CARBON MANAGEMENT TECHNO ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Submitted by
CONTENTS
1.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 3
2.
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3
3.
CDR and Country Selection ................................................................................................. 3
5.
3.1.
CDR technology: ............................................................................................................ 3
3.2.
Selected Country: ........................................................................................................... 4
3.2.1.
Abundant Biomass Resources ................................................................................... 4
3.2.2.
Prospects for Renewable Energy .............................................................................. 4
3.2.3.
CO2 Storage Infrastructure ...................................................................................... 4
Logistical analysis .................................................................................................................. 6
5.1.
Lifecycle Analysis (LCA) of the Proposed DACCS System ....................................... 6
5.1.1.
Biomass Collection and Preparation ........................................................................ 6
5.1.2.
Transportation of Biomass........................................................................................ 7
5.1.3.
Operation of the DACCS Facility ............................................................................. 7
5.1.4.
Transporting Captured CO2 to Storage Sites ........................................................... 7
5.1.5.
CO2 storage in sedimentary basins ........................................................................... 7
References ...................................................................................................................................... 9
Fig. 1. Esri satellite image of Stuttgart, Arkansas, USA, indicating the position of Riceland foods and
CDR technology to be implanted in Bryant park. ......................................................................................... 5
Fig. 2. OSM image of Stuttgart, USA........................................................................................................... 6
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report proposes the implementation of Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS)
with biomass (rice husk) as a national-scale Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) pathway for the
United States. DACCS utilizes advanced solid sorbents to directly capture CO2 from ambient air,
coupled with renewable energy sources to minimize emissions. This study evaluates the U.S.'s
renewable energy resources, particularly rice husk biomass, and analyses logistical
considerations for implementing. The project involves a lifecycle assessment (LCA) and a
techno-economic analysis to calculate the net CO2 removal cost. This initiative seeks to provide
a cost-effective and sustainable carbon removal solution by leveraging agricultural wastes and
renewable energy infrastructure in the United States.
2. INTRODUCTION
Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is critical to achieving the Paris Agreement's climate targets.
Several CDR approaches have been developed, however they differ greatly in terms of CO2
removal efficiency, deployment time, and permanence. All these parameters are necessary for
commercial-scale deployments of CDR.
To achieve our "net-zero" emissions goal by midcentury, we prioritize reducing carbon dioxide
(CO2) in the atmosphere. This aligns with the United States' immediate goal of 100% clean
electricity by 2035 and a 40 percent decrease in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 by 2030.
DACCS stands out among numerous CDR technologies because to its capacity to capture CO2
straight from the atmosphere, regardless of emission source. DACCS technologies aim to remove
carbon from the air. Typically, enormous fans are used to move air through carbon capture tools,
which absorbs CO2 and stores it underneath.
This research addresses the viability of adopting DACCS in the United States, taking advantage
of the country's substantial rice husk biomass and potential for renewable energy. The goal is to
assess resource availability, logistics, and costs in order to compute the net removal cost of CO2
and make suggestions for improving the system.
3. CDR and Country Selection
3.1. CDR technology:
The recommended CDR technique is Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS), which
captures air CO2 regardless of emission source. This method use complex solid sorbents for
efficient CO2 absorption, in conjunction with renewable energy to reduce emissions. DACCS,
unlike point-source capture systems, allows for greater site selection freedom and is especially
adapted to tackling scattered CO2 emissions in the atmosphere (Sanchez et al., 2018).
3.2. Selected Country:
The United States was chosen to adopt the DACCS pathway owing to its plentiful renewable
energy supplies, strong infrastructure, and developed CO2 storage facilities. The main
justifications are:
3.2.1. Abundant Biomass Resources
Rice husks are a substantial byproduct of the rice milling industry in the United States. Major
rice-producing states like Arkansas, California, and Stuttgart generate more than 1 million tons
of rice husk biomass per year (Sánchez et al., 2019). Rice husks are a good feedstock for
DACCS systems since they are inexpensive, sustainable, and have little rivalry with food
production.
3.2.2. Prospects for Renewable Energy
United States has abundant renewable energy resources, including wind and solar, which are
critical for powering DACCS systems with minimal emissions. For instance, California and
Texas are renewable energy production leaders, producing 34% and 26% of their electricity from
renewable sources, significantly (Susskind et al., 2022).
3.2.3. CO2 Storage Infrastructure
The United States contains numerous sedimentary basins and depleted oil reserves that are suited
for long-term CO2 storage. The Gulf Coast region, in particular, has been extensively examined
for its CO2 storage capacity, with estimations reaching 500 billion metric tons (Eide et al.,
2019).
