Designing multi-phased CO<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si12.svg"><mml:msub><mml:mrow/><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math> capture and storage infrastructure deployments

Jones, Erick C.; Yaw, Sean; Bennett, Jeffrey A.; Ogland-Hand, Jonathan D.; Strahan, Cooper; Middleton, Richard S.

doi:10.1016/j.rset.2022.100023

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, energy storage technologies are constantly improving, and the developmental of new battery chemistries has the potential to accelerate these effects. However, as shown in other technologies, including distributed energy resources (DERs) [23][24][25], carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) [26], infrastructure [27], new semiconductors in EVs , and weatherization [28,29], most of the impacts and the challenges are from simply finding a way to increase adoption. Innovative technologies are usually faced with a limiting factor, preventing them from reaching their full potential.…”

Section: Case Study Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lithium Supply Chain Optimization: A Global Analysis of Critical Minerals for Batteries

Jones

2024

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy storage is a foundational clean energy technology that can enable transformative technologies and lower carbon emissions, especially when paired with renewable energy. However, clean energy transition technologies need completely different supply chains than our current fuel-based supply chains. These technologies will instead require a material-based supply chain that extracts and processes massive amounts of minerals, especially critical minerals, which are classified by how essential they are for the modern economy. In order to develop, operate, and optimize the new material-based supply chain, new decision-making frameworks and tools are needed to design and navigate this new supply chain and ensure we have the materials we need to build the energy system of tomorrow. This work creates a flexible mathematical optimization framework for critical mineral supply chain analysis that, once provided with exogenously supplied projections for parameters such as demand, cost, and carbon intensity, can provide an efficient analysis of a mineral or critical mineral supply chain. To illustrate the capability of the framework, this work also conducts a case study investigating the global lithium supply chain needed for energy storage technologies like electric vehicles (EVs). The case study model explores the investment and operational decisions that a global central planner would consider in order to meet projected lithium demand in one scenario where the objective is to minimize cost and another scenario where the objective is to minimize CO2 emissions. The case study shows there is a 6% cost premium to reduce CO2 emissions by 2%. Furthermore, the CO2 Objective scenario invested in recycling capacity to reduce emissions, while the Cost Objective scenario did not. Lastly, this case study shows that even with a deterministic model and a global central planner, asset utilization is not perfect, and there is a substantial tradeoff between cost and emissions. Therefore, this framework—when expanded to less-idealized scenarios, like those focused on individual countries or regions or scenarios that optimize other important evaluation metrics—would yield even more impactful insights. However, even in its simplest form, as presented in this work, the framework illustrates its power to model, optimize, and illustrate the material-based supply chains needed for the clean energy technologies of tomorrow.

show abstract

Section: Case Study Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lithium Supply Chain Optimization: A Global Analysis of Critical Minerals for Batteries

Jones

2024

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2050, the system would be capturing and storing 73 Mt/y. We assume SEJ communities are to be avoided in pipeline routing and utilize SimCCS TIME , 51,52 a variant of SimCCS PRO , to model construction phases. SimCCS TIME minimizes the total capital and operating cost for CCS in a region over a specified overall time period while meeting target capture and storage levels at intermediate time steps.…”

Section: Social and Environmentalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design Insights for Industrial CO₂ Capture, Transport, and Storage Systems

Gunawan,

Gittoes,

Isaac

et al. 2024

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present methods and insights for the design of CO 2 capture, transport, and storage systems for industrial facilities with a case study focus on Louisiana. Our analytical framework includes (1) evaluating the scale and concentration of capturable CO 2 emissions at individual facilities for the purpose of estimating the cost of CO 2 capture retrofits that utilize various energy supply sources to meet parasitic demands; (2) screening to identify potential CO 2 storage sites and estimate their capacities, injectivities, and costs; and (3) designing cost-minimized trucking or pipeline infrastructure connecting CO 2 capture plants with storage sites, considering existing land uses, demographics, and a variety of social and environmental justice factors. Estimated levelized costs of capture at Louisiana's 190 industrial facilities range from below $50/tCO 2 to above $500/tCO 2 , depending on facility-specific features. We identified 98 potential storage sites with storage costs ranging from $8 to $17/tCO 2 . We find that in most situations, pipelines are the least-costly mode of CO 2 transport. When industrial facilities in a region share pipelines, aggregate pipeline mileage and average transport costs are dramatically lower than without sharing. Shared pipeline networks designed to avoid disadvantaged communities require right-ofway areas compared to those for networks that transect such communities, but result in 25% higher average per-tonne transport cost.

