Global What? Control Possibilities of CO2 and Other Greenhouse Gases

1991 ◽  
Vol 113 (3) ◽  
pp. 440-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. J. Springer
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Co2 Production ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Electric Cars ◽  
Ice Caps

Global what? is a frequent response by those who first hear of the potential for global warming, global climate change, and global catastrophe, potentially brought on by excessive greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere. The principal greenhouse gas, CO2, is joined by methane, N2O, and other trace gases in absorbing infrared radiation, which would otherwise escape into space, a process thought to be responsible for gradual increase in temperature that will melt ice caps and raise ocean levels. This paper discusses control possibilities that could be considered once there is agreement that CO2 must be controlled. Many of the responses to the energy crisis of 1974 are applicable for CO2 control. A variety of technologies, energy sources, and ideas are offered that, in combination, could be the basis for a global energy policy. Conversion and replacement of coal, oil, and eventually natural gas fired electric power plants with other energy sources such as nuclear, solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal, could significantly reduce CO2 emissions. There are, however, no good alternatives to fossil fuels used in transportation that significantly reduce CO2 emissions. Of all the fossil fuels, natural gas has the least CO2 production. Electric vehicles and hydrogen-fueled engines are future possibilities, but the electricity for the electric cars and for making hydrogen must be from nonfossil fuel driven generators. Conservation, efficiency, and tax incentives are other parts of a control strategy, once the amount of control considered necessary is established. Renewed interest in nonfossil fuel energy sources and their research and development is obviously needed.

scholarly journals Feasibility of replacement of nuclear power with other energy sources in the Czech republic

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (6 Part A) ◽  
pp. 3543-3553
Author(s):  
Pavel Charvat ◽  
Lubomir Klimes ◽  
Jiri Pospisil ◽  
Jiri Klemes ◽  
Petar Varbanov
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Combined Cycle ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
The Moment

The feasibility and consequences of replacing nuclear power plants (NPP) in the Czech Republic with other energy sources are discussed. The NPP produced about one-third of electricity in the Czech Republic in 2017. Renewable energy sources such as hydropower, wind and solar power plants and biomass/biogas burning power plants produced about 11% of electricity in 2017. Due to the geographical and other constraints (intermittency, land footprint, and public acceptance), the renewables do not have the potential to entirely replace the capacity of the NPP. The only feasible technologies that could replace NPP in the Czech Republic in the near future are the power plants using fossil fuels. The combined cycle power plants running on natural gas (NGCC) are technically and environmentally fea-sible alternative for NPP at the moment. However, the natural gas imports would increase by two-thirds and the total greenhouse gas emissions would go up by about 10% if the power production of the NPP was entirely replaced by NGCC in the Czech Republic.

CO2 Emission Abatement in CC-IGCC Power Plants: Energy and Economic Comparisons

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Gambini ◽  
Michela Vellini
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Dioxide ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Combined Cycle ◽  
Exhaust Gas ◽  
Gas Treatment ◽  
Low Co2 ◽  
Global Efficiency

In this paper two methodologies, able to avoid CO2 dispersion in atmosphere, have been analyzed: • treating exhaust gases in order to remove, liquefy and store the produced carbon dioxide; • de-carbonizing fossil fuels before using them in the combustion in order to inhibit completely carbon dioxide production. These methodologies have been implemented in advanced power plants based on gas turbine: a combined cycle power plant (CC), fed by natural gas, and an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), fed by coal. The exhaust gas treatment is based on a chemical process of absorption, while the fossil fuel decarbonization is based on partial oxidation of methane, steam methane reforming and coal gasification. These systems require material and energetic integrations with the power sections and so the best interconnections must be investigated in order to obtain good overall performance. With reference to thermodynamic and economic performance, significant comparisons have been made between the above mentioned reference plants. An efficiency decrease and an increase in the cost of electricity have been obtained when power plants are equipped with systems able to reduce CO2 emissions. However, in order to obtain low CO2 emissions when coal is used, the coal decarbonization must be implemented: in this case it is possible to attain a global efficiency of about 38%, a specific emission of 0.1117 kg/kWh and an increase of kWh cost of about 32%. Vice versa, in order to obtain low CO2 emissions when natural gas is used, the exhaust gas treatment must be implemented: in this case it is possible to attain a global efficiency of about 50.7%, a specific emission of 0.0391 kg/kWh and an increase of kWh cost of about 15%. The clean use of coal seems to have good potential because it allows low energy penalizations (about 7.5 percentage points) and economic increases of about 32%. Because of the great availability, the homogeneous distribution and the low cost of this fuel, these results seem to be very interesting especially in the viewpoint of a transition towards the “hydrogen economy”, based, at least in the medium term, on fossil fuels.

