Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)  (Read 96244 times)

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4012
  • Autodidacticism is a complicated word
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 991
  • Likes Given: 1280
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #350 on: November 07, 2021, 09:54:20 PM »
What if all these ships were obligated to leave a trail of volcanic ash behind as they cross the deep oceans? To sequester their own carbon pollution, and a little more...

We could start with a few tests, do the research, and then expand.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-28.7/centery:19.4/zoom:3

All I can think about this is how stupid it would be to do it.
We keep mucking around with quick fixes rather than just stopping the cause.

The more we try to find solutions that involve altering the natural environment, the worse it will become.
Even if we could stop the cause in time, it would already be too late. It will surely be too late by 2050, when everyone says they'll be net zero. Trees are burning, methane is escaping, and that's not gonna stop when we stop burning fossil fuels. If we truly are serious about saving the climate, we'll have to extract lots and lots of carbon from the atmosphere. And machines aren't gonna be able to do it! We would have to build millions of them... That's just insanity!

So that leaves only enhanced rock weathering, and maybe ocean seeding. This is the only way we could try to extract huge amounts of carbon.  I don't see any other way...
We humans are just a stupid virus. The planet will cure itself of us. And all we'll leave behind is just a few seconds on the geological timescale.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4012
  • Autodidacticism is a complicated word
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 991
  • Likes Given: 1280
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #351 on: November 07, 2021, 10:31:17 PM »
I really don't think ocean seeding will be a big problem if they do it right. Some problems have been reported when oxygen was depleted, but if you do it in the deep ocean, where there's a lot of depth, and current, I don't really see what the problem could be. Don't forget that ocean vents put out lots of minerals in the deep ocean! And I don't see any problem there with oxygen. All I see is life...

So I would do some serious research on the ash that falls into the ocean from volcanic eruptions. I'm pretty sure that ocean seeding could be done without too many problems, if done right!

We humans are just a stupid virus. The planet will cure itself of us. And all we'll leave behind is just a few seconds on the geological timescale.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4012
  • Autodidacticism is a complicated word
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 991
  • Likes Given: 1280
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #352 on: November 07, 2021, 10:50:28 PM »
Poo from the world’s largest animals have a stunning effect on ocean ecosystems—and even carbon capture

A million additional whales defecating close to the surface would be like having massive ocean fertilizer machines—absorbing as much carbon as forests covering a continent

https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2021/11/poo-from-the-worlds-largest-animals-have-a-stunning-effect-on-ocean-ecosystems-and-even-carbon-capture/

The Southern Ocean that encircles Antarctica has, for decades, been home to a mystery known as the “krill paradox.” It goes like this: tiny shrimp-like krill have been in decline there for decades, even though the population of one of their chief predators—whales—fell dramatically during the 20th century. With fewer whales, shouldn’t krill numbers boom? Now, scientists think they have an answer: Whale poop.

Thanks to an elaborate decade-long investigation involving whale-mounted trackers, drones and sonar, scientists have found that the planet’s largest animals eat and poop far more than previously thought. This gluttony has the potential to ripple through entire ecosystems—including krill—as the whales vacuum up vast amounts of nutrients, then spread them back into the water as feces.

“Just this idea that if you remove large whales, there’s actually less productivity and potentially less krill and fish is amazing,” said Jeremy Goldbogen, a Stanford University biologist who supervised much of the work.

The insight came from a simple question: How much do baleen whales eat?

The animals, which can grow as large as a commercial airliner in the case of the blue whale, feed on some of the smallest animals in the sea by sucking vast amounts of ocean water through comb-like structures in their mouths called baleen. The baleen catches krill or small fish such as anchovies, which the whales then swallow.

But estimates of the total mass of food these giants consume has been wracked by uncertainty and guesswork. The whales are too big to study in captivity, and much of their feeding happens out of sight, underwater in the open ocean. Scientists instead extrapolated the whales’ metabolic needs based on smaller animals, and estimated prey consumption by measuring the stomach contents of dead whales.

In 2010, scientists launched an effort to get a clearer picture of these whales’ appetites. Using suction cups, they attached 321 motion trackers to 7 different species of baleen whales spanning the Pacific, Atlantic and Southern oceans. These devices allowed scientists to record the movements of the whales, including distinctive swimming behavior when feeding. All told, they recorded more than 70,000 feeding events over 10 years.

Scientists also flew drones over 105 whales, taking photos to calculate each whale’s size and how much water it filtered in a single gulp. Finally, they followed feeding whales aboard small boats and used sonar to measure the density and size of clouds of krill or fish on which the animals were feasting. The effort involved 17 researchers from 13 different universities and government agencies in Europe, Africa, and the U.S.