show abstract

Evaluation of Geological Carbon Storage Opportunities in California and a Deep Look in the Vicinity of Kern County

Kim

Yaw

Kovscek

2022

SPE Western Regional Meeting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geological carbon storage has a critical role to play for the US to accomplish carbon neutrality by 2050. In this work, previous studies of geological carbon storage are reviewed, redefined, and evaluated to focus on providing proper candidate storage sites in the Southern San Joaquin Basin. This study clarifies not only the CO2 capture and storage opportunity but also the potential economic benefit. A three-stage selection method is applied to a catalog of saline formations and hydrocarbon fields to qualify sites for additional in-depth study. The three stages consist of screening using geological criteria, defining exclusion zones, and qualifying sites (Callas and Benson, 2020; Kim et al., 2022). Exclusion zones define potentially unacceptable storage sites based on seismic risk, surface environment such as sensitive habitats, social, and economic aspects. Nine saline formations and 133 hydrocarbon fields were examined. The exclusion zones including faulted, seismically active, large population density, restricted lands, and sensitive habitats, were subtracted from hydrocarbon fields and saline formations. This process resulted in qualified sites. Finally, qualified sites were prioritized using a scoring system. The estimated CO2 storage resource in the qualified saline formations ranged from 16.6 to 52 GtCO2 whereas the estimated CO2 storage resource in hydrocarbon fields ranged from 0.45 - 1.15 GtCO2. Among hydrocarbon fields, 15 CO2-EOR candidate fields with storage resources of 0.36 – 0.88 GtCO2 are located in Kern County. Considering the scoring system, a total of 41 storage sites including 7 hydrocarbon fields were defined as target CO2 storage sites. The opportunities for 41 CO2 storage sites in and around Kern County were linked to selected large CO2 emitters in Southern California including Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and Ventura Counties. Finally, the prospective storage sites and emitters were analyzed technoeconomically using SimCCS to find optimal conditions to deploy CCS projects. Regional GHG emissions from oil and gas facilities such as EOR steam generators and CHPs can be captured and stored economically in geological formations as a result of LCFS and 45Q credits. The sensitivity of 45Q credit value and covered period are critical factors to incentivize CCS deployment. The deployment scenarios evaluated using SimCCS teach that the Southern San Joaquin basin is an excellent potential regional carbon storage hub.

show abstract

Designing multi-phased CO2 capture and storage infrastructure deployments

Cited by 5 publications

References 21 publications

Lithium Supply Chain Optimization: A Global Analysis of Critical Minerals for Batteries

Lithium Supply Chain Optimization: A Global Analysis of Critical Minerals for Batteries

Design Insights for Industrial CO₂ Capture, Transport, and Storage Systems

Evaluation of Geological Carbon Storage Opportunities in California and a Deep Look in the Vicinity of Kern County

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Designing multi-phased CO2 capture and storage infrastructure deployments

Cited by 5 publications

References 21 publications

Lithium Supply Chain Optimization: A Global Analysis of Critical Minerals for Batteries

Lithium Supply Chain Optimization: A Global Analysis of Critical Minerals for Batteries

Design Insights for Industrial CO2 Capture, Transport, and Storage Systems

Evaluation of Geological Carbon Storage Opportunities in California and a Deep Look in the Vicinity of Kern County

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Design Insights for Industrial CO₂ Capture, Transport, and Storage Systems