Biomass-fired cogeneration systems with CO2 capture and storage

Uddin, Sk Noim; Barreto, Leonardo

doi:10.1016/j.renene.2006.04.009

Cited by 82 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…High feedstock and transportation costs make biogas power production more costly than power production in BIGCC or steam engine plants based on woody biomass feedstock (König, 2011). Both, steam engines and BIGCC can be integrated with CCS (Azar et al, 2006;Uddin and Barreto, 2007).…”

Section: Agricultural Biomassmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cost-effective policy instruments for greenhouse gas emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution through bioenergy production in Austria

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change mitigation and security of energy supply are important targets of Austrian energy policy. Bioenergy production based on resources from agriculture and forestry is an important option to attain these targets. In order to increase the share of bioenergy, supporting policy instruments are necessary. The cost-effectiveness of these instruments in attaining policy targets depends on the availability of bioenergy technologies. Advanced technologies such as second generation biofuels, biomass gasification for power * Correspondence to: Johannes Schmidt, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development, University of Natural Ressources and Life Sciences, Feistmantelstraße 4, A-1180 Vienna, Austria. E-Mail: johannes.schmidt@boku.ac.at 2 production and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) will likely change the performance of policy instruments. This article assesses the cost-effectiveness of energy policy instruments with respect to greenhouse gas emission (GHG) reduction and fossil fuel substitution under consideration of new bioenergy technologies for the year 2030. Instruments that directly subsidize bioenergy are compared with instruments that aim at reducing GHG emissions. A spatially explicit modeling approach is used to account for biomass supply and energy distribution costs in Austria. Results indicate that a carbon tax performs cost effective with respect to both policy targets if BECCS is not available. However, the availability of BECCS creates a tradeoff between GHG emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution. Biofuel blending obligations are costly in attaining the policy targets.

show abstract

Section: Agricultural Biomassmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Injection costs range from 1.1 to 11.4 € tCO 2 -1 , depending on the type and depth of storage. Others estimate transportation and injection costs to be in the range of 13 to 42 € tCO 2 -1 (Azar et al, 2006;Rhodes and Ketih, 2005;Uddin and Barreto, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effective policy instruments for greenhouse gas emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution through bioenergy production in Austria

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New configurations of CHP systems were studied and among them photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) configurations [15][16][17] or fuel cell CHP systems [2,4,14] are close to implementation in the near future. Also the fuel disposal issue was considered, mainly by various biomass availabilities [16,18,19], or gasoline and hydrogen [10]. Analysis of the CO 2 mitigation costs of large-scale biomass-fired cogeneration technologies with CO 2 capture and storage was performed [19], showing that biomass-fired cogeneration plants based on integrated gasification combined cycle technology (CHP-BIGCC) is very energy and emission efficient and also cost competitive compared with other conversion systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also the fuel disposal issue was considered, mainly by various biomass availabilities [16,18,19], or gasoline and hydrogen [10]. Analysis of the CO 2 mitigation costs of large-scale biomass-fired cogeneration technologies with CO 2 capture and storage was performed [19], showing that biomass-fired cogeneration plants based on integrated gasification combined cycle technology (CHP-BIGCC) is very energy and emission efficient and also cost competitive compared with other conversion systems. A new analytical approach based on the current models of the solid oxide fuel cell and gas turbine was elaborated [20], in which multiple irreversibilities existing in real hybrid systems are taken into account.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy and Exergy Analysis and Optimization of Combined Heat and Power Systems. Comparison of Various Systems

Feidt

Costea

2012

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The paper presents a comparison of various CHP system configurations, such as Vapour Turbine, Gas Turbine, Internal Combustion Engine, External Combustion Engine (Stirling, Ericsson), when different thermodynamic criteria are considered, namely the first law efficiency and exergy efficiency. Thermodynamic optimization of these systems is performed intending to maximize the exergy, when various practical related constraints (imposed mechanical useful energy, imposed heat demand, imposed heat to power ratio) or main physical limitations (limited heat availability, maximum system temperature allowed, thermo-mechanical constraints) are taken into account. A sensitivity analysis to model parameters is given. The results have shown that the various added constraints were useful for the design allowing to precise the influence of the model main parameters on the system design. Future perspective of the work and recommendations are stated.

show abstract

“…Environmental and economic studies focus on its application in the electricity and heating sectors (Carpentieri et al, 2005;Rhodes 2007;Uddin and Barreto 2007) and the biofuel sector (Kheshgi and Prince, 2005;Westermark, 2008, 2009;Laude et al, 2010;Mathews, 2008;Möllersten et al, 2003). Considering that CO 2 from biomass is neutral, BECCS can contribute to a net removal of atmospheric CO 2 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Providing adequate economic incentives for bioenergies with CO2 capture and geological storage

Ricci

2012

Energy Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowing that carbon capture and storage (CCS) could play an important role in reducing CO2 emissions, it is important to have a good understanding of this role and the importance of environmental policies to support carbon capture and geological storage from bioenergies (BECCS). To date CCS technologies are not deployed on a commercial level, and policy instruments should be used to provide incentives to firms to use these technologies to reduce pollution. The aim of this paper is to compare the cost-efficiency of several incentive-based instruments (a fossil fuel tax, an emissions tax, a cap and trade system that recognize negative emissions, and a subsidy on captured emissions) needed to spur the adoption of CCS of the emissions from fossil fuel as well as from biomass, using a dynamic general equilibrium model. The study shows that BECCS will be deployed only if a specific subsidy per unit of biomass emissions captured with a CCS technology is available. We show also that the two most cost-efficient instruments for achieving a given emissions reduction target are a specific subsidy that rewards captured emissions and a carbon tax whose revenues are recycled to subsidize BECCS. Keywords:Bioenergies with carbon capture and storage, dynamic computable general equilibrium model, policy instruments efficiency. RésuméLa capture et le stockage du carbone (CCS) à un rôle important à jouer dans la réduction des émissions de CO2. Elle peut s'appliquer aux énergies fossiles et aux bioénergies (BECCS). A l'heure actuelle, ces technologies ne sont pas encore au stade de la commercialisation. Il existe donc une nécessité de mettre en place des incitations économiques claires et crédibles pour faciliter leur développement. L'objectif de ce papier est de comparer l'efficacité-économique de plusieurs instruments économiques (une taxe fossile, une taxe sur les émissions, un système de permis négociable qui reconnait les émissions négatives et une subvention à la capture des émissions) capables de stimuler le CCS et le BECCS. Cette analyse est conduite grâce à un modèle dynamique d'équilibre général calculable. Les résultats montrent que la technologie BECCS, compte tenu de sa singularité, sera développée uniquement si une subvention à la capture des émissions issues de la biomasse est mise en place. De plus, les deux instruments les plus efficace-économiquement pour atteindre un niveau donné de réduction d'émissions sont la subvention à la capture des émissions et la taxe carbone dont les revenus sont recyclés sous forme de subvention au BECCS. Mots-clés :Capture et Stockage du Carbone, bioénergies, modèle d'équilibre général calculable, efficacité-économique, incitation-économique.3

show abstract

Biomass-fired cogeneration systems with CO2 capture and storage

Cited by 82 publications

References 21 publications

Cost-effective policy instruments for greenhouse gas emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution through bioenergy production in Austria

Cost-effective policy instruments for greenhouse gas emission reduction and fossil fuel substitution through bioenergy production in Austria

Energy and Exergy Analysis and Optimization of Combined Heat and Power Systems. Comparison of Various Systems

Providing adequate economic incentives for bioenergies with CO2 capture and geological storage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About