The results were stunning. These whales, it turns out, eat approximately triple the amount of food previously estimated. For the eastern North Pacific blue whale, that amounted to roughly 16 metric tons per day—the equivalent of eating 3 adult African elephants. To grasp the difference from previous studies, the researchers noted that in 2008 scientists predicted that each year whales off the west coast of North America ate approximately 2 million metric tons in total. The new study found that individual blue, fine and humpback whales in the area ate that amount, according to the study, published today in the journal Nature.

“Think of these large whales as mobile krill processing plants,” said Matthew Savoca, a marine ecologist and postdoctoral fellow at Stanford University who was the study’s lead author.

To understand the implications for ecosystems, Savoca and colleagues looked to the Southern Ocean. There the whaling industry had decimated whale populations during the 20th century, killing more than 1.5 million baleen whales. Based on estimated whale numbers there around 1900, those whales each year ate 430 million metric tons of krill a year, double the total mass of krill found in that ocean at the end of the 20th century. The results suggest krill numbers in that earlier era were far greater than today, to feed so many whales without being wiped out.

The researchers suspect the answer is in whale poop, or, more specifically, the iron contained in the poop. The growth of phytoplankton in the Southern Oceans is limited by a lack of iron, so having more than a million additional whales defecating relatively close to the ocean surface would be like having fertilizer machines crisscrossing the region. At pre-hunting numbers, Antarctic minke, humpback, fin and blue whales combined would have injected as much as 1500 metric tons of iron back into the environment, much of which otherwise would have sunk to the ocean floor as krill died.

The iron boost would have driven much bigger plankton blooms—approximately 215 million metric tons of additional plant growth, equal to 11% of today’s Southern Ocean plankton production, the scientists estimate. That, in turn, would have supported larger numbers of krill, which feed on the plankton.


“Our results say that if we restore whale populations to pre-whaling levels seen at the beginning of the 20th century, we’ll restore a huge amount of lost function to ocean ecosystems,” said Nicholas Pyenson, curator of fossil marine mammals at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History, who took part in the research. “It may take a few decades to see the benefit, but it’s the clearest read yet about the massive role of large whales on our planet.”

As world leaders gather today in Glasgow, Scotland for a global climate change summit, the findings also hint that more voracious whales could even put a dent in greenhouse gas pollution. The additional plankton growth from earlier whale numbers in the Southern Ocean, said Pyenson, would have absorbed as much carbon as forest ecosystems covering a continent.
We humans are just a stupid virus. The planet will cure itself of us. And all we'll leave behind is just a few seconds on the geological timescale.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4012
  • Autodidacticism is a complicated word
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 991
  • Likes Given: 1280
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #353 on: November 08, 2021, 09:29:18 AM »
I woke up this morning wondering what the effect could be from overfishing. We didn't just kill all the whales, we also caught 90% of all fish...

So the oceans are empty now, and all those fish shat as well. I think we need to put a lot of shit in the oceans to replace the missing fish shit. Then their babies would have something to eat again... Maybe it's not just overfishing that's depleting the oceans. Maybe it's also a lack of food for their babies that's killing them...


The world’s oceans could be virtually emptied for fish by 2048. A study shows that if nothing changes, we will run out of seafood in 2048. If we want to preserve the ecosystems of the sea, change is needed.
https://www.theworldcounts.com/challenges/planet-earth/oceans/overfishing-statistics/story
We humans are just a stupid virus. The planet will cure itself of us. And all we'll leave behind is just a few seconds on the geological timescale.

morganism

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1972
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #354 on: November 11, 2021, 08:01:37 AM »
Converting methane to methanol - with and without water

The new paper describes how a common copper-zinc oxide catalyst can steer the reaction along different pathways depending on whether water is present.

"Copper-zinc oxide is a commercial catalyst that is readily available and not too expensive," said Sanjaya Senanayake, one of the study co-authors. "We wanted to see whether it might work for methane-to-methanol conversion."

According to their study results, copper-zinc oxide has the best selectivity of any catalyst tested for this reaction without the addition of water-about 30%. That means methanol, the desired product (instead of CO or CO2), makes up 30% of the products of the reaction when it runs without water. (When run with water, the copper-zinc oxide catalyst had 80% selectivity for methanol production.)

For comparison, the team's earlier studies of this reaction using a cerium oxide catalyst produced almost no methanol without water.

