Carbon Capture & Storage
Thanks to:
Prof. Tom McKinnon
Mark Lockhart, formerly URS Corporation
•2
Topics
• History of international action • U.S. Government Mandates
• GHG Emissions Control
 Cap‐and‐Trade Program?
• Carbon Capture & Storage
•3
Topics
• History of international action • U.S. Government Mandates
• GHG Emissions Control
 Cap‐and‐Trade Program?
• Carbon Capture & Storage
•4
Montreal Protocol
•
1930s. CFCs produced commercially by DuPont.
 Excellent phase properties for refrigerants.
 Non‐toxic.
 Non‐flammable.
•
1974. Molina & Rowland discovered that CFC breakdown by UV light can lead to ozone destruction.
•
1985. Antarctic ozone hole discovered.
•
1988. UN treaty in Montreal led to orderly phase‐out of CFCs.
•
Inspired confidence that international action could be marshaled for GHG control
•5
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
•
Formed by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP)
•
One of the biggest science‐related endeavors in history
 Doesn’t conduct science on its own
 Evaluates scientific results to assist policy makers
 Several hundred international scientists
•
First report issued in 1990 with others following every 5 – 6 years
•
Shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore
•6
UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UN FCCC)
• Signed in 1992 at Rio Earth Summit
 155 countries, including the US
• Industrialized countries (“Annex I”) agreed to voluntary targets
 Reduce Year 2000 emissions to 1990 levels
• 200 projects with a value of $500M started
• Became apparent rapidly that voluntary measures were not working
•7
Kyoto Protocol
•
•
Adopted in 1997, Kyoto, Japan
Binding emissions targets
 Reduce emissions by an average of 5.2% below 1990 levels by 2012
 Each country held to different standards
•
•
Covers six GHG: CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6
Established market mechanisms
 i.e. carbon trading
•
Applies only to OECD nations plus former East Bloc
 China and India not bound
•
Entered into force on Feb 16, 2005 when Russia signed
•8
Global Kyoto Commitments
Commitments respond to a reduction of 30‐40% below BAU forecasts by 2012.
•9
US and Kyoto
• March 2001, President Bush indicated the U.S. would not sign the Kyoto Protocol
 Argument against. • China and India not bound by the treaty so US would not hurt the economy
 Argument for
• On a per‐capita basis, emissions from China and India are a small fraction of US emissions
• As the largest GHG emitter, the US has the duty to lead
•10
Kyoto Flexibility Mechanisms
• International Emissions Trading.
 Countries below their cap can sell excess emissions allowances to another country.
• Joint Implementation.
 Project occurring between “Annex I” countries (all regulated countries).
 Transference of emissions allowances.
• Clean Development Mechanism.
 Industrialized countries can develop GHG mitigation projects in developing countries and receive Certified Emissions Reductions.
•11
Kyoto and EU ETS
•
The Kyoto treaty led to an emissions trading scheme (ETS) in the European Union.

•
Cap‐and‐trade system.
Emissions permits given out for free to large emitters (e.g. power plants).

Poor data available on which to base the allocation of permits.

Lots of incentive to over‐report emissions levels.
•
Emitters w/ excess permits can sell them. Emitters exceeding their allowances must buy permits.
•
Several collapses in the carbon market.
•
Model for US cap and trade plans.
•12
Copenhagen Summit
• United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Copenhagen, Denmark, December 2009
• Copenhagen Accord was “taken note of” but not “adopted”
 Drafted by the US, China, India, Brazil & South Africa
 Not passed unanimously
 Many countries & non‐governmental organizations opposed to this agreement
• Document recognized that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of the present day and that actions should be taken to keep any temperature increases to below 2°C
• Document is not legally binding & does not contain any legally binding commitments for reducing CO2 emissions
•13
Topics
• History of international action
• U.S. Government Mandates
• GHG Emissions Control
 Cap‐and‐Trade Program?