scholarly journals Estimating CO2 Emissions from Large Scale Coal-Fired Power Plants Using OCO-2 Observations and Emission Inventories

Atmosphere ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 811
Author(s):  
Yaqin Hu ◽  
Yusheng Shi
Keyword(s):  
Power Plant ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Gaussian Model ◽  
Point Sources ◽  
Emission Inventories ◽  
Bottom Up

The concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) has increased rapidly worldwide, aggravating the global greenhouse effect, and coal-fired power plants are one of the biggest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions in China. However, efficient methods that can quantify CO2 emissions from individual coal-fired power plants with high accuracy are needed. In this study, we estimated the CO2 emissions of large-scale coal-fired power plants using Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) satellite data based on remote sensing inversions and bottom-up methods. First, we mapped the distribution of coal-fired power plants, displaying the total installed capacity, and identified two appropriate targets, the Waigaoqiao and Qinbei power plants in Shanghai and Henan, respectively. Then, an improved Gaussian plume model method was applied for CO2 emission estimations, with input parameters including the geographic coordinates of point sources, wind vectors from the atmospheric reanalysis of the global climate, and OCO-2 observations. The application of the Gaussian model was improved by using wind data with higher temporal and spatial resolutions, employing the physically based unit conversion method, and interpolating OCO-2 observations into different resolutions. Consequently, CO2 emissions were estimated to be 23.06 ± 2.82 (95% CI) Mt/yr using the Gaussian model and 16.28 Mt/yr using the bottom-up method for the Waigaoqiao Power Plant, and 14.58 ± 3.37 (95% CI) and 14.08 Mt/yr for the Qinbei Power Plant, respectively. These estimates were compared with three standard databases for validation: the Carbon Monitoring for Action database, the China coal-fired Power Plant Emissions Database, and the Carbon Brief database. The comparison found that previous emission inventories spanning different time frames might have overestimated the CO2 emissions of one of two Chinese power plants on the two days that the measurements were made. Our study contributes to quantifying CO2 emissions from point sources and helps in advancing satellite-based monitoring techniques of emission sources in the future; this helps in reducing errors due to human intervention in bottom-up statistical methods.

scholarly journals Recent advances in integrated CO2 capture and utilization: A review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuzhuang Sun ◽  
Hongman Sun ◽  
Paul T Williams ◽  
Chunfei Wu
Keyword(s):  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Co2 Capture ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Environmental Issues ◽  
Research Attention ◽  
Recent Advances

CO2 is one of the most important greenhouse gases leading to severe environmental issues. The increase of CO2 emissions from the consumption of fossil fuels has received much research attention....

