Carbon capture options


in Economics, Photography, Science, The environment

Because the alternative is deep and rapid emissions cuts which countries are unwilling to implement, the IPCC now assumes that stabilizing the climate will involve heavy use of negative emission technologies: “between 100bn and 1trn tonnes of CO2 to be removed from the atmosphere by the end of the century if the Paris goals were to be reached; the median value was 730bn tonnes–that is, more than ten years of global emissions.”

There are numerous possible options. CO2 could be separated from flue gasses from power plants, compressed, and injected underground. If those power plants burn biomass which recently took CO2 out of the atmosphere, that could help draw down the stock of carbon in the atmosphere. That approach is called bioenergy with carbon capture and storage or BECCS. It’s also possible to separate CO2 directly from the air and bury it (direct capture). It’s also worth bearing in mind that sometimes CO2 is injected underground to push up oil to be sold (enhanced oil recovery or EOR). In that case, it likely creates more emissions than it avoids since the same volume of oil is pushed out and then likely burned in a vehicle where it cannot be captured.

All this may be highly questionable as a climate change solution and, indeed, the main push for CCS is from corporations and states that don’t want to give up fossil fuel production. The notion the technology will eventually exist at scale helps justify today’s fossil fuel burning, even though right now we’re buying about 40 million tonnes of CO2 while emitting 43.1 billion tonnes. Burying any substantial fraction of global CO2 emissions would mean compressing and burying many times the total quantity of oil we take out of the ground — with everything that implies about costs, deployment times, and capital requirements — and this whole infrastructure would require energy to run instead of producing it, either requiring us to deploy yet-more climate-safe energy to build and power the equipment or putting us in the self-defeating position of burning more fossil fuels to generate energy to bury the CO2 from the fossil fuels we already burned.


{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }

Milan January 28, 2020 at 1:23 pm
. June 19, 2020 at 7:41 pm

$1.2 billion CO2 pipeline from Industrial Heartland to depleted oilfields in central Alberta comes online

After 11 years, the province’s largest carbon capture and storage project is fully operational, allowing millions of tonnes of emissions to move from facilities near Edmonton to a storage site in central Alberta.

The Alberta Carbon Trunk Line (ACTL) has been in the works since 2009 when then-premier Ed Stelmach’s government funded the project with $495 million to help tackle emissions and gain more oil revenues from depleted wells.

The roughly $1.2-billion project will transport liquified CO2 from Alberta’s Industrial Heartland area northeast of Edmonton to a site near Clive, about 120 kilometres south of Edmonton. The CO2 will then be pumped into Enhance Energy’s depleted oil reservoirs allowing for up to 20 per cent more oil to be taken out of the ground because it will flow more easily.

The system is designed to store about two million tonnes of CO2 underground at the site per year.

The first to use the pipeline will be the Agrium fertilizer plant and the NWR Sturgeon Refinery. The cost of processing CO2 will then be recouped from Enhance Energy as part of a commercial agreement.

. May 24, 2021 at 6:02 pm

Trials to suck carbon dioxide from the air to start across the UK | Greenhouse gas emissions | The Guardian

. September 29, 2021 at 6:27 pm

Microsoft’s million-tonne CO2-removal purchase — lessons for net zero

Strengthen markets, measures and definitions for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to fight climate change.

. October 5, 2021 at 4:53 pm

World’s biggest machine capturing carbon from air turned on in Iceland | Carbon capture and storage (CCS) | The Guardian

. October 22, 2021 at 1:31 pm

The policy implications of an uncertain carbon dioxide removal potential

• Experts are surveyed on the feasible CDR potential from BECCS, DACCS, and afforestation

• Results highlight a potentially large but highly uncertain CDR potential

• Uncertainty in future CDR potential drives greater climate action in the 2020s

• High uncertainty in CDR leads to an extra 10 GtCO2e of emissions reductions by 2030

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: