Cost Estimation and Comparison of Carbon Capture and Storage Technology with Wind Energy (original) (raw)
Related papers
Energy Science and Technology, 2013
In the IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES), it was projected that the number of CO 2 emission sources from the electric power and industrial sectors will increase significantly until 2050. Because fossil fuel-fired power plants are responsible for around one-third of total global CO 2 emissions, they are prime candidates for the application of CO 2 capture and storage techniques. The aim of this work is to mitigate the impact of climate change by reducing the amount of CO 2 emitted to the atmosphere in Mulla Abdulla and Taza power plants in Kirkuk/ Iraq using CCS techniques, and to calculate the cost of the system components.
Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage
Energy Policy, 2007
CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) is receiving considerable attention as a potential greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation option for fossil fuel power plants. Cost and performance estimates for CCS are critical factors in energy and policy analysis. CCS cost studies necessarily employ a host of technical and economic assumptions that can dramatically affect results. Thus, particular studies often are of limited value to analysts, researchers, and industry personnel seeking results for alternative cases. In this paper, we use a generalized modeling tool to estimate and compare the emissions, efficiency, resource requirements and current costs of fossil fuel power plants with CCS on a systematic basis. This plant-level analysis explores a broader range of key assumptions than found in recent studies we reviewed for three major plant types: pulverized coal (PC) plants, natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants, and integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) systems using coal. In particular, we examine the effects of recent increases in capital costs and natural gas prices, as well as effects of differential plant utilization rates, IGCC financing and operating assumptions, variations in plant size, and differences in fuel quality, including bituminous, sub-bituminous and lignite coals. Our results show higher power plant and CCS costs than prior studies as a consequence of recent escalations in capital and operating costs. The broader range of cases also reveals differences not previously reported in the relative costs of PC, NGCC and IGCC plants with and without CCS. While CCS can significantly reduce power plant emissions of CO 2 (typically by 85-90%), the impacts of CCS energy requirements on plant-level resource requirements and multi-media environmental emissions also are found to be significant, with increases of approximately 15-30% for current CCS systems. To characterize such impacts, an alternative definition of the ''energy penalty'' is proposed in lieu of the prevailing use of this term. r
Estimation of CO2 Mitigation Potential through Renewable Energy Generation
Energy is vital input for economy and social development in every society. Presently, the global primary energy demands are met largely from oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear and hydroelectric energy among which coal is dominant. Thermal Power Stations add to environmental degradation problems through gaseous emissions, particulate matter, fly ash, bottom ash, which are very harmful to human life. The proper siting, installation and operation of renewable and nonconventional energy power sources will help to control, replace and avoid adverse environmental impacts. The Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and other gases released by burning fossil fuels contribute to the “green house” effect which cause global climate changes. Renewable energy sources mainly Wind, Small hydro, Biomass and Solar Photovoltaic (SPV) etc. are the most suitable means to achieve the mitigation of CO2 emission. This study gives estimation of CO2 mitigation potential of renewable energy sources in comparison with pollution caused by pulverized coal boilers based thermal power plants. In this paper emissions (kg/KWH) from Indian coal-fired thermal power plants have been calculated by taking emission data from 81 thermal power plants around the country. The total amounts of emission (kg/year) from existing thermal power plants have been estimated and the mitigation of emissions through renewable energy generation have been shown.
Carbon dioxide capture and storage has been presented as a necessary component of energy plans, because it is 7 presumed to deliver significant environmental benefits. In this study, we systematically evaluate the environmental impact of 8 electricity generated by natural gas and coal power plants with selected CO 2 capture technologies with and without CO 2 storage. 9 To examine uncertainties that could arise from the provided environmental impacts of the applied methodology of life cycle 10 assessment, we perform sensitivity analyses of important parameters over a large range of values. In addition, a sensitivity analysis 11 of the thermodynamic efficiencies allows evaluation of power plants with different thermodynamic performances. We find that, in 12 plants using either natural gas or coal, post-combustion capture results in a higher environmental impact per MWh than that of 13 business-as-usual (i.e., no CO 2 capture). Furthermore, chemical looping combustion only marginally decreases the environmental 14 impact of electricity generation in natural gas plants, while in coal plants it can decrease the impact by up to 17%. In addition, 15 CO 2 transportation and storage result in a net negative environmental impact, making an improvement in comparison to the 16 business-as-usual environmental footprint of a plant more difficult. Overall, the most decisive factor affecting the environmental 17 impact of electricity is the energy penalty associated with CO 2 capture; because of this factor, CO 2 capture and storage does not 18 necessarily result in a reduction of the overall environmental impact. 42 Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a methodological tool used to 43 quantitatively analyze the life cycle of activities within the context 44 of environmental impact. Recently published LCA studies on the 45 performance of CCS in the power sector base their results on 46 individual impact categories, such as global warming, human 47 toxicity, and others. 17−20 These types of analyses focus, however, 48 on one-to-one comparisons of specific impact categories, rather 49 than on overall evaluations of plant performance. 