3.2.4. Policy and profitability
The United States provides subsidies for CDR projects, including tax relief under Section 45Q of
the Internal Revenue Service Code, which grant $50 per tones of CO2 permanently stored (Fikru,
2022).
4. Resource Analysis of the Entire Country
The United States has an extensive and fluctuated renewable energy portfolio that includes solar,
wind, geothermal, hydrothermal, and biomass, with biomass developing as an important resource
for carbon removal technology. Rice husks, an agricultural residue of rice milling, have great
potential as a biomass source because of their availability, sustainability, and low competition
with food production. Every year, major rice-producing states such as Arkansas, California, and
Stuttgart produce around 1.3 million tons of rice husks, which are frequently neglected or
wasted. Rice husks have a high calorific value (13-16 MJ/kg), making them an acceptable source
for energy-intensive processes such as DACCS (Chieng and Kuan, 2022). The use of rice husks
in DACCS coincides with environmental goals by minimizing trash and eliminating emissions
from open-field burning ((Jeswani et al., 2022).
Additionally, their low costs of procurement and continuous supply improve economic
feasibility, as demonstrated by research focusing on the economic viability of waste biomass in
carbon removal pathways (Kharissova et al., 2024). By using rice husks into the United States'
carbon removal plan, the country may use an abundant and sustainable resource to achieve its
climate goals while also increasing the efficiency of DACCS systems.
Fig. 1. Esri satellite image of Stuttgart, Arkansas, USA, indicating the position of Riceland foods and CDR
technology to be implanted in Bryant park.
Fig. 2. OSM image of Stuttgart, USA
Bryant Park in Stuttgart, Arkansas, is an excellent location for implementing (CDR) technology
due to its closeness to large biomass supplies and suitable logistical infrastructure. Riceland
Foods, one of the largest rice milling factories in the United States, is located near Stuttgart and
produces a significant amount of rice husks, a sustainable feedstock for the proposed DACCS
system. The centralized placement within a 100-kilometer radius of several rice mills reduces
transportation emissions and costs, in line with the system's net-negative emission targets.
Furthermore, Stuttgart's developed transportation networks and closeness to sedimentary basins
along the Gulf Coast make it an ideal location for CO2 storage logistics. Bryant Park, by
leveraging its particular regional features, can serve as a good site for scalable and commercially
feasible CDR technology.
5. Logistical analysis
5.1. Lifecycle Analysis (LCA) of the Proposed DACCS System
The DACCS system's lifecycle assessment (LCA) includes all upstream scope 3 phases, which
culminates with CO2 storage. Each phase is crucial in estimating the environmental effect and
ensuring that the system produces net-negative emissions. A comprehensive explanation of each
LCA phase is provided below:
5.1.1. Biomass Collection and Preparation
Rice husks, a waste residue of rice milling, are collected in milling facilities. Riceland Foods in
Stuttgart, Arkansas, is the main source. Emissions throughout this phase are low since rice husks
are readily accessible at milling plants. Pre-processing (e.g., drying and cleaning) consumes
energy and contributes somewhat to total emissions. Using waste biomass removes the need for
extra agricultural land and prevents rivalry with food crops, making it feasible ((Eide et al.,
2019).
5.1.2. Transportation of Biomass
Rice husks are transported by truck from milling facilities to the DACCS facility within a 100kilometer radius. For 1 million tonnes of rice husks carried over 100 km with an emission ratio
of 26.5 g CO2e per ton-kilometer:
1,000,000𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 ℎ𝑢𝑠𝑘𝑠 × 100 𝐾𝑚 × 0.0265𝑡𝐶𝑂2𝑒 / 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒 − 𝐾𝑚
= 2,650 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑂2𝑒
Accessibility to rice mills reduces transit distances and emissions.
5.1.3. Operation of the DACCS Facility
The facility's solid sorbent technology for CO2 capture is powered by renewable energy sources.
Biomass energy from rice husks could enhance renewable sources. Facility services emit about
1,000 tCO2e per year due to auxiliary activities and maintenance. Renewable energy minimizes
operational emissions substantially when compared to fossil fuel-based systems (Sovacool et al.,
2022).
5.1.4. Transporting Captured CO2 to Storage Sites
Pipelines transmit captured CO2 to sedimentary basins in the Gulf Coast region, which are about
200 kilometers from the DACCS complex. For 1.5 million tons of CO2 delivered over 200 km
with an emission rate of 0.01 g CO2e per ton-kilometer:
1,500,000×200×0.01=3,000tCO2e annually.
When compared to truck or rail alternatives, pipelines provide a low-emission, efficiency mode
of CO2 transportation ((Smith et al., 2021).