Together, the data indicate that the reaction proceeds along two different pathways involving two different sites of the copper-zinc-oxide catalyst-one for the reaction with water and one for the reaction without water.

"The particular configuration of active sites for the reaction with water is different from the configuration without water, and the mechanism is different, too-it's practically two different processes," Rodriguez said.

But in both cases, even without water, "the binding between the methanol and the catalyst is strong enough to allow the methanol to form from methane, but weak enough to enable the methanol to come off the surface as a gas before it is further oxidized to CO or CO2," Liu said.

"As soon as the methanol goes into the gas phase you can condense the whole thing and then separate liquid methanol," Rodriguez said.

That quick "desorption" of methanol from the surface of the catalyst, which keeps the methanol from reacting further with oxygen, also eliminates a potentially explosive step.

The team is already using their new knowledge of the reaction mechanisms to look for ways to further improve the catalyst. Their goal is to achieve a selectivity of at least 60-70% without water.

"The atomic level understanding is much more advanced than what we've ever had before. We know really atom by atom that copper zinc oxide is much better for the preferred no-water reaction condition,"

https://www.biofueldaily.com/reports/Converting_methane_to_methanol___with_and_without_water_999.html

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.1c08063

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 26184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1166
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #355 on: November 12, 2021, 12:22:06 AM »
The Monash Carbon Capture and Conversion (MC³) team of students from Monash University in Australia and Malaysia is the only team to receive the XPRIZE Carbon Removal Student Award.

Monash University Team Wins XPRIZE Carbon Removal Students Award Funde
Quote
“We submitted a BioTechnology proposal that consisted of biologically-assisted carbon capture and conversion methods which focused on the capture of CO2 from the ocean and air via artificial forestry and microalgae cultures in novel designed floating photobioreactors.

The biomass produced from these carbon farms will then be utilized downstream, powered by bioenergy, in their transformation into cross-laminated timber, for sustainable buildings, and biochar, a charcoal that can be used for soil amendment.” …
https://www.tesmanian.com/blogs/tesmanian-blog/monash-university-students-win-xprize-carbon-removal-award-funded-by-elon-musk
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #356 on: November 22, 2021, 12:37:25 PM »
Cheap Wind and Solar Should Prompt ‘Rethink’ on Role of CCS, Paper Argues

Oil and gas companies should be asking themselves whether they are investing in “the right kind of CCS”, its lead author said.

The falling cost of wind and solar power significantly reduces the need for carbon capture and storage technology to tackle climate change, a new paper has argued.

CCS, which removes emissions from the atmosphere and stores them underground, has long been presented as critical to restricting global heating to 1.5C by the end of the century.

But a paper published today by Imperial College London’s Grantham Institute finds that rapidly-falling costs in wind and solar energy could “erode” the value of CCS by up to 96 percent.

The authors suggest that targeted, rather than blanket, deployment of CCS is the best strategy for achieving the Paris Agreement goals.

Neil Grant, a PhD candidate at Imperial College who led the research, said the past decade had “seriously changed the game for CCS”.

“While CCS deployment has stagnated, renewables have surged and their costs have plummeted – and so the picture today is very different to what it was in 2010,” he told DeSmog. “Cheap, abundant renewable energy reduces the value of CCS in all areas.”

“Now that renewable electricity is so cheap, this should cause us to seriously rethink the role of CCS.”

Renewables
The authors used Integrated Assessment Modelling (IAM) to explore 1.75C and 2C warming scenarios, restricting the biomass potential in the pathways to “try and limit unsustainable biomass consumption”.

They found that the rate of electrification accelerated faster in the absence of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), with a faster phase-out of unabated fossil fuels in the power sector.

“Wind and solar play a central role in electrifying end-use sectors and accelerating the phaseout of fossil fuels in the power sector if BECCS is unavailable, with deployment accelerating to provide the necessary clean electricity supply,” the authors note.

...

The Imperial College paper found that the biggest losers to cheap renewables were CCS applied to fossil fuels – used to generate electricity, make hydrogen and to burn in heavy industry such as blast furnaces for steel production.

Grant and co-authors argue that CCS should not be abandoned altogether, but that priority areas for CCS deployment should be to help remove CO2 from the atmosphere, and for capturing CO2 in industry, rather than that applied to fossil fuels.

