Carbon capture and storage: Difference between revisions

From IMAGE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{AdditionalInfoTemplate
{{AdditionalInfoTemplate
|IMAGEComponent=Energy conversion;
|IMAGEComponent=Energy conversion;
|Reference=Hendriks et al., 2004a; Hendriks et al., 2002a; Hendriks et al., 2002b;
|Reference=Hendriks et al., 2004a; Hendriks et al., 2004b; Hendriks et al., 2002;
|Description=For carbon capture and storage, three different steps are identified in the TIMER model:  
|BelongsTo=Energy conversion/Description;
CO<sub>2</sub> capture and compression, CO<sub>2</sub> transport and CO<sub>2</sub> storage. Capture is assumed to be possible in electric power production, half of the industry sector and hydrogen production. Here, alternative technologies are defined that compete for market share with conventional technologies (without CCS). The former have higher costs and slightly lower conversion efficiencies and are therefore not chosen under default conditions; however, these technologies increase much less in price if a carbon price is introduced in the model. Capture is assumed to be at a maximum 95%; the remaining 5% is still influenced by the carbon price. The actual market shares of the conventional and CCS based technologies are determined in each market using multinomial logit equations. The capture costs are based on Hendriks et al. ([[Hendriks et al., 2002a]]; [[Hendriks et al., 2002b]]; [[Hendriks et al., 2004a]]).  
}}<div class="page_standard">
For carbon capture and storage (CCS), three different steps are identified in the TIMER model:  
*CO<SUB>2</SUB> capture and compression;
*CO<SUB>2</SUB> transport;
*CO<SUB>2</SUB> storage.
Carbon capture is assumed possible for power generation, half of the industrial sector and hydrogen production. In these sectors CCS technologies are defined that compete over market shares with conventional technologies (without CCS). The CCS technologies involve higher costs and a slightly lower conversion efficiency, and are therefore not chosen under default conditions. However, according to model calculations, the costs of these CCS technologies would increase far less compared to conventional technologies if a carbon price would be introduced. Carbon capture is assumed at a maximum of 95%, the remaining 5% is still influenced by the carbon price. The actual market shares of conventional and CCS-based technologies are determined for each market, using multinomial logit equations. The costs of carbon capture are based on Hendriks et al. ([[Hendriks et al., 2002]]; [[Hendriks et al., 2004a]]; [[Hendriks et al., 2004b]]).  


In the electric power sector, they increase generation costs by about 40-50% for natural gas and coal-based power plants. Expressed in terms of costs per unit of CO<sub>2</sub>, this is equivalent to about 35-45$/tCO<sub>2</sub>. Similar cost levels are assumed for industrial sources. CO<sub>2</sub> transport costs were estimated for each region and storage category on the basis of the distance between the main CO<sub>2</sub> sources (industrial centres) and storage sites (Hendriks et al., 2002a). The estimated transport costs vary from 1-30 (2005)$/tCO<sub>2</sub> – the majority being below 10 (2005)$/tCO<sub>2</sub>. Finally, for each region the potential for 11 storage categories has been estimated (in empty and still existing oil and gas fields, and on and off shore – thus a total of 8 combinations); enhanced coal-based methane recovery and aquifers (the original aquifer category was divided into two halves to allow more differentiation in costs). For each category, storage costs have been determined with typical values around 5-10 (2005)$/tCO<sub>2</sub> (Hendriks et al., 2002a). The model uses these categories in the order of their transport and storage costs (the resource with lowest costs first).
The use of CCS increases power generation costs by about 40% to 50%, for natural-gas-fired and coal-fired power plants. Expressed in terms of costs per unit of CO<SUB>2</SUB>, this is roughly equivalent to between USD<SUB>2005</SUB> 35 and 45/t CO<SUB>2</SUB>. Similar cost levels are assumed for industrial sources. CO<SUB>2</SUB> transport costs were estimated for each region and storage category, based on the distance between the main CO<SUB>2</SUB> sources (industrial centres) and storage sites (Hendriks et al., 2002a). The estimated transport costs vary from USD<SUB>2005</SUB> 1 to 30/t CO<SUB>2</SUB> – the majority being below USD<SUB>2005</SUB> 10/t CO<SUB>2</SUB>.  
|BelongsTo=Energy conversion/Description;
 
}}
Finally, for each region, the potential for storage categories has been estimated, including:
*empty onshore oil or gas fields;
*operational onshore oil or gas fields;
*empty offshore oil or gas fields;
*operational offshore oil or gas fields;
*enhanced coal-based methane recovery;
*aquifers.  
For each category, storage costs were determined, with values typically of USD<SUB>2005</SUB>  5 to 10/t CO<SUB>2</SUB> ([[Hendriks et al., 2004b]]).
This page is referred by {{#show:{{PAGENAME}}|?AIBelongsToPage}}
</div>

Latest revision as of 09:55, 17 November 2018

References

For carbon capture and storage (CCS), three different steps are identified in the TIMER model:

  • CO2 capture and compression;
  • CO2 transport;
  • CO2 storage.

Carbon capture is assumed possible for power generation, half of the industrial sector and hydrogen production. In these sectors CCS technologies are defined that compete over market shares with conventional technologies (without CCS). The CCS technologies involve higher costs and a slightly lower conversion efficiency, and are therefore not chosen under default conditions. However, according to model calculations, the costs of these CCS technologies would increase far less compared to conventional technologies if a carbon price would be introduced. Carbon capture is assumed at a maximum of 95%, the remaining 5% is still influenced by the carbon price. The actual market shares of conventional and CCS-based technologies are determined for each market, using multinomial logit equations. The costs of carbon capture are based on Hendriks et al. (Hendriks et al., 2002; Hendriks et al., 2004a; Hendriks et al., 2004b).

The use of CCS increases power generation costs by about 40% to 50%, for natural-gas-fired and coal-fired power plants. Expressed in terms of costs per unit of CO2, this is roughly equivalent to between USD2005 35 and 45/t CO2. Similar cost levels are assumed for industrial sources. CO2 transport costs were estimated for each region and storage category, based on the distance between the main CO2 sources (industrial centres) and storage sites (Hendriks et al., 2002a). The estimated transport costs vary from USD2005 1 to 30/t CO2 – the majority being below USD2005 10/t CO2.

Finally, for each region, the potential for storage categories has been estimated, including:

  • empty onshore oil or gas fields;
  • operational onshore oil or gas fields;
  • empty offshore oil or gas fields;
  • operational offshore oil or gas fields;
  • enhanced coal-based methane recovery;
  • aquifers.

For each category, storage costs were determined, with values typically of USD2005 5 to 10/t CO2 (Hendriks et al., 2004b). This page is referred by Energy conversion/Description

Retrieved from "https://models.pbl.nl/index.php?title=Carbon_capture_and_storage&oldid=33653"