2. METHODOLOGY 50 In our analysis, we use the ability of the life cycle impact 51 assessment (LCIA) method Eco-indicator 99 21 one of the 52 most widely used life cycle impact assessment methodologies -53 that aggregates all individually calculated environmental 54 impacts of an activity into a single number using normalization 55 and weighting. In this paper, we present a tool that allows 56 objective evaluation of CCS technologies, which can aid public 57 policy decision-making, concerning its implementation. 58 The environmental impacts for each aspect of coal and 59 natural gas CCS plants (e.g., CO 2 emissions, construction, etc.) 60 are combined to calculate the environmental impact of the 61 electricity (EIE) of the plants (based on the method of 62 exergoenvironmental analysis (e.g., ref 22). In the present 63 analysis, the EIE is the main parameter used to compare the 64 environmental performance of selected energy conversion 65 systems. In earlier work of the authors, power plants with 66 several CO 2 capture methods have been simulated and their 67 thermodynamic, economic and environmental performance 68 have been studied. 23−25 Two of these CO 2 capture technologies 69 are chosen for the analysis presented here. 70 The analysis is conducted for three natural gas-and three 71 coal-fired power plants. Each group of plants includes a 72 reference plant, which represents the business as usual scenario, 73 and two power plants with CO 2 capture: one with chemical 74 absorption using monoethanolamine (MEA), 27,28 and one with 75 oxy-fuel chemical looping combustion (CLC). 29−33 These CO 2 76 capture technologies represent the most technologically
Energy for Sustainable Development, 2009
Carbon capture and storage CCS Clean fossil fuels Co-production of electric power and chemicals CO2 CO2 compression India has the second largest population in the world and is ranked number six in terms of CO 2 emissions generated from fossil fuels. A large portion of its power plants is old and inefficient, and it is expected that India in the coming 10-15 years will need to upgrade and extend its power sector significantly. This may give rise to new initiatives that bring the harnessing of indigenous coal in a green manner into question. This article takes into consideration opportunities of emerging polygeneration schemes intended (mainly) for the electric power sector with inclusion of additional yields like synthetic fuels, chemicals and heat. Reference is made to European-based initiatives pertaining to the capture and storage of carbon dioxide (CCS)especially a Sino-European project COACH 1 that is operated under the auspices of the European Commission and the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST). Some main principles of COACH have been transferred from the EU-based DYNAMIS ,2 project, although in a different setting. Both projects emphasise technologies and options that can be realised by 2012 (and beyond) for co-production of hydrogen and electricity via pre-combustion decarbonisation from fossil fuels with safe geological storage of the CO 2 . It is believed that the European Commissionin due coursewill make provisions for similar arrangements with India. A main challenge of CCSin any contextis the techno-economic aspect of fuel penalty and cost. In addition to the higher investment cost, an energy potential corresponding to 20-30% additional fuel is inherently sacrificed in order to isolate and compress the CO 2 stream before it can be injected into a permanent sink. For this reason CCS is entirely policy driven rather than motivated by profit. Although CCS is far more costly and requiring substantially more primary energy, it is likely to assume that India will be forced to either implement CCS or to retire parts of its generating capacity. This suggests that India may become attractive for industrialised countries to make "green" investments in its power sector provided however, that CCS will become eligible for joint mitigation actions beyond the Kyoto treaty that expires by 2012. The energy supply situation of India is seen as a matter of growing concern. In contrast to Europe where the issue of greenhouse gas emissions is high on the political agenda, India seemingly is more focused on cost, energy supply and local pollution. Coal is still the prevalent fuel in the Indian power sector, and is likely to be so in the foreseeable future. This suggests that time is due for India to embark on pre-normative research and technology initiatives in order to pave the ground for a cleaner energy policy in an Indian context. One step in this direction is to gain knowledge on prevalent carbon capture techniquesin theory and via major CCS projects and storage sites.
Feasibility study of carbon capture and storage on NLC India Ltd
International Journal of Ambient Energy, 2018
India is one of the largest growing economies in the world. It has a GDP of 2487.94 billion US dollars as of 2017. Around 61.297% of power generation is by utilizing abundantly available lignite blended with imported coal. India is slowly cutting out its demand for imported coal from other countries. It has built its own lignite based power plant to overcome the need of imported coal. The impact on cost of electricity (COE) and net power output (NPO) after retrofitting Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) over a Lignite based power plant of India is analyzed. In this paper, a feasibility study is carried out for NLC India Ltd. Barsingsar power plant by retrofitting CCS. The results obtained from the Integrated Environmental Control Model (IECM) Software are positively strong enough to encourage CCS implementation. Various strategies for utilizing the CO 2 capture and carbon storage sites are suggested.
Advances of Carbon Capture and Storage in Coal-Based Power Generating Units in an Indian Context
Energies
India is a nation with a diverse economy that requires tremendous resources to completely meet the desires of its compatriots in various sectors. In terms of energy resources and requirements, coal-based power plants can fulfill the bulk of these electricity needs. India is very reliant on coal, which is used in power plants as a primary energy source. However, the usage of coal energy at a higher level continuously pollutes the atmosphere. The Indian power market alone accounts for half of the country’s CO2 emissions, which implies that significant action is needed to contain environmental pollution. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a bridging technique and feasible alternative for the carbon fired plant processing of CO2. However, the application of CCS in coal-fired power stations is still uncommon in the nation. At the UNFCCC Paris Summit, India committed to reduce its carbon emission intensity by approximately 30–33% by 2030. In this work, several CCS systems, possible CO2 o...