...

https://www.desmog.com/2021/11/19/cheap-wind-and-solar-should-prompt-rethink-on-role-of-ccs-paper-argues/
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4012
  • Autodidacticism is a complicated word
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 991
  • Likes Given: 1280
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #357 on: December 21, 2021, 06:57:21 AM »
The craft brewery using algae to cut emissions

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-australia-57675513

Fermenting beer produces carbon dioxide (CO2), which is usually released into the atmosphere. So a craft brewery in Sydney, Young Henrys, has partnered with climate change scientists and developed a way to use microalgae to capture that CO2, and turn it into oxygen.

The brewers estimate their algae releases as much oxygen as two hectares of bushland.

Video by Isabelle Rodd

We humans are just a stupid virus. The planet will cure itself of us. And all we'll leave behind is just a few seconds on the geological timescale.

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10410
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3530
  • Likes Given: 761
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #358 on: January 18, 2022, 01:44:53 PM »
Decarbonisation Tech Instantly Converts CO2 to Solid Carbon
https://techxplore.com/news/2022-01-decarbonisation-tech-instantly-co2-solid.html





Karma Zuraiqi et al, Direct conversion of CO2 to solid carbon by Ga-based liquid metals, Energy & Environmental Science (2022)
https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2022/EE/D1EE03283F
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― anonymous

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

SteveMDFP

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2554
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 603
  • Likes Given: 46
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #359 on: January 18, 2022, 02:05:06 PM »
Decarbonisation Tech Instantly Converts CO2 to Solid Carbon
https://techxplore.com/news/2022-01-decarbonisation-tech-instantly-co2-solid.html
The chemistry is pretty nifty.  But as long as coal is burned, all this does is reverse a little bit of those emissions, while consuming far more energy than burning the coal released.

Step one for this overall problem is leaving the carbon in the ground.  Then we might think about removing some from the atmosphere.  Though I think enhanced weathering of alkaline rock would be far more energy efficient and economical.

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10410
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3530
  • Likes Given: 761
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #360 on: January 18, 2022, 02:34:09 PM »
Quote
... all this does is reverse a little bit of those emissions, while consuming far more energy than burning the coal released.
Not true

Gallium is liquid at 85.58°F (29.76°C). The system can run on process waste heat. It works at both 200°C and RT
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― anonymous

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Richard Rathbone

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1757
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 390
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #361 on: January 18, 2022, 04:39:06 PM »
Quote
... all this does is reverse a little bit of those emissions, while consuming far more energy than burning the coal released.
Not true

Gallium is liquid at 85.58°F (29.76°C). The system can run on process waste heat. It works at both 200°C and RT

This process consumes Gallium. Doing the electrolysis to get Gallium back from Gallium Oxide costs energy, quite a lot more energy than was obtained by burning the coal that produced the CO2. It could quite easily take 5x the electricity to regenerate the Gallium as would have been produced by burning the coal.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #362 on: January 22, 2022, 04:38:22 PM »
Denmark Invests in Carbon Capture as It Phases Out Offshore Drilling

Having banned oil exploration in its territorial waters, Denmark is investing $2.4 billion into a plan to capture CO2 from the energy and industrial sectors and inject it into the seabed in geological formations that previously held oil and gas deposits.

Reuters reported that the subsidies for carbon capture and storage are part of an ambitious Danish climate pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 70 percent by 2030 compared to 1990 levels, which would mean slashing annual CO2 emissions by 20 million metric tons. Denmark also has banned oil exploration in Danish waters, and has vowed to phase out offshore drilling in the North Sea by 2050.

...

Facilities will begin storing carbon dioxide under the North Sea in 2025, sequestering some 0.4 million metric tons of CO2 a year. Subsidies will initially fund carbon capture from facilities that are particularly hard to clean up, such as waste incinerators and cement factories.

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/denmark-invests-in-carbon-capture-as-it-phases-out-offshore-drilling
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #363 on: February 19, 2022, 07:00:52 PM »
Review of technologies that repurpose carbon finds most aren’t Paris Agreement compatible

As the climate crisis becomes more immediate, carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technology has been touted as part of the solution. The process involves harnessing carbon dioxide from emissions or the atmosphere and repurposing them. However, a review published February 18 in the journal One Earth calls into question the viability of many of these methods to meet both the long-term and short-term emissions goals that follow from the Paris Agreement, and suggests focusing on technologies that use non-fossil carbon dioxide and store carbon permanently.

CCU typically works by capturing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants or industry. This carbon dioxide is then converted using electricity, heat, or catalysts into a new product, like the fuel methanol. “It sounds really good, right?” says lead author Kiane de Kleijne , a climate researcher at Radboud University. “It's taking problematic waste and turning it into a valuable product. But we assessed and harmonized many previous studies on CCU, and this showed us that CCU doesn't consistently reduce emissions.”