Power Cycles of Generation III and III+ Nuclear Power Plants

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexey Dragunov ◽  
Eugene Saltanov ◽  
Igor Pioro ◽  
Pavel Kirillov ◽  
Romney Duffey
Keyword(s):  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Thermal Efficiency ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Thermal Power ◽  
Electrical Energy ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Thermal Power Plants

It is well known that the electrical-power generation is the key factor for advances in any other industries, agriculture and level of living. In general, electrical energy can be generated by: 1) non-renewable-energy sources such as coal, natural gas, oil, and nuclear; and 2) renewable-energy sources such as hydro, wind, solar, biomass, geothermal and marine. However, the main sources for electrical-energy generation are: 1) thermal - primary coal and secondary natural gas; 2) “large” hydro and 3) nuclear. The rest of the energy sources might have visible impact just in some countries. Modern advanced thermal power plants have reached very high thermal efficiencies (55–62%). In spite of that they are still the largest emitters of carbon dioxide into atmosphere. Due to that, reliable non-fossil-fuel energy generation, such as nuclear power, becomes more and more attractive. However, current Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) are way behind by thermal efficiency (30–42%) compared to that of advanced thermal power plants. Therefore, it is important to consider various ways to enhance thermal efficiency of NPPs. The paper presents comparison of thermodynamic cycles and layouts of modern NPPs and discusses ways to improve their thermal efficiencies.

scholarly journals Advances in Underground Energy Storage for Renewable Energy Sources

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 5142
Author(s):  
Javier Menéndez ◽  
Jorge Loredo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Energy Storage ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Greenhouse Gas ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Coal Fuel

The use of fossil fuels (coal, fuel, and natural gas) to generate electricity has been reduced in the European Union during the last few years, involving a significant decrease in greenhouse gas emissions [...]

Power Generation for the Near Future

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kau-Fui Vincent Wong ◽  
Guillermo Amador
Keyword(s):  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Energy Production ◽  
Alternative Energy ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Traditional Methods ◽  
Alternative Energy Sources ◽  
The Us ◽  
Near Future

As society continues advancing into the future, more energy is required to supply the increasing population and energy demands. Unfortunately, traditional forms of energy production through the burning of carbon-based fuels are dumping harmful pollutants into the environment, resulting in detrimental, and possibly irreversible, effects on our planet. The burning of coal and fossil fuels provides energy at the least monetary cost for countries like the US, but the price being paid through their negative impact of our atmosphere is difficult to quantify. A rapid shift to clean, alternative energy sources is critical in order to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions. For alternative energy sources to replace traditional energy sources that produce greenhouse gases, they must be capable of providing energy at equal or greater rates and efficiencies, while still functioning at competitive prices. The main factors hindering the pursuit of alternative sources are their high initial costs and, for some, intermittency. The creation of electrical energy from natural sources like wind, water, and solar is very desirable since it produces no greenhouse gases and makes use of renewable sources—unlike fossil fuels. However, the planning and technology required to tap into these sources and transfer energy at the rate and consistency needed to supply our society comes at a higher price than traditional methods. These high costs are a result of the large-scale implementation of the state-of-the-art technologies behind the devices required for energy cultivation and delivery from these unorthodox sources. On the other hand, as fossil fuel sources become scarcer, the rising fuel costs drive overall costs up and make traditional methods less cost effective. The growing scarcity of fossil fuels and resulting pollutants stimulate the necessity to transition away from traditional energy production methods. Currently, the most common alternative energy technologies are solar photovoltaics (PVs), concentrated solar power (CSP), wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, tidal, wave, and nuclear. Because of government intervention in countries like the US and the absence of the need to restructure the electricity transmission system (due to the similarity in geographical requirements and consistency in power outputs for nuclear and traditional plants), nuclear energy is the most cost competitive energy technology that does not produce greenhouse gases. Through the proper use of nuclear fission electricity at high efficiencies could be produced without polluting our atmosphere. However, the initial capital required to erect nuclear plants dictates a higher cost over traditional methods. Therefore, the government is providing help with the high initial costs through loan guarantees, in order to stimulate the growth of low-emission energy production. This paper analyzes the proposal for the use of nuclear power as an intermediate step before an eventual transition to greater dependence on energy from wind, water, and solar (WWS) sources. Complete dependence on WWS cannot be achieved in the near future, within 20 years, because of the unavoidable variability of these sources and the required overhaul of the electricity transmission system. Therefore, we look to nuclear power in the time being to help provide predictable power as a means to reduce carbon emissions, while the other technologies are refined and gradually implemented in order to meet energy demand on a consistent basis.

