18. House, K.Z.; Baclig, A.C.; Ranjan, M.; van Nierop, E.A.; Wilcox, J.; Herzog, H.J. Economic and Energetic Analysis of Capturing CO2 from Ambient Air. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 20428–20433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Štavalj, D.; Bator, H.; Perišić, E.; Cota, N. CO2 Recompression at Process Plant Etan. In Proceeding of the 39th International Scientific & Expert Meeting of Gas Professionals, Opatija, Croatia, 8–10 May 2024. [Google Scholar]
  20. Witkowski, A.; Majkut, M. The Impact of CO2 Compression Systems on the Compressor Power Required for a Pulverized Coal-Fired Power Plant in Post-Combustion Carbon Dioxide Sequestration. Arch. Mech. Eng. 2012, 59, 343–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Novosel, D.; Leonard, N.; Mikulić, S.; Mudrić, D. Initial Results of CO2 Injection for Enhanced Oil Recovery from the Ivanić and Žutica Oil Fields. Naft. I Plin. 2018, 38, 57–66. [Google Scholar]
  22. Novosel, D.; Babić, D.; Leonard, N.; Mikulić, S.; Jelić-Balta, J. Five Years of CO2 Injection for Enhanced Oil Recovery from the Ivanić and Žutica Fields—Experience and Results. Naft. I Plin. 2020, 40, 33–49. [Google Scholar]
  23. CO2ntessa—Accelerating the Transition to Climate Neutrality: Climate Neutral Cement Production in NEXE Plant in Našice, Croatia. Available online: https://www.nexe.hr/en/co2ntessa/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  24. KOdeCO Net Zero Project. Available online: https://www.holcim.com/what-we-do/green-operations/ccus/kodeco (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  25. Croatia Plans to Store CO2 in Depleted Oil Fields: Smart, or a Drop in the Ocean? Available online: https://innovationorigins.com/en/croatia-plans-to-store-co2-in-depleted-oil-fields-smart-or-a-drop-in-the-ocean/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  26. Lask, J.; Rukavina, S.; Zorić, I.; Kam, J.; Kiesel, A.; Lewandowski, I.; Wagner, M. Lignocellulosic Ethanol Production Combined with CCUS: A Study of GHG Reductions and Potential Environmental Trade-offs. GCB Bioenergy 2021, 13, 336–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Giant Grass Miscanthus: Bioethanol Source with Negative CO2 Balance. Available online: https://renewable-carbon.eu/news/giant-grass-miscanthus-bioethanol-source-with-negative-co2-balance/ (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  28. CCGeo: Closed Carbon Geothermal Energy, Project Summary, EU Innovation Fund. Available online: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-07/if_pf_2021_ccgeo_en.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2024).
  29. Predovan, M.; Blecich, P. Thermodynamic Analysis of a 17.5 MW Geothermal Power Plant Operating with Binary Organic Rankine Cycle. In Proceedings of the XVIII International Scientific Congress Machines. Technologies. Materials, Borovets, Bulgaria, 10–13 March 2021. [Google Scholar]
  30. Mrazovas, S.; Basic, D. Methane-Rich Geothermal Waters in the Pannonian Basin of Vojvodina (Northern Serbia). Geothermics 2009, 38, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (1)

Figure 1. Global capacity of CCUS facilities between 2010 and 2023.

Figure 1. Global capacity of CCUS facilities between 2010 and 2023.

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (2)

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (3)

Figure 2. The CO2 EOR project in northern Croatia.

Figure 2. The CO2 EOR project in northern Croatia.

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (4)

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (5)

Figure 3. Pressure–enthalpy charts for the compression, transport, and liquefaction process of the primary CO2 stream (left) and for the recompression–intercooling process of the secondary (resurfaced) CO2 stream (right).

Figure 3. Pressure–enthalpy charts for the compression, transport, and liquefaction process of the primary CO2 stream (left) and for the recompression–intercooling process of the secondary (resurfaced) CO2 stream (right).

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (6)

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (7)

Figure 4. Historical and future projected oil production rates at the Ivanić oil field in barrels of crude oil (bbl).

Figure 4. Historical and future projected oil production rates at the Ivanić oil field in barrels of crude oil (bbl).

Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (8)

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.


© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Current Status of Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects Using Carbon Dioxide (EOR CO2) in Croatia (2024)

FAQs

What percentage of captured carbon dioxide is used for enhanced oil recovery? ›

According to the Global CCS Institute, about 73% of CO2 captured every year is used for EOR to push more oil out of depleted fields, to be refined and burnt, producing emissions.

What happens to CO2 in enhanced oil recovery? ›

Following CO2 EOR operations, the CO2 can remain underground in the reservoir, and is thereby prevented from entering the atmosphere. The U.S. Department of Energy has significantly funded and supported CCS projects in the United States, resulting in the most robust portfolio of large-scale CCS projects in the world.

What is the recovery factor of CO2 EOR? ›

CO2 EOR is a type of tertiary oil recovery that can recover even more oil from these existing wells and reservoirs. In CO2 EOR, carbon dioxide is pumped into the oil-bearing rock formation to recover even more oil. CO2 EOR has the potential to recover an additional 15% to 20% of the original oil.

How big is the enhanced oil recovery market? ›

The global enhanced oil recovery market size is estimated to reach US$ 98.74 billion by 2032 from valued at US$ 49.50 billion in 2022 and poised to grow at a CAGR of 7.20% during the forecast period 2023 to 2032.

Which oil companies are doing carbon capture? ›

Chevron, Exxon, Baker Hughes and SLB are racing to scale up carbon capture and storage across the U.S. as the world races to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. The technology today is expensive, logistically complex and faces controversy.

Is EOR the same as fracking? ›

Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) is not commonly considered a form of EOR. Fracking and other forms of well stimulation, permanently change the geology of the formation, creating new pathways for oil or gas to flow.

What are the disadvantages of CO2 EOR? ›

2. Techniques for Injecting CO2 into Subsurface Reservoirs
approachdisadvantages
CO2-foam injection technologyCO2-foam injection technology is a lengthy process
composition of the surfactant is likely to be unstable under harsh reservoir conditions
13 more rows
Mar 18, 2022

What are the disadvantages of enhanced oil recovery? ›

One of the major concerns of using EOR is the environmental impact of the injected substances and the produced fluids. Depending on the type and source of the injection, EOR can result in increased greenhouse gas emissions, water consumption, waste generation, and contamination of soil and groundwater.

What are the three types of enhanced oil recovery? ›

The three major types of enhanced oil recovery operations are chemical flooding (alkaline flooding or micellar-polymer flooding), miscible displacement (carbon dioxide [CO2] injection or hydrocarbon injection), and thermal recovery (steamflood or in-situ combustion).

Is enhanced oil recovery sustainable? ›

From thermodynamics point of view, CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) with CCS option is not sustainable, i.e., during the life cycle of the process more energy is consumed than the energy produced from oil.

What is the source of CO2 for EOR? ›

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CO2 STORAGE IN AN EOR PROJECT

Just as there are certain places where oil, gas and natural CO2 has been geologically trapped and stored in the subsurface, there will be underground reservoirs where CO2 captured from power plants and industrial facilities can be safely and securely stored.

What does EOR recovery methods do to the overall quality of the oil? ›

The third enhanced oil recovery (EOR) method is gas injection, which involves introducing gases like carbon dioxide, nitrogen, or natural gas into the reservoir. This process helps maintain pressure, reduce oil viscosity, or mix with the oil to improve its flow.

What is the success rate of enhanced oil recovery? ›

EOR can extract 30% to 60% or more of a reservoir's oil, compared to 20% to 40% using primary and secondary recovery. According to the US Department of Energy, carbon dioxide and water are injected along with one of three EOR techniques: thermal injection, gas injection, and chemical injection.

What is the outlook for enhanced oil recovery? ›

The Global Enhanced Oil Recovery Market Size is Anticipated to Exceed USD 97.88 Billion by 2033, Growing at a CAGR of 6.47% from 2023 to 2033. Tertiary recovery, also known as enhanced oil recovery (EOR), is the process of mobilizing residual oil that can't be extracted using primary or secondary recovery techniques.

What has the highest oil recovery rate? ›

The recovery of petroleum from the reservoir in properly operated water drive pools may run as high as 80%. The force behind the water drive may be hydrostatic pressure, the expansion of the reservoir water, or a combination of both. Water drive is also used in certain submarine fields.