For a technology to be compatible with the Paris Agreement, the IPCC taught us that it must halve carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 and reach zero emissions by 2050. Of the 74 CCU routes reviewed, 8 met the 2030 target and just 4 were able to reach zero emissions by 2050. De Kleijne and her team also evaluated CCU’s technological maturity, how close the technology is to being ready for widespread use.

“If a technology is not going to reduce emissions by a lot and it's still very far away from commercialization, then maybe it is better to redirect funding to technologies that do have the potential of really drastically reducing emissions,” says de Kleijne.

The researchers evaluated the efficacy of CCU technologies at reducing emissions through the entire lifespan of the process. In the case of many CCUs examined, the capture and conversion components are highly energy intensive, and when the final step of the cycle is the creation of something like methanol, the use of the end product also generates emissions. “In many cases they don't really reduce emissions compared to the conventional product, so that is problematic,” says de Kleijne.

The review warns that the potential of CCU technologies might divert attention from more effective emission reduction options like carbon capture and permanent storage and reducing consumption. The team reviewed, however, a few low-emission CCU systems that store carbon long-term and that de Kleijne says are promising. For example, the carbonization of steel slag to create construction materials can sequester large amounts of carbon which would remain stored indefinitely. In addition, if the carbon is captured directly from the atmosphere or after combustion of biomass which has sequestered carbon through photosynthesis, utilizing atmospheric carbon can lower atmospheric concentrations of CO2, something that de Kleijne hopes to continue investigating.

“We would love to be able to extend our analysis a bit further, because now we have done this assessment for CCU and it's not looking great,” she says. “But it would be good to be able to compare it to other alternatives to replacing fossil fuel-based products or services.

https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/943074

So CCU for use in cars is BS and we will move beyond that.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

morganism

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1972
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #364 on: March 03, 2022, 08:57:42 AM »
Flash Joule heating for bulk graphene

As reported in Nature, flash graphene is made in 10 milliseconds by heating carbon-containing materials to 3,000 Kelvin (about 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit). The source material can be nearly anything with carbon content. Food waste, plastic waste, petroleum coke, coal, wood clippings and biochar are prime candidates."

the process produces “turbostratic” graphene, with misaligned layers that are easy to separate. “A-B stacked graphene from other processes, like exfoliation of graphite, is very hard to pull apart,” Tour said. “The layers adhere strongly together. But turbostratic graphene is much easier to work with because the adhesion between layers is much lower. They just come apart in solution or upon blending in composites.

“By strengthening concrete with graphene, we could use less concrete for building, and it would cost less to manufacture and less to transport,” he said. “Essentially, we’re trapping greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane that waste food would have emitted in landfills. We are converting those carbons into graphene and adding that graphene to concrete, thereby lowering the amount of carbon dioxide generated in concrete manufacture. It’s a win-win environmental scenario using graphene.”

In the past, Tour said, “graphene has been too expensive to use in these applications. The flash process will greatly lessen the price while it helps us better manage waste.”

“With our method, that carbon becomes fixed,” he said. “It will not enter the air again.”

The process aligns nicely with Rice’s recently announced Carbon Hub initiative to create a zero-emissions future that repurposes hydrocarbons from oil and gas to generate hydrogen gas and solid carbon with zero emission of carbon dioxide. The flash graphene process can convert that solid carbon into graphene for concrete, asphalt, buildings, cars, clothing and more, Tour said."

https://news.rice.edu/news/2020/rice-lab-turns-trash-valuable-graphene-flash

Gram-scale bottom-up flash graphene synthesis

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-1938-0

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #365 on: April 08, 2022, 09:26:51 PM »
Visualizing the scale of the carbon removal problem

...

But this kind of carbon removal is still being done at a very small scale. There are just 18 direct air capture facilities spread across Canada, Europe, and the United States. Altogether, they can capture just 0.01 million metric tons of CO2. To avoid the worst effects of climate change, we need a lot more facilities with much larger capacity, according to a recent report from the International Energy Agency (IEA). By 2030, direct air capture plants need to be able to draw down 85 million metric tons of the greenhouse gas. By 2050, the goal is a whopping 980 million metric tons of captured CO2.

It’s hard to understand how massive that kind of growth is, so we decided to draw it out. The small black box below is how much CO2 existing direct air capture plants remove from the atmosphere today. The next generation of direct air capture plants is supposed to be way bigger, with a single plant able to capture the equivalent of all the blue boxes (plus the black box) together — 1 million metric tons of CO2 per year.

