PDF Publication Title:
Text from PDF Page: 180
168 IPCC Special Report on Carbon dioxide Capture and Storage the successful scale-up and commercialization of technologies that have not yet been demonstrated, or which are still under development at relatively small scales, such as solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC). Published cost estimates for these systems thus have a very high degree of uncertainty. 3.7.12 CO2 capture costs for other industrial processes (advanced technology) capture. The cost of electricity production attributed to CO2 capture increases by 35-70% for a natural gas combined cycle plant, 40-85% for a new pulverized coal plant and 20-55% for an integrated gasification combined cycle plant. Overall, the COE for fossil fuel plants with capture ranges from 43-86 US$ MWh- 1, as compared to 31-61 US$ MWh-1 for similar plants without capture. These costs include CO2 compression but not transport and storage costs. In most studies to date, NGCC systems typically have a lower COE than new PC and IGCC plants (with or without capture) for large base load plants with high capacity factors (75% or more) and gas prices below about 4 US$ GJ-1 over the life of the plant. However, for higher gas prices and/ or lower capacity factors, NGCC plants typically have higher COEs than coal-based plants, with or without capture. Recent studies also found that IGCC plants were on average slightly more costly without capture and slightly less costly with capture than similarly sized PC plants. However, the difference in cost between PC and IGCC plants with or without CO2 capture can vary significantly with coal type and other local factors, such as the cost of capital. Since neither PC nor IGCC systems have yet been demonstrated with CO2 capture and storage for a large modern power plant (e.g., 500 MW), neither the absolute or relative costs of these systems (nor comparably sized NGCC systems with capture and storage) can be stated with a high degree of confidence at this time, based on the criteria of Table 3.6. As noted earlier, CO2 capture for industrial processes has not been widely studied. The most extensive analyses have focused on petroleum refineries, especially CO2 capture options for heaters and other combustion-based processes (see Table 3.12). The use of oxy-fuel combustion offers potential cost savings in several industrial applications. The CO2 Capture Project reports the cost of capturing CO2 in refinery heaters and boilers, with an ion transport membrane oxygen plant, to be 31 US$/tCO2 avoided. The cost of pre-combustion capture based on shift and membrane gas separation was predicted to be 41 US$/tCO2 avoided (CCP, 2005). It also may be possible to apply oxy-fuel combustion to cement plants, but the CO2 partial pressure in the cement kiln would be higher than normal and the effects of this on the calcination reactions and the quality of the cement product would need to be investigated. The quantity of oxygen required per tonne of CO2 captured in a cement plant would be only about half as much as in a power plant, because only about half of the CO2 is produced by fuel combustion. This implies that the cost of CO2 capture by oxy-fuel combustion at large cement plants would be lower than at power plants, but a detailed engineering cost study is lacking. Emerging technologies that capture CO2 using calcium-based sorbents, described in Section 3.3.3.4, may be cost competitive in cement plants in the future. Table 3.15 also shows that the lowest CO2 capture costs with current technology (as low as 2 US$/tCO2 captured or avoided) were found for industrial processes such as coal-based hydrogen production plants that produce concentrated CO2 streams as part of the production process. Such industrial processes may represent some of the earliest opportunities for CCS. 3.7.13 Summary of CO2 capture cost estimates Table 3.15 summarizes the range of current CO2 capture costs for the major electric power systems analyzed in this report. These costs apply to case studies of large new plants employing current commercial technologies. For the PC and IGCC systems, the data in Table 3.15 apply only to plants using bituminous coals and the PC plants are for supercritical units only. The cost ranges for each of the three systems reflect differences in the technical, economic and operating assumptions employed in different studies. While some differences in reported costs can be attributed to differences in the CO2 capture system design, the major sources of variability are differences in the assumed design, operation and financing of the reference plant to which the capture technology is applied (i.e., factors such as plant size, location, efficiency, fuel type, fuel