scholarly journals Techno-Economic Assessment of Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage Systems in a Typical Sugarcane Mill in Brazil

Energies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 1129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Restrepo-Valencia ◽  
Arnaldo Walter
Keyword(s):  
Co2 Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Economic Assessment ◽  
Energy Requirements ◽  
Biomass Combustion ◽  
Reference Case ◽  
Cogeneration System ◽  
The Cost ◽  
And Storage

For significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, those from electricity generation should be negative by the end of the century. In this sense, bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) technology in sugarcane mills could be crucial. This paper presents a technical and economic assessment of BECCS systems in a typical Brazilian sugarcane mill, considering the adoption of advanced—although commercial—steam cogeneration systems. The technical results are based on computational simulations, considering CO2 capture both from fermentation (released during ethanol production) and due to biomass combustion. The post combustion capture technology based on amine was considered integrated to the mill and to the cogeneration system. A range of energy requirements and costs were taken from the literature, and different milling capacities and capturing rates were considered. Results show that CO2 capture from both flows is technically feasible. Capturing CO2 from fermentation is the alternative that should be prioritized as energy requirements for capturing from combustion are meaningful, with high impacts on surplus electricity. In the reference case, the cost of avoided CO2 emissions was estimated at 62 €/t CO2, and this can be reduced to 59 €/t CO2 in case of more efficient technologies, or even to 48 €/t CO2 in case of larger plants.

Techno-Economic Comparison of CO2 Capture Technologies Employed With Natural Gas Derived GTCC

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kostantinos Atsonios ◽  
Antonios Koumanakos ◽  
Kyriakos D. Panopoulos ◽  
Aggelos Doukelis ◽  
Emmanuel Kakaras
Keyword(s):  
Co2 Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Economic Assessment ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Membrane Reactors ◽  
Physical Absorption ◽  
Process Simulations ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Economic Comparison

Carbon Capture and Storage can either concern the removal of carbon as CO2 in flue gases (post-combustion option) or before its combustion in a Gas Turbine (pre-combustion option). Among the numerous CO2 capture technologies, amine scrubbing (MEA and MDEA), physical absorption (Selexol™ and Rectisol™) and H2 separator membrane reactors are investigated and compared in this study. In the pre-combustion options, the final fuel combusted in the GT is a rich-H2 fuel. Process simulations in ASPEN Plus™ showed that the case of H2 separation with Pd-based membranes has the greatest performance as far as the net efficiency of the energy system is concerned. The economic assessment reveals that the technology is promising in terms of cost of CO2 avoided, provided that the current high membrane costs are reduced.

scholarly journals Optimization of Network Carbon Capture and Storage System (CCS) Using Mathematical Approach

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 161
Author(s):  
David Licindo ◽  
Arinne Christin Paramudita ◽  
Renanto Handogo ◽  
Juwari Purwo Sutikno
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Storage System ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Exact Result ◽  
Maximum Load ◽  
Mathematical Approach ◽  
Source To Sink ◽  
Storage Location ◽  
The Cost ◽  
And Storage

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is one of the technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) tocapture of CO2 from the flue gas of a power plant that typically use coal as a Source of energy and then store it ina suitable geological storage (in specific locations). In practice, these sites may not be readily available forstorage at the same time that the Sources (GHG producing) are operating which gives rise to multi – periodplanning problems. This study presents a mathematical approach by considering constraints limit flowratereceived by Sink, various time availability of Sink and Source and calculation with the purpose to determine theminimum cost network which is getting the maximum load that is exchanged from Source to Sink. Illustrativecase studies are given to demonstrate the application of mathematical models to obtained with the exact result ofthe exchange network from Source to Sink. Derived from network obtained from the calculation of theMaximum Load Source to Sink and results may vary in accordance with the limitations that exist in themathematical model. The case study has been prepared with 2 cases, first 6 Source and 3 Sink with value ofSource Load is greater than the amount available on the Sink. Also, second case is 2 Source and 5 Sinkwithvalue of Source Load is smaller than the amount available on the Sink. In addition, Case Studies tominimize the cost of pipeline construction and distribution of CO2 by plant and storage location determination inJava. Flowrate restriction factor that goes into Sink, Source and Sink establishment time and cost are taken intoaccount can affect the networks that can be exchanged from the Source to the Sink.