...

So, in addition to cutting emissions, the IEA projects we’ll need to scale up carbon removal dramatically. More than 30 new direct air capture plants would need to be built each year, on average, to reach its 2050 goal. Each of those plants would need to be able to draw down 1 million metric tons of CO2 a year, for a total of 980 million metric tons per year in 2050.

...

Again, what we can capture now is just one one-hundredth of that blue square. And the first plant big enough to capture as much CO2 as that blue square represents isn’t expected to come online until the mid-2020s. So we’re already behind schedule when it comes to the IEA’s plans, and speeding things up is expected to come with a hefty price tag (right now, it typically costs upwards of $600 to capture a mere ton of CO2).

https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/7/23013822/carbon-dioxide-removal-direct-air-capture-climate-change

See link for the scale graphics.
Dare i say quite ambitious?  ::)
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Shared Humanity

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1400
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 471
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #366 on: May 01, 2022, 11:57:16 PM »
Interesting approach to carbon capture.


kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #367 on: July 22, 2022, 06:44:37 PM »
It takes an exascale supercomputer to drive carbon capture

Here on Earth, we bury our problems and simulate our way out of them later


...

The irony is that it takes a CO2-generating powerhouse to start cracking the CO2 capture problem, namely America's first exascale supercomputer, the 21-megawatt Frontier, at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Jordan Musser, a scientist at the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in the US, is leading an effort to use the entire Frontier supercomputer later this year to model the feasibility of moving clean carbon capture from a small-scale lab experiment to much larger scale.

There are only about 20 projects queued up that can gobble most of the cores on the exascale machine outside of the NETL group's work, but the code to model the new approach to carbon capture means billions of particles need to be tracked individually to simulate a gas-solid interaction over defined time scales. As one might imagine, this is more than a little computationally-intensive.

"We are using a metal oxide to provide oxygen for the reaction so there's no nitrogen available, therefore when the reaction occurs with the fossil energy source, there's no nitrous oxide or other byproduct produced. Further, the only resulting gases are carbon dioxide and water vapor so it's possible to condense water vapor and get a pure CO2 stream for use or storage," Musser explained.

NETL's small experimental carbon capture system using this approach is already functional, but "as you make the reactors bigger, the particle sizes remain the same but it changes all the flow conditions. You get different mixing behaviors, different amounts of contact between gas and solid, so this changes the overall performance of the unit," he added. Changes therefore have to be made to the geometry and flow behavior to get the right amount of mixing for heat transfer, chemical reactions, and other processes that have to fit into a particular window of time.

"The advantage of having exascale capabilities is we can look at larger systems in much higher resolution," Musser said. "With limited computing we'd do coarsening of approximations of the system. Now, we can look at mid-to-large-scale units, which takes us into the demo pilot range for these to provide insight into operational conditions or potential problems."

...

https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/22/exascale_supercomputer_carbon_capture/
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6793
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1049
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #368 on: August 08, 2022, 07:21:00 AM »
you really have to look deeper: shallow SOC measurements overestimate sequestratiob

https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2022/08/no-till-may-not-be-the-agricultural-panacea-we-thought-it-was/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0016706122003354

closed access on the paper (boo! hiss!) .

This is meta analysis of 1k+ studies. There are other studies indicating same, you got to look all the way down the soil column to 60 cm, or as i prefer, 1m with hydraulic borer if necessary. Sucking SOC outta the lower layers to enhance measurements in top 10 or 30 cm is a fools errand ... except perhaps for the fools gold in sequestration credits you can sell in the carbon market.

sidd


sidd

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4012
  • Autodidacticism is a complicated word
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 991
  • Likes Given: 1280
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #369 on: September 02, 2022, 12:04:58 AM »
Carbon capture is not a solution to net zero emissions plans, report says
The technology, put forward as part of the UK’s net zero strategy, could extend the life of fossil fuel infrastructure

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/01/carbon-capture-is-not-a-solution-to-net-zero-emissions-plans-report-says?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Carbon capture and storage schemes, a key plank of many governments’ net zero plans, “is not a climate solution”, the author of a major new report on the technology has said.

Researchers for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) found underperforming carbon capture projects considerably outnumbered successful ones by large margins.

Of the 13 projects examined for the study – accounting for about 55% of the world’s current operational capacity – seven underperformed, two failed and one was mothballed, the report found.

“Many international bodies and national government are relying on carbon capture in the fossil fuel sector to get to net zero, and it simply won’t work,” Bruce Robertson, the author of the IEEFA report, said.