cost, capacity factor and cost of capital). Because no single set of assumptions applies to all situations or all parts of the world, we display the ranges of cost represented by the studies in Tables 3.8, 3.10, 3.11 and 3.12. Figure 3.20 displays the normalized power plant cost and emissions data from Table 3.15 in graphical form. On this graph, the cost of CO2 avoided corresponds to the slope of a line connecting any two plants (or points) of interest. While Table 3.15 compares a given capture plant to a similar plant without capture, in some cases comparisons may be sought between a given capture plant and a different type of reference plant. Several cases are illustrated in Figure 3.20 based on either a PC or NGCC reference plant. In each case, the COE and CO2 emission rate are highly dependent upon technical, economic and financial factors related to the design and operation of the power systems of interest at a particular location. The cost of CO2 avoided is especially sensitive to these site-specific factors and can vary by an order of magnitude or more when different types of plants are compared. Comparisons of different plant types, therefore, require a specific context and geographical location to be meaningful and should be based on the full COE including CO2 transport and storage costs. Later, Chapter 8 presents examples of full CCS costs for different plant types and storage options. For the power plant studies reflected in Table 3.15, current CO2 capture systems reduce CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour by approximately 85-90% relative to a similar plant without In contrast to new plants, CO2 capture options and costs for existing power plants have not been extensively studied. Current studies indicate that these costs are extremely site-specific and fall into two categories (see Table 3.8). One is the retrofitting of a post-combustion capture system to the existing unit.PDF Image | CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE AND STORAGE
PDF Search Title:
CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE AND STORAGEOriginal File Name Searched:
srccs_wholereport.pdfDIY PDF Search: Google It | Yahoo | Bing
NFT (Non Fungible Token): Buy our tech, design, development or system NFT and become part of our tech NFT network... More Info
IT XR Project Redstone NFT Available for Sale: NFT for high tech turbine design with one part 3D printed counter-rotating energy turbine. Be part of the future with this NFT. Can be bought and sold but only one design NFT exists. Royalties go to the developer (Infinity) to keep enhancing design and applications... More Info
Infinity Turbine IT XR Project Redstone Design: NFT for sale... NFT for high tech turbine design with one part 3D printed counter-rotating energy turbine. Includes all rights to this turbine design, including license for Fluid Handling Block I and II for the turbine assembly and housing. The NFT includes the blueprints (cad/cam), revenue streams, and all future development of the IT XR Project Redstone... More Info
Infinity Turbine ROT Radial Outflow Turbine 24 Design and Worldwide Rights: NFT for sale... NFT for the ROT 24 energy turbine. Be part of the future with this NFT. This design can be bought and sold but only one design NFT exists. You may manufacture the unit, or get the revenues from its sale from Infinity Turbine. Royalties go to the developer (Infinity) to keep enhancing design and applications... More Info
Infinity Supercritical CO2 10 Liter Extractor Design and Worldwide Rights: The Infinity Supercritical 10L CO2 extractor is for botanical oil extraction, which is rich in terpenes and can produce shelf ready full spectrum oil. With over 5 years of development, this industry leader mature extractor machine has been sold since 2015 and is part of many profitable businesses. The process can also be used for electrowinning, e-waste recycling, and lithium battery recycling, gold mining electronic wastes, precious metals. CO2 can also be used in a reverse fuel cell with nafion to make a gas-to-liquids fuel, such as methanol, ethanol and butanol or ethylene. Supercritical CO2 has also been used for treating nafion to make it more effective catalyst. This NFT is for the purchase of worldwide rights which includes the design. More Info
NFT (Non Fungible Token): Buy our tech, design, development or system NFT and become part of our tech NFT network... More Info
Infinity Turbine Products: Special for this month, any plans are $10,000 for complete Cad/Cam blueprints. License is for one build. Try before you buy a production license. May pay by Bitcoin or other Crypto. Products Page... More Info
CONTACT TEL: 608-238-6001 Email: greg@infinityturbine.com (Standard Web Page)