• Carbon Capture & Storage
•14
Waxman‐Markey American Clean Energy & Security Act (2009)
• Emission cuts
 Cap GHG emissions
 Require high‐emitting industries to reduce output to specific targets between now & middle of the century
• Covers 85% of overall economy
• Includes suppliers – electricity producers, oil refineries, natural gas suppliers
• Includes energy‐intensive users – iron, steel, cement, & paper manufacturers
 Emission cuts would start in 2012  The cap‐and‐trade program would be completely phased in by 2016 • Emission permits
 Regulated industries would need to acquire permits for their emissions
• Offsets
 Allowed to purchase carbon offsets to meet portion of required emission reductions
• Can fund clean‐energy projects elsewhere instead of cutting their own emissions •
•
•
•
•
•
Renewable electricity standard
Investments in energy technology
Coal‐fired power plants
Bill as drafted has little
Energy‐efficiency standards
Worker transition
Smarter cars and smarter grids
likelihood for passage
Ref: http://www.grist.org/article/2009‐06‐03‐waxman‐markey‐bill‐breakdown/
•15
EPA CO2 Endangerment Finding
• Endangerment finding
 April 2007 Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts v. EPA that the Clean Air Act gives the EPA authority to regulate emissions of greenhouse gases if they are a threat to human health & welfare
 Dec. 2009 EPA finalized finding that greenhouse gases pose a threat to human health & welfare
• Mandatory reporting
 25,000 ton/yr CO2(e) threshold
•16
Cap‐and‐Trade
• Administrative approach to provide economic incentives to reduce emissions of pollutants  Government issues limit on total amount of pollutants an industry can emit
 Companies issued permits to allow emissions to a certain limit
• Buy credits if emitting more than allowed
• Can sell credits if emitting less than allowed
• Offsets & credits
o
Carbon Offset Credits – production & use of clean forms of energy: wind, solar, hydro, & biofuels. o
Carbon Reduction Credits – collection & storage of carbon through reforestation, forestation, ocean & soil collection, & storage efforts
• Similar systems already in place
 European Union Emission Trading Scheme since 2005
 United States’ Acid Rain Program
 NOx Budget Trading Program in U.S. Northeast
•17
Trading Carbon Credits/ Allowances – An Overview
Facility A reduces
emissions by 10,000
TPY and sells CO2e
credits to Climate
Exchange for $15 each
($150,000 minus fees)
Company B plants trees
on grassland to create
2,000 CO2e offsets. Sells
offsets to climate
exchange for $15 each
($30,000 minus fees).
Facility C increases
emissions by 12,000
TPY and buys CO2e
credits/offsets from
Climate Exchange for
$15 each ($180,000
plus fees)
Climate Exchange
•18
Alternatives to Cap‐and‐Trade
• Carbon tax
 Carbon tax monies flow to government
 Cap‐and‐trade monies flow between commercial entities
• Cap & dividend
 Cap placed on carbon
• Downstream cap: where CO2 leaves the economy & enters the atmosphere
• Upstream cap: where carbon enters the economy in the form of a fossil fuel
 Dividends
• Cost of permits passed on to consumers
• Monies received for permits flow into a not‐for‐profit trust & ultimately into equal shares & wired to every American’s bank account
•19
Topics
• History of international action • U.S. Government Mandates
• GHG Emissions Control
 Cap‐and‐Trade Program
 Alternatives
• Carbon Capture & Storage
•20
Global Warming Potential Carbon Dioxide
CO2
GWP
1
Methane
Nitrous oxide
CH4
N2 O
21
310
HFC-23
HFC-32
HFC-125
HFC-134a
HFC-143a
HFC-152a
HFC-227ea
HFC-236fa
HFC-4310mee
CF4
11,700
650
2,800
1,300
3,800
140
2,900
6,300
1,300
6,500
C2F6
9,200
C4F10
7,000
C6F14
7,400
Sulfur Hexafluoride
SF6
23,900
Water Vapor
H2 O
???
Gas
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
•21
U.S. Annual Carbon Dioxide Emissions
“Study places CO2 capture cost between $34 and $61/ton”
Oil & Gas Journal, Oct. 12, 2009
•22
Industrial Emissions
•23
Reducing Energy Costs and Emissions
Use Energy More Efficiently within Process
Optimize Process
Online control
and
optimization
Improve
monitoring and
operation
Recover More Heat
Reduce waste
and leaks
Improve heat
integration
New Process
Technology
New catalyst
and new
technology
•24
Topics
• History of international action • U.S. Government Mandates
• GHG Emissions Control
 Cap‐and‐Trade Program
 Alternatives
• Carbon Capture & Storage
•25
Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS)
• CO2 Capture Technologies
 Post‐Combustion
 Pre‐Combustion
 Oxy‐Combustion
• Transport
• Storage / Sequestration
• Issues
•26
CO2 Capture Routes
• Post‐Combustion
 Capture CO2 from flue gas after combustion device
• Pre‐Combustion
 Gasify / convert fuel to CO2 and hydrogen (H2)
 Capture CO2 prior to combustion device
 Use H2 for fuel
• Oxy‐Combustion
 Air Separation Unit (ASU) to produce oxygen (O2)
 Use O2 & fuel for combustion
 Condense water (H2O) from flue gas
 Resulting flue gas is a CO2 stream
•27
Post‐Combustion
•28
Pre‐Combustion
•29
Oxy‐Combustion
•30
Merits of CO2 Capture Approaches
Advantages
Post‐combustion
Barriers to Implementation
• Applicable to the majority of existing coal‐fired power plants
Flue gas is . . .