Despite being a technology still in development, carbon capture and storage has been put forward as a key element in the UK’s plans to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Proposals put forward by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (Beis) suggest that up to 30m tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions will need to be captured and sequestered every year in the UK alone by the mid-2030s, if targets are to be met. Internationally, to align with goals to reach net zero by 2050, annual CCS capacity will need to reach 1.6bn tonnes of CO2 every year by 2030, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has said.

IEEFA’s report said that although carbon capture and storage is a 50-year-old technology, its results have been varied. Most CCS projects have since reused captured gas by pumping it into dwindling oil fields to help squeeze out the last drops, it pointed out.

This “enhanced oil recovery” (EOS) accounts for about 73% of the CO2 captured globally each year, in recent years, according to the report. Roughly 28m tonnes out of the 39m tonnes captured globally, according to its estimates, is reinjected and sequestered in oil fields to push more oil out of the ground.

“EOR itself leads to CO2 emissions both directly and indirectly,” the report said. “The direct impact is the emissions from the fuel used to compress and pump CO2 deep into the ground. The indirect impact is the emissions from burning the hydrocarbons that could now have come out without EOR.”

A further challenge is finding suitable storage sites for carbon sequestration, where the gas will not merely be used to push out more oil. According to the report, trapped CO2 will need monitoring for centuries to ensure it does not leak into the atmosphere – raising the risk of liability being handed over to the public, years after private interests have extracted their profits from the enterprise.

The risk is that CCS technology will be used to extend the life of fossil fuel infrastructure long past the cut off point for maintaining atmospheric carbon at less than catastrophic levels, the report suggested.

“Although [there is] some indication it might have a role to play in hard-to-abate sectors such as cement, fertilisers and steel, overall results indicate a financial, technical and emissions-reduction framework that continues to overstate and underperform,” Robertson said.

However, he added: “As a solution to tackling catastrophic rising emissions in its current framework, CCS is not a climate solution.”

A Beis official disputed the report’s claims, pointing to Norway’s Sleipner and Snøhvit sites as examples of successful carbon storage. The UK had potential to store 78bn tonnes of CO2, and doing so was essential to meet net zero emissions targets, the official said.

“We are determined to make the UK a world leader in this field and are exploring the potential of CCS as part of our plans for industrial decarbonisation,” the official said. “We are supporting this through our £1bn carbon capture infrastructure fund and have committed to establishing two CCS industrial clusters by the mid-2020s and a further two by 2030.”

The IEA was also contacted for comment.
We humans are just a stupid virus. The planet will cure itself of us. And all we'll leave behind is just a few seconds on the geological timescale.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #370 on: September 02, 2022, 08:20:00 AM »
Quote
The risk is that CCS technology will be used to extend the life of fossil fuel infrastructure long past the cut off point for maintaining atmospheric carbon at less than catastrophic levels, the report suggested.

Well we are doing that now.

Regardless of the future trajectories at least 27 cm of SLR from Greenland is baked in. Antarctic contribution not known yet but that will probably accelerate in the near future. Meanwhile on land the heat waves and floods get more intense. We keep adding while the sinks decline (forests burn and ocean waters warm).

It will be interesting to see how bad the next El Nino will be... 
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

morganism

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1972
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #371 on: October 20, 2022, 12:49:46 PM »
A breakthrough discovery in carbon capture conversion for ethylene production      Sep 12, 2022

A team of researchers led by Meenesh Singh at University of Illinois Chicago has discovered a way to convert 100% of carbon dioxide captured from industrial exhaust into ethylene, a key building block for plastic products.
 The process can convert up to 6 metric tons of carbon dioxide into 1 metric ton of ethylene, recycling almost all carbon dioxide captured. Because the system runs on electricity, the use of renewable energy can make the process carbon negative.

According to Singh, his team's approach surpasses the net-zero carbon goal of other carbon capture and conversion technologies by actually reducing the total carbon dioxide output from industry. "It's a net negative," he said. "For every 1 ton of ethylene produced, you're taking 6 tons of CO2 from point sources that otherwise would be released to the atmosphere."

 Among manufactured chemicals worldwide, ethylene ranks third for carbon emissions after ammonia and cement. Ethylene is used not only to create plastic products for the packaging, agricultural and automotive industries, but also to produce chemicals used in antifreeze, medical sterilizers and vinyl siding for houses.

Ethylene is usually made in a process called steam cracking that requires enormous amounts of heat. Cracking generates about 1.5 metric tons of carbon emissions per ton of ethylene created. On average, manufacturers produce around 160 million tons of ethylene each year, which results in more than 260 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions worldwide.