What percentage of CO2 emissions can be captured? ›

Conventional CCS on a fossil fuel power station can reduce CO2 emission by over 95 per cent. However, burning biomass in a boiler coupled with CCS allows a power station to have negative emissions overall.

What are the carbon credits for enhanced oil recovery? ›

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 allows an $85 per tonne tax credit for capturing and storing carbon dioxide (CO2). This legislation also allows for a $60 per tonne tax credit for using captured carbon (45Q tax credits) for enhanced oil recovery.

What is enhanced oil recovery rate? ›

EOR can extract 30% to 60% or more of a reservoir's oil, compared to 20% to 40% using primary and secondary recovery. According to the US Department of Energy, carbon dioxide and water are injected along with one of three EOR techniques: thermal injection, gas injection, and chemical injection.

How efficient is carbon dioxide capture? ›

CCS projects generally aim for 90% capture efficiency, but most of the current installations have failed to meet that goal. Storage of the captured CO2 is in deep geological formations.

Top Articles
In Process vs. In Progress: Difference Explained (14 Examples)
‘In Process' or 'In Progress': What's the Difference Between the Two?
Spasa Parish
Rentals for rent in Maastricht
159R Bus Schedule Pdf
Sallisaw Bin Store
Black Adam Showtimes Near Maya Cinemas Delano
Espn Transfer Portal Basketball
Pollen Levels Richmond
11 Best Sites Like The Chive For Funny Pictures and Memes
Finger Lakes 1 Police Beat
Craigslist Pets Huntsville Alabama
Paulette Goddard | American Actress, Modern Times, Charlie Chaplin
Red Dead Redemption 2 Legendary Fish Locations Guide (“A Fisher of Fish”)
What's the Difference Between Halal and Haram Meat & Food?
R/Skinwalker
Rugged Gentleman Barber Shop Martinsburg Wv
Jennifer Lenzini Leaving Ktiv
Justified - Streams, Episodenguide und News zur Serie
Epay. Medstarhealth.org
Olde Kegg Bar & Grill Portage Menu
Cubilabras
Half Inning In Which The Home Team Bats Crossword
Amazing Lash Bay Colony
Juego Friv Poki
Dirt Devil Ud70181 Parts Diagram
Truist Bank Open Saturday
Water Leaks in Your Car When It Rains? Common Causes & Fixes
What’s Closing at Disney World? A Complete Guide
New from Simply So Good - Cherry Apricot Slab Pie
Drys Pharmacy
Ohio State Football Wiki
Find Words Containing Specific Letters | WordFinder®
FirstLight Power to Acquire Leading Canadian Renewable Operator and Developer Hydromega Services Inc. - FirstLight
Webmail.unt.edu
2024-25 ITH Season Preview: USC Trojans
Metro By T Mobile Sign In
Restored Republic December 1 2022
12 30 Pacific Time
Jami Lafay Gofundme
Greenbrier Bunker Tour Coupon
No Compromise in Maneuverability and Effectiveness
Black Adam Showtimes Near Cinemark Texarkana 14
Ice Hockey Dboard
Über 60 Prozent Rabatt auf E-Bikes: Aldi reduziert sämtliche Pedelecs stark im Preis - nur noch für kurze Zeit
Wie blocke ich einen Bot aus Boardman/USA - sellerforum.de
Infinity Pool Showtimes Near Maya Cinemas Bakersfield
Dermpathdiagnostics Com Pay Invoice
How To Use Price Chopper Points At Quiktrip
Maria Butina Bikini
Busted Newspaper Zapata Tx
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Greg Kuvalis

Last Updated:

Views: 5549

Rating: 4.4 / 5 (75 voted)

Reviews: 82% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Greg Kuvalis

Birthday: 1996-12-20

Address: 53157 Trantow Inlet, Townemouth, FL 92564-0267

Phone: +68218650356656

Job: IT Representative

Hobby: Knitting, Amateur radio, Skiing, Running, Mountain biking, Slacklining, Electronics

Introduction: My name is Greg Kuvalis, I am a witty, spotless, beautiful, charming, delightful, thankful, beautiful person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.