Development of an Integrated Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage Hub in the United States

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mackenzie Scharenberg ◽  
Diana Bacon ◽  
Dan Blankenau ◽  
Dana Divine ◽  
Andrew Duguid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
The United States ◽  
And Storage

Integrated Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage for the Mid-Continent Region of the United States

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Duguid ◽  
Diana Bacon ◽  
Dan Blankenau ◽  
Dana Divine ◽  
Isis Fukai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
The United States ◽  
And Storage

Deploying Carbon Capture and Storage in Europe and the United States: A Comparative Analysis

2007 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 343-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Gibbons ◽  
Elizabeth JI. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
Term Care ◽  
And Storage ◽  
The U.S

AbstractCarbon capture and storage could play an important role as a near-term bridging technology, enabling deep reductions from greenhouse gas emissions while still allowing use of inexpensive fossil fuels. However, filling this technological promise requires resolution of key regulatory and legal uncertainties surrounding both human and ecological health, integration within a larger climate policy, and clear assignment of responsibility and liability for long-term care. Deployment of CCS projects in the European Union (E.U.) and the United States (U.S.) may be technologically similar, but will be contextually different. In this paper, we explore the existing energy, policy, regulatory and legal climates that will necessitate different approaches for deployment. The high U.S. dependence on coal makes CCS very important if the U.S. is to achieve deep emissions reductions, while in the E.U. an established climate policy, the importance of off shore projects, and a supportive political climate are favorable to CCS deployment. Additionally, in Europe, regulators must clarify the classification of CO2 within E.U. and international regulations governing on and offshore projects, whereas in the U.S. subsurface property rights, abandoned wells, and state-level jurisdictional difference will play important roles.

CCS AS ONE OF the CO2 EMISSION REDUCTION METHODS

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Teresa ADAMCZAK-BIAŁY ◽  
Adam WÓJCICKI
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Great Plains ◽  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Geological Storage ◽  
Co2 Emission Reduction ◽  
And Storage

Information presented in the article allows us to introduce one of the ways of reducing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions responsible for the temperature increase and climate change. This is the technology of capture and underground storage of carbon dioxide in geologic structures (Carbon Capture and Storage/Sequestration – CCS). Most of the large-scale CCS projects (i.e. capture and storage of an order of magnitude of 1 million tonnes of CO2 per year) operate in the United States and Canada. Many of them are associated with the use of CO2 captured from the industrial processes for the enhanced oil recovery (EOR). The presented examples of projects are: Boundary Dam Integrated Carbon Capture and Sequestration Demonstration Project (Canada), Great Plains Synfuels and Weyburn-Midale Project (Canada), and Kemper County IGCC Project (United States). CCS projects are crucial for demonstrating the technological readiness and reduce the cost of wider commercial implementation of capture and geological storage of CO2. The status of the projects on geological storage of CO2 in 2015 is 15 large-scale CCS projects operating around the world, and 7 projects in execution.

Carbon capture rollout will hit global policy gap

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Industrial Facilities ◽  
Content Type ◽  
And Storage

Subject Carbon capture and storage technology. Significance Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is considered critical to achieving the ambitious reductions in greenhouse gas emissions set out in the 2015 Paris Agreement. CCS technology would allow power plants and industrial facilities to continue burning fossil fuels without pumping climate change-inducing gases into the atmosphere. However, deployment of CCS has been slow and the prospect of meeting the expectations placed upon it by the Paris climate negotiators is moving further out of scope. The recent cancellation of the Kemper CCS project in the United States is a bad sign for the future of the technology. Impacts Without faster deployment of CCS, many countries will struggle to meet their Paris Agreement emissions reduction pledges. If the rollout of CCS continues to falter, more wind and solar power will be needed to reduce carbon emissions. Absent a viable CCS model, it will be even more difficult to replace aged coal plants in the United States and other developed economies.

scholarly journals Infrastructure to enable deployment of carbon capture, utilization, and storage in the United States

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (38) ◽  
pp. E8815-E8824 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan W. J. Edwards ◽  
Michael A. Celia
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Carbon Dioxide ◽  
Oil Recovery ◽  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
The United States ◽  
Transport Infrastructure ◽  
Government Finance ◽  
Transport Costs ◽  
And Storage

In February 2018, the United States enacted significant financial incentives for carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) that will make capture from the lowest-capture-cost sources economically viable. The largest existing low-capture-cost opportunity is from ethanol fermentation at biorefineries in the Midwest. An impediment to deployment of carbon capture at ethanol biorefineries is that most are not close to enhanced oil recovery (EOR) fields or other suitable geological formations in which the carbon dioxide could be stored. Therefore, we analyze the viability of a pipeline network to transport carbon dioxide from Midwest ethanol biorefineries to the Permian Basin in Texas, which has the greatest current carbon dioxide demand for EOR and large potential for expansion. We estimate capture and transport costs and perform economic analysis for networks under three pipeline financing scenarios representing different combinations of commercial and government finance. Without government finance, we find that a network earning commercial rates of return would not be viable. With 50% government financing for pipelines, 19 million tons of carbon dioxide per year could be captured and transported profitably. Thirty million tons per year could be captured with full government pipeline financing, which would double global anthropogenic carbon capture and increase the United States’ carbon dioxide EOR industry by 50%. Such a development would face challenges, including coordination between governments and industries, pressing timelines, and policy uncertainties, but is not unprecedented. This represents an opportunity to considerably increase CCUS in the near-term and develop long-term transport infrastructure facilitating future growth.

Evaluating the development of carbon capture and storage technologies in the United States

2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 971-986 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaas van Alphen ◽  
Paul M. Noothout ◽  
Marko P. Hekkert ◽  
Wim C. Turkenburg
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Storage Technologies ◽  
And Storage
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document