1 / 19

Carbon Capture and Storage

Carbon Capture and Storage. Sally M. Benson Energy Resources Engineering Stanford University Stanford, CA. Chapter 13. Carbon Capture and Storage Lead Authors. Convening Lead Author (CLA) Sally M. Benson (Stanford University, USA) Lead Authors (LA) Kamel Bennaceur (Schlumberger, France)

megara
Download Presentation

Carbon Capture and Storage

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Carbon Capture and Storage Sally M. Benson Energy Resources Engineering Stanford University Stanford, CA

  2. Chapter 13. Carbon Capture and StorageLead Authors Convening Lead Author (CLA) Sally M. Benson (Stanford University, USA) Lead Authors (LA) KamelBennaceur (Schlumberger, France) Peter Cook (CO2CRC, Australia) John Davison (IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, UK) Heleen de Coninck (ECN, Netherlands) Karim Farhat (Stanford University, USA) Andrea Ramirez (Utrecht University, the Netherlands) Dale Simbeck (SFA Pacific, USA) Terry Surles (Desert Research Institute, USA) PreetiVerma (The Climate Group, India) Iain Wright (BP, UK) Review Editor John Ahearne (Sigma Xi, USA)

  3. Emissions of CO2, the most important long-lived anthropogenic greenhousegas, can be reduced by CCS. Pipeline Transport Geological Sequestration Compression Capture

  4. CCS is applicable to stationary CO2 sources, including the power generation,refining, building materials, and the industrial sectors. Natural Gas Coal

  5. Interest in CCS has been growing rapidly around the world. Source: GCCSI, Global Status of CCS Projects 2013 Update.

  6. The technology for CCS is available today, but significant improvements are needed tosupport widespread deployment.

  7. Options for Geological Storage

  8. Technology Improvements Are Needed Capture Reduce cost (power generation cost from 1.5 to 2 x cost without CCS) Reduce energy demand (15-30% of power generation) Optimize integration with power generation and other applications Storage Increase confidence in the permanence of saline aquifer storage Improve understanding of the relationship between pressure buildup and induced seismicity

  9. Successful experience from five ongoing projects demonstrate that CCS can be safe and effective for reducing emissions.

  10. Significant scale-up compared to existing CCS activities will be needed to achieve largereductions in CO2 emissions. 1,000 MW Coal Power Plant = 8.5 Megatonne/year 1 Gigatonne CO2 ~ 100 xscaleup of existing CCS ~ 120 Coal Plants (1,000 MW)

  11. The technical potential of CCS on a global level is promising, but on a regionallevel is differentiated. Unevenly distributed CO2 storage capacity is a limiting factor.

  12. Worldwide storage capacity estimation is improving but more experience is needed. Storage capacity is sufficient for anticipated needs between now and 2100, but it is not available everywhere.

  13. The combination of high costs and low or absent incentives for large-scale deployment are a major factor limiting the widespread use of CCS. Source: Thomson Reuters Point Carbon. The Washington Post. Published on May 5, 2013, 7:24 p.m.

  14. Environmental risks of CCS appear manageable, but regulations are needed.

  15. Experience so far has shown that local resistance to CO2 storage projects may lead to cancellation of planned CCS projects. Local Concerns • Safety risks of CO2 leakage • Contamination of groundwater • Impacts of increased coal mining • Effect on local ecosystems • Assumption that CO2 is explosive or poisonous • Effects of conducting seismic surveys on their property General Concerns • Availability of storage sites • Permanence of storage and long term liability • Lack of infrastructure • Diversion of attention from renewables and efficiency • Lack of clarity on pore space ownership • Costs • Risks of unknown technology

  16. Social, economic, policy and political factors may limit deployment if not adequately addressed. Early Adopters Business Model Public Support CCS Technology Learning By Doing Policy Support Regulatory Capacity Long Term Steward-ship Land Use

  17. CCS combined with biomass can lead to negative emissions.

  18. Consequences of Excluding CCS from the Mitigation Portfolio Cost of mitigation will increase • Including CCS reduces the cost of the overall mitigation portfolio Sufficiently large emission reductions will not be possible without CCS • Base and peak load generation will be challenging without fossil fuels Political support for mitigation will be weak • Fossil fuel-rich regions will resist mitigation Some geographic areas will not be able to reduce emissions rapidly enough • Renewable energy and nuclear power may be poor options in some areas

More Related