scholarly journals Economic Conditions for Developing Hydrogen Production Based on Coal Gasification with Carbon Capture and Storage in Poland

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (19) ◽  
pp. 5074
Author(s):  
Radosław Kaplan ◽  
Michał Kopacz
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Coal Gasification ◽  
Net Present Value ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Economic Assessment ◽  
Free Cash Flow ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Capital Expenditures ◽  
Hard Coal ◽  
And Storage

This study documents the results of economic assessment concerning four variants of coal gasification to hydrogen in a shell reactor. That assessment has been made using discounting methods (NPV: net present value, IRR: internal rate of return), as well as indicators based on a free cash flow to firm (FCFF) approach. Additionally, sensitivity analysis has been carried out, along with scenario analysis in current market conditions concerning prices of hard coal, lignite, hydrogen and CO2 allowances, as well as capital expenditures and costs related to carbon capture and storage (CCS) systems. Based on NPV results, a negative economic assessment has been obtained for all the analyzed variants varying within the range of EUR −903 to −142 million, although the variants based on hard coal achieved a positive IRR (5.1–5.7%) but lower than the assumed discount rates. In Polish conditions, the gasification of lignite seems to be unprofitable, in the assumed scale of total investment outlays and the current price of coal feedstock. The sensitivity analyses indicate that at least a 20% increase of hydrogen price would be required, or a similar reduction of capital expenditures (CAPEX) and costs of operation, for the best variant to make NPV positive. Analyses have also indicated that on the economic basis, only the prices of CO2 allowances exceeding EUR 40/Mg (EUR 52/Mg for lignite) would generate savings due to the availability of CCS systems.

The Cost of Carbon Capture and Storage in the Perth Region

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Guy Allinson ◽  
Richard Edward Dunsmore ◽  
Peter Neal ◽  
Minh Ho
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
The Cost ◽  
And Storage

scholarly journals Total cost of carbon capture and storage implemented at a regional scale: northeastern and midwestern United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 20190065 ◽  
Author(s):  
William J. Schmelz ◽  
Gal Hochman ◽  
Kenneth G. Miller
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Regional Scale ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Midwestern United States ◽  
Additional Costs ◽  
The Cost ◽  
And Storage

We model the costs of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in subsurface geological formations for emissions from 138 northeastern and midwestern electricity-generating power plants. The analysis suggests coal-sourced CO 2 emissions can be stored in this region at a cost of $52–$60 ton −1 , whereas the cost to store emission from natural-gas-fired plants ranges from approximately $80 to $90. Storing emissions offshore increases the lowest total costs of CCS to over $60 per ton of CO 2 for coal. Because there apparently is sufficient onshore storage in the northeastern and midwestern United States, offshore storage is not necessary or economical unless there are additional costs or suitability issues associated with the onshore reservoirs. For example, if formation pressures are prohibitive in a large-scale deployment of onshore CCS, or if there is opposition to onshore storage, offshore storage space could probably store emissions at an additional cost of less than $10 ton −1 . Finally, it is likely that more than 8 Gt of total CO 2 emissions from this region can be stored for less $60 ton −1 , slightly more than the $50 ton −1 Section 45Q tax credits incentivizing CCS.

Lithium-based ceramics in nonsilicates for CO2 capture: Current status and new trends

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yingchao Hu ◽  
Ruicheng Fu ◽  
Wenqiang Liu ◽  
Dingding Yao ◽  
Shuiping Yan
Keyword(s):  
Co2 Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Climate Changes ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Current Status ◽  
And Storage

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has been broadly recognized as having the potentials to play a key role in mitigating the climate changes induced by enormous emissions of greenhouse...

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document