scholarly journals Demographic determinants of energy consumption in the European Union: Econometric analysis results

Stanovnistvo ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Predrag Petrovic ◽  
Goran Nikolic ◽  
Ivana Ostojic
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Energy Consumption ◽  
Global Climate Change ◽  
Energy Demand ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Senior Citizens ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Transport Infrastructure ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Human Society

Over the past several decades there has been a strong intensifying trend of human society impact on ecosystems, consumption of natural resources and global change. The environmental impact of the society is fully apparent and dominantly implemented through various greenhouse gases emissions (GHG), leading towards global climate change with considerably spread harmful effects. Global climate change includes the earth and ocean surface and atmospheric warming, but also melting of snow and ice, increase of sea levels and ocean acidity, as well as ever more common natural phenomena extremes (winds, various forms of rainfall/precipitation, extremely low or high temperatures, etc.). Scientists are well-familiarized with the fact that use of fossil fuels, such as oil derivatives and coal, is the main generator of harmful gases. In addition, possible substitutions for fossil fuels in the form of other energy sources are very limited, and it should be remembered that other energy sources also have certain adverse environmental effects. Bearing in mind climate change caused by products of fossil fuels combustion, as well as inevitable depletion of natural crude oil resources, management of growing global energy demand becomes one of the key goals and challenges of 21st century. If these reasons are coupled with obligations emanating from Kyoto Protocol, it is clear that attention of researches should be more than reasonably focused on the main determinants of energy consumption. This study is focused on illumination of key demographic and economic determinants of energy consumption in 28 EU member states in the period 1960- 2014. The results obtained demonstrate that population positively and quite strongly influence total energy consumption. An increase of population of 1% will result in an increase of energy consumption of 1.59% to 1.76%. Such relation most probably can be explained by the fact that demographic growth of the society aggravates and complicates planning processes of efficient energy consumption, diminishing the ability of society to be energy efficient. The population effect of persons aged 65 and above to energy consumption is also positive. An increase in share of this age group of 1% will result in an increase in energy consumption of approximately 0.43%. Positive elasticity coefficient should be understood as a proof that European societies with higher share of senior citizens consume more energy that societies with higher share of younger population, not necessarily as an argument that senior citizens use more energy than younger population. The explanation for such nature of a cause-andeffect relation could be that high share of senior citizens influences the structure of production and consumption, spatial distribution of population, transport infrastructure and social services provided. A significant influence on energy consumption in the EU is made by the level of economic development of countries, which is in accordance with the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC), suggesting a relation of inverted letter ?U?. The amount of income per capita needed to have the EKC expressed ranges between 54,183 and 81,552 dollars.

Consumption of combustible minerals in the context of the targets of sustainable development of Ukraine and global environment changes

2021 ◽  
Vol 3-4 (185-186) ◽  
pp. 109-125
Author(s):  
Myroslav Podolskyy ◽  
Dmytro Bryk ◽  
Lesia Kulchytska-Zhyhailo ◽  
Oleh Gvozdevych
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Thermal Power ◽  
Energy Resource ◽  
Fuel Oil ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
The European Union

An analysis of Ukraine’s sustainable development targets, in particular in the field of energy, resource management and environmental protection, are presented. It is shown that regional energetic is a determining factor for achieving the aims of sustainable development. Changes in the natural environment in Ukraine due to external (global) and internal (local) factors that are intertwined and overlapped can cause threats to socio-economic development. It is proved that in the areas of mining and industrial activity a multiple increase in emissions of pollutants into the environment are observed. The comparison confirmed the overall compliance of the structure of consumption of primary energy resources (solid fossil fuels, natural gas, nuclear fuel, oil and petroleum products, renewable energy sources) in Ukraine and in the European Union, shows a steaby trend to reduce the share of solid fuels and natural gas and increasing the shares of energy from renewable sources. For example, in Ukraine the shares in the production and cost of electricity in 2018 was: the nuclear power plants – 54.33 % and in the cost – 26.60 %, the thermal power – 35.95 and 59.52 %, the renewable energy sources – 9.6 and 13.88 %. The energy component must be given priority, as it is crucial for achieving of all other goals of sustainable development and harmonization of socio-economic progress. The paper systematizes the indicators of regional energy efficiency and proposes a dynamic model for the transition to sustainable energy development of the region.

Comparing Flexible CO2 Capture in Gas- and Coal-Dominated Electricity Markets

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Fyffe ◽  
Stuart M. Cohen ◽  
Michael E. Webber
Keyword(s):  
Natural Gas ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Co2 Capture ◽  
Electricity Markets ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Electricity Price ◽  
Economic Viability ◽  
Electricity Prices ◽  
Modeling Framework ◽  
Co2 Capture Systems

Coal-fired power plants are a source of inexpensive, reliable electricity for many countries. Unfortunately, their high carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions rates contribute significantly to global climate change. With the likelihood of future policies limiting CO2 emissions, CO2 capture and sequestration (CCS) could allow for the continued use of coal while low- and zero-emission generation sources are developed and implemented. This work compares the potential impact of flexibly operating CO2 capture systems on the economic viability of using CCS in gas- and coal-dominated electricity markets. The comparison is made using a previously developed modeling framework to analyze two different markets: 1) a natural-gas dominated market (the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or ERCOT) and 2) a coal-dominated market (the National Electricity Market, or NEM in Australia). The model uses performance and economic parameters for each power plant to determine the annual generation, CO2 emissions, and operating profits for each plant for specified input fuel prices and CO2 emissions costs. Previous studies of ERCOT found that flexible CO2 capture operation could improve the economic viability of coal-fired power plants with CO2 capture when there are opportunities to reduce CO2 capture load and increase electrical output when electricity prices are high. The model was used to compare the implications of using CO2 capture systems in the two electricity systems under CO2 emissions penalties from 0–100 US dollars per metric ton of CO2. Half the coal-fired power plants in each grid were selected to be considered for a CO2 capture retrofit based on plant efficiency, whether or not SO2 scrubbers are already installed on the plant, and the plant’s proximity to viable sequestration sites. Plants considered for CO2 capture systems are compared with and without inflexible CO2 capture as well as with two different flexible operation strategies. With more coal-fired power plants being dispatched as the marginal generator and setting the electricity price in the NEM, electricity prices increase faster due to CO2 prices than in ERCOT where natural gas-plants typically set the electricity price. The model showed moderate CO2 emissions reductions in ERCOT with CO2 capture and no CO2 price because increased costs at coal-fired power plants led to reduced generation. Without CO2 prices, installing CO2 capture on coal-fired power plants resulted in moderately reduced CO2 emissions in ERCOT as the coal-fired power plants became more expensive and were replaced with less expensive natural gas-fired generators. Without changing the makeup of the plant fleet in NEM, a CO2 price would not currently promote significant replacement of coal-fired power plants because there is minimal excess capacity with low CO2 emissions rates that can displace existing coal-fired power plants. Additionally, retrofitting CO2 capture onto half of the coal-based fleet in NEM did not reduce CO2 emissions significantly without CO2 costs being implemented because the plants with capture become more expensive and were replaced by the coal-fired power plants without CO2 capture. Operating profits at NEM capture plants increased as CO2 price increased much faster than capture plants in ERCOT. The higher rate of increasing profits for plants in NEM is due to the marginal generators in NEM being coal-based facilities with higher CO2 emissions penalties than the natural gas-fired facilities that set electricity prices in ERCOT. Overall, coal-fired power plants were more profitable with CO2 capture systems than without in both ERCOT and NEM when CO2 prices were higher than USD25/ton.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document