Energy penalty estimates for CO2 capture: Comparison between fuel types and capture-combustion modes

Vasudevan, Suraj; Farooq, Shamsuzzaman; Karimi, Iftekhar A.; Saeys, Mark; Quah, Michael C.G.; Agrawal, Rakesh

doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.02.154

Cited by 96 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, Zhang and colleagues () calculate 0.23 kWh of work loss/kg of CO 2 . Vasudevan and colleagues () assume 0.22 kWh of work loss/kg of CO 2 . Slightly different capture plants and processes may explain the difference.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Dioxide–Based Production of Methane and Methanol and Derived Polymers

Hoppe

Thonemann

Bringezu

2017

J of Industrial Ecology

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Previous studies showed that using carbon dioxide (CO2) as a raw material for chemical syntheses may provide an opportunity for achieving greenhouse gas (GHG) savings and a low‐carbon economy. Nevertheless, it is not clear whether carbon capture and utilization benefits the environment in terms of resource efficiency. We analyzed the production of methane, methanol, and synthesis gas as basic chemicals and derived polyoxymethylene, polyethylene, and polypropylene as polymers by calculating the output‐oriented indicator global warming impact (GWI) and the resource‐based indicators raw material input (RMI) and total material requirement (TMR) on a cradle‐to‐gate basis. As carbon source, we analyzed the capturing of CO2 from air, raw biogas, cement plants, lignite‐fired power, and municipal waste incineration plants. Wind power serves as an energy source for hydrogen production. Our data were derived from both industrial processes and process simulations. The results demonstrate that the analyzed CO2‐based process chains reduce the amount of GHG emissions in comparison to the conventional ones. At the same time, the CO2‐based process chains require an increased amount of (abiotic) resources. This trade‐off between decreased GHG emissions and increased resource use is assessed. The decision about whether or not to recycle CO2 into hydrocarbons depends largely on the source and amount of energy used to produce hydrogen.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Dioxide–Based Production of Methane and Methanol and Derived Polymers

Hoppe

Thonemann

Bringezu

2017

J of Industrial Ecology

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A drop-in fuel that will, by definition, require no changes in the infrastructure and thus avoid a costly and disruptive transition, is accorded 5 points, whereas a fuel that is incompatible with the present distribution, refueling, and shipping infrastructure 1 point. For CCS, the choice is primarily about the capture technology best suited to the process, with pre-combustion capture favored over post-combustion (or oxyfuel combustion) capture on account of the customarily lower capture costs and energy penalties ( Leung et al., 2014 ; Vasudevan et al., 2016 ; Cormos et al., 2018 ). Within this, a certain fuel would be given a better rating based on the ease or cost of carbon capture — for instance, the removal of a large quantity of CO 2 is an integral part of bio-LNG synthesis using anaerobic digestion, whereas for methanol, the amount of CO 2 captured per unit of fuel would be much lower.…”

Section: Comparative Evaluation Of Biofuel Alternativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Perspective on Biofuels Use and CCS for GHG Mitigation in the Marine Sector

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the marine sector were around 2.6% of world GHG emissions in 2015 and are expected to increase 50%–250% to 2050 under a “business as usual” scenario, making the decarbonization of this fossil fuel-intensive sector an urgent priority. Biofuels, which come in various forms, are one of the most promising options to replace existing marine fuels for accomplishing this in the short to medium term. Some unique challenges, however, impede biofuels penetration in the shipping sector, including the low cost of the existing fuels, the extensive present-day refueling infrastructure, and the exclusion of the sector from the Paris climate agreement. To address this, it is necessary to first identify those biofuels best suited for deployment as marine fuel. In this work, the long list of possible biofuel candidates has been narrowed down to four high-potential options—bio-methanol, bio-dimethyl ether, bio-liquefied natural gas, and bio-oil. These options are further evaluated based on six criteria—cost, potential availability, present technology status, GHG mitigation potential, infrastructure compatibility, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) compatibility—via both an extensive literature review and stakeholder discussions. These four candidates turn out to be relatively evenly matched overall, but each possesses certain strengths and shortcomings that could favor that fuel under specific circumstances, such as if compatibility with existing shipping infrastructure or with CCS deployment become pivotal requirements. Furthermore, we pay particular attention to the possibility of integrating deployment of these biofuels with CCS to further reduce marine sector emissions. It is shown that this aspect is presently not on the radar of the industry stakeholders but is likely to grow in importance as CCS acceptability increases in the broader green energy sector.

show abstract

“…Interactions with the CaCO 3 processing surroundings were represented by a version adapted to the national conditions of the LCI "Limestone, milled, loose, at plant/CH U". The electrical consumption of the ASU plant (200 kWh/t O 2 ) and the compressor arrangement on purified CO 2 (100 kWh/t CO 2 ) were also assess [41,47].…”

Section: Environmental Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of the Implementation of Carbon Capture Systems on the Environmental, Energy and Economic Performance of the Brazilian Electricity Matrix

Moore

Kulay

2019

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effect of Carbon Capture and Storage units on the environmental, energy and economic performance of the Brazilian electric grid. Four scenarios were established considering the coupling of Calcium Looping (CaL) processes to capture CO2 emitted from thermoelectric using coal and natural gas: S1: the current condition of the Brazilian grid; S2 and S3: Brazilian grid with CaL applied individually to coal (TEC) and gas (TGN) operated thermoelectric; and S4: CaL is simultaneously coupled to both sources. Global warming potential (GWP) expressed the environmental dimension, Primary Energy Demand (PED) was the energy indicator and Levelised Cost of Energy described the economic range. Attributional Life Cycle Assessment for generation of 1.0 MWh was applied in the analysis. None of the scenarios accumulated the best indexes in all dimensions. Regarding GWP, S4 totals the positive effects of using CaL to reduce CO2 from TEC and TGN, but the CH4 emissions increased due to its energy requirements. As for PED, S1 and S2 are similar and presented higher performances than S3 and S4. The price of natural gas compromises the use of CaL in TGN. A combined verification of the three analysis dimensions, proved that S2 was the best option of the series due to the homogeneity of its indices. The installation of CaL in TECs and TGNs was effective to capture and store CO2 emissions, but the costs of this system should be reduced and its energy efficiency still needs to be improved.

show abstract

Energy penalty estimates for CO2 capture: Comparison between fuel types and capture-combustion modes

Cited by 96 publications

References 24 publications

Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Dioxide–Based Production of Methane and Methanol and Derived Polymers

Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Dioxide–Based Production of Methane and Methanol and Derived Polymers

A Perspective on Biofuels Use and CCS for GHG Mitigation in the Marine Sector

Effect of the Implementation of Carbon Capture Systems on the Environmental, Energy and Economic Performance of the Brazilian Electricity Matrix

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About