5.1.5. CO2 storage in sedimentary basins
CO2 is transported and deposited into geological formations like sedimentary basins or depleted
oil fields for long-term storage. Emissions at this period are low due to developed safe injection
methods and surveillance technologies. The Gulf Coast region's sedimentary basins are wellcharacterized and have a demonstrated track record of safe CO2 storage.
6. Results and discussion
The proposed DACCS system's lifecycle data analysis (LCA), provide in Excel worksheet shows
that it can achieve net-negative emissions by sequestering 1,500,000 tonnes of CO2 per year
while emitting only 12,150 tonnes through upstream and operational activities, yielding a net
sequestration of 1,487,850 tonnes.
Net CO2 Sequestration = Total CO2 Captured − LCA Emissions
1,500,000 − 12,150 = 1,487,850 tCO2
𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝑶𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕𝒔 (𝑼𝑺𝑫) = 𝑆𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑳𝑪𝑨 𝑷𝒉𝒂𝒔𝒆𝒔
15,000,000 + 10,000,000 + 112,500,000 + 15,000,000 + 30,000,000 = $182,500,000
𝑁𝑒𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 =
𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
182,500,000
=
= $122.63
net CO2 sequestered
1,487,850
The net removal cost of the system is computed as $122.63 per tonne of CO2, with operational
costs at the DACCS facility accounting for the majority of the cost. Transportation stages for
biomass and CO2 storage contribute significantly to emissions, exposing logistical inefficiencies.
While these results validate the system's practicality, with potential for cost and emission
reductions throughout the LCA process.
Improvements can be made over time to increase efficiency and lower expenses. Minimizing
transportation distances by putting facilities near biomass sources or using electric vehicles
might greatly reduce emissions. Future-oriented solid absorbing agents and on-site renewable
energy integration are examples of technological improvements that potentially lower
operational costs and environmental effect. Furthermore, increasing pipeline efficiency for CO2
transfer and streamlining compression operations will improve the system's sustainability.
Scaling up operations and using shared infrastructure could lead to economies of scale, lower
the CO2 removal cost/tonne. Government incentives such as carbon credits and renewable
energy subsidies have the potential to significantly improve the system's economic stability.
With time, these efforts are predicted to reduce the net removal cost to $80-$100 per tonne,
making the DACCS pathway more competitive while increasing its net-negative effect.
References
CHIENG, S. & KUAN, S. H. 2022. Harnessing bioenergy and high value–added products from
rice residues: a review. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 12, 3547-3571.
EIDE, L. I., BATUM, M., DIXON, T., ELAMIN, Z., GRAUE, A., HAGEN, S., HOVORKA, S.,
NAZARIAN, B., NØKLEBY, P. H. & OLSEN, G. I. 2019. Enabling large-scale carbon
capture, utilisation, and storage (CCUS) using offshore carbon dioxide (CO2)
infrastructure developments—a review. Energies, 12, 1945.
FIKRU, M. G. 2022. The impact of policies on profit-maximizing rates of reliance on carbon
capture for storage versus cleaner production. Journal of Cleaner Production, 379,
134659.
JESWANI, H. K., SAHARUDIN, D. M. & AZAPAGIC, A. 2022. Environmental sustainability
of negative emissions technologies: A review. Sustainable Production and Consumption,
33, 608-635.
KHARISSOVA, A. B., KHARISSOVA, O. V., KHARISOV, B. I. & MÉNDEZ, Y. P. 2024.
Carbon negative footprint materials: a review. Nano-Structures & Nano-Objects, 37,
101100.
SANCHEZ, D. L., AMADOR, G., FUNK, J. & MACH, K. J. 2018. Federal research,
development, and demonstration priorities for carbon dioxide removal in the United
States. Environmental Research Letters, 13, 015005.
SÁNCHEZ, J., CURT, M. D., ROBERT, N. & FERNÁNDEZ, J. 2019. Biomass resources. The
role of bioenergy in the bioeconomy. Elsevier.
SMITH, E., MORRIS, J., KHESHGI, H., TELETZKE, G., HERZOG, H. & PALTSEV, S. 2021.
The cost of CO2 transport and storage in global integrated assessment modeling.
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 109, 103367.
SOVACOOL, B. K., BAUM, C. M., LOW, S., ROBERTS, C. & STEINHAUSER, J. 2022.
Climate policy for a net-zero future: ten recommendations for Direct Air Capture.
Environmental Research Letters, 17, 074014.
SUSSKIND, L., CHUN, J., GANT, A., HODGKINS, C., COHEN, J. & LOHMAR, S. 2022.
Sources of opposition to renewable energy projects in the United States. Energy Policy,
165, 112922.