In addition to ethylene, the UIC scientists were able to produce other carbon-rich products useful to industry with their electrolysis approach. They also achieved a very high solar energy conversion efficiency, converting 10% of energy from the solar panels directly to carbon product output. This is well above the state-of-the-art standard of 2%. For all the ethylene they produced, the solar energy conversion efficiency was around 4%, approximately the same rate as photosynthesis."

https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/A_breakthrough_discovery_in_carbon_capture_conversion_for_ethylene_production_999.html


CO2-free high-purity ethylene from electroreduction of CO2 with 4% solar-to-ethylene and 10% solar-to-carbon efficiencies

Here, we develop an aqueous flow-through electrochemical cell to enhance the activity and selectivity of C2H4 on a three-dimensional (3D) Cu mesh electrode by applying square-wave oscillating potentials.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666386422003472?via%3Dihub

NeilT

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 388
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #372 on: October 20, 2022, 07:45:16 PM »
A bit more of the paragraph explains the breakthrough.  It is quite significant.

Quote
The lower single-pass conversion (<10%) of the state-of-the-art CO2 electrolyzers contributes significantly to the cost of post-CO2RR separation of products, rendering even processes with high CO2RR current densities unfit for scaling up. Here, we develop an aqueous flow-through electrochemical cell to enhance the activity and selectivity of C2H4 on a three-dimensional (3D) Cu mesh electrode by applying square-wave oscillating potentials. A high C2H4 faradaic efficiency of ∼58%, C2H4 current density of 306 mA/cm2, and gaseous C2H4 purity of ∼52 wt % without CO2 in the product stream are obtained.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

morganism

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1972
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #373 on: November 07, 2022, 07:13:09 AM »
This simple material could scrub carbon dioxide from power plant smokestacks
by Staff Writers
Washington DC (SPX) Nov 03, 2022

Exhaust from coal-fired power plants, at left, contain large quantities of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (purple tripartite molecules). Aluminum formate, a metal-organic framework whose structure is highlighted at right, can selectively capture carbon dioxide from dried flue gas conditions, potentially at a fraction of the cost of using other carbon filtration materials.

How can we remove carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, from fossil-fuel power plant exhaust before it ever reaches the atmosphere? New findings suggest a promising answer lies in a simple, economical and potentially reusable material analyzed at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), where scientists from several institutions have determined why this material works as well as it does.

The team's object of study is aluminum formate, one of a class of substances called metal-organic frameworks (MOFs). As a group, MOFs have exhibited great potential for filtering and separating organic materials - often the various hydrocarbons in fossil fuels - from one another. Some MOFs have shown promise at refining natural gas or separating the octane components of gasoline; others might contribute to reducing the cost of plastics manufacturing or cheaply converting one substance to another. Their capacity to perform such separations comes from their inherently porous nature.

Aluminum formate, which the scientists refer to as ALF, has a talent for separating carbon dioxide (CO2) from the other gases that commonly fly out of the smokestacks of coal-fired power plants. It also lacks the shortcomings that other proposed carbon filtration materials have, said NIST's Hayden Evans, one of the lead authors of the team's research paper, published in the peer-reviewed journal Science Advances.

"What makes this work exciting is that ALF performs really well relative to other high-performing CO2 adsorbents, but it rivals designer compounds in its simplicity, overall stability and ease of preparation," said Evans, a chemist at the NIST Center for Neutron Research (NCNR). "It is made of two substances found easily and abundantly, so creating enough ALF to use widely should be possible at very low cost."

The research team includes scientists from the National University of Singapore; Singapore's Agency for Science, Technology and Research; the University of Delaware; and the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Coal-fired power plants account for roughly 30% of global CO2 emissions. Even as the world embraces other energy sources such as solar and wind power that do not generate greenhouse gases, finding a way to reduce the carbon output of existing plants could help mitigate their effects while they remain in operation.

Scrubbing the CO2 from flue gas before it reaches the atmosphere in the first place is a logical approach, but it has proved challenging to create an effective scrubber. The mixture of gases that flows up the smokestacks of coal-fired power plants is typically fairly hot, humid and corrosive - characteristics that have made it difficult to find an economical material that can do the job efficiently.

Some other MOFs work well but are made of expensive materials; others are less costly in and of themselves but perform adequately only in dry conditions, requiring a "drying step" that reduces the gas humidity but raises the overall cost of the scrubbing process.

"Put it all together