• Retrofit technology option
•Dilute in CO2
•At ambient pressure
. . . Resulting in . . .
•Low CO2 partial pressure
– Significantly higher performance or circulation volume required for high capture levels
– CO2 produced at low pressure compared to sequestration requirements
Pre‐combustion
Synthesis gas is . . .
•
Concentrated in CO2
•
High pressure
. . . Resulting in . . .
•
Oxy‐combustion
High CO2 partial pressure
–
Increased driving force for separation
–
More technologies available for separation
•
Applicable mainly to new plants, as few gasification plants are currently in operation
•
Barriers to commercial application of gasification are common to pre‐
combustion capture
•
Availability
•
Cost of equipment
•
Extensive supporting systems requirements
•
Potential for reduction in compression costs/loads
•
Very high CO2 concentration in flue gas
•
Large cryogenic O2 production requirement may be cost prohibitive
•
Retrofit and repowering technology option
•
Cooled CO2 recycle required to maintain temperatures within limits of combustor materials
•
Decreased process efficiency
•
Added auxiliary load
•31
CO2 Removal Technologies
CO2 Removal
Absorption
Chemical
Adsorption
Adsorber Beds
Cryogenics
Membranes
Microbial/
Algae Systems
Gas Separation
MEA
Alumina
Polydimethylsiloxane
Caustic
Zeolite
Polyphenyleneoxide
Other
Activated C
Physical
Regeneration
Method
Selexol
Pressure Swing
Rectisol
Temperature Swing
Other
Washing
Gas Absorption
Polypropelene
Ceramic Based
Systems
•32
CO2 Sequestration and Storage
CO2 Sequestration/
Storage
Geologic
Sequestration
Ocean
Sequestration
Biological
Sequestration
Other Methods
Salt Domes
Deep Ocean
Injection
Forests &
Terrestrial Sys
Permanent
Storage
Depleted Oil
& Gas Wells
Unconfined
Release
Marine Algae
Solid Storage
(Insulated)
Abandoned
Coal Seams
Dense Plume
Formation
Dry Ice
Injection
•33
CO2 Capture and Sequestration
Power Station/Industrial Facility
500m
OIL
CO2
CH4
1000m
1500m
CO2
CO2
IMPERMEABLE
CAP-ROCK
IMPERMEABLE
CAP-ROCK
CO2 Replaces Methane
Trapped in Coal
COAL
SEAM
Enhanced Oil Recovery
(CO2 Displaces Oil)
SALINE
RESERVOIR
IMPERMEABLE
CAP-ROCK
CO2 Stored in Saline
Formation
•34
CO2 Capture & Storage (CCS) Issues
• Capture
• Storage
 75 ‐90% of the CCS cost
 Long‐term storage & liability
 High capital cost & energy penalties
 Land & mineral access rights for geologic storage
• Transport
 Infrastructure
• Pipeline
• Right of ways
 Limited by economics of transport distance
• Research Focus
 Cost & energy penalty reductions
 Providing scientific and operational basis for safe & effective injection & long‐term storage
•35
CO2 Sources
“Study places CO2 capture cost between $34 and $61/ton”
Oil & Gas Journal, Oct. 12, 2009
•36
CO2 Sources & Disposition Options
“Study places CO2 capture cost between $34 and $61/ton”
Oil & Gas Journal, Oct. 12, 2009
•37
Deep Saline Aquifers in the United States Ref: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/greenhouse‐gas‐in‐aquifers‐0320.html
•38
Topics
• History of international action • U.S. Government Mandates
• GHG Emissions Control
 Cap‐and‐Trade Program
 Alternatives
• Carbon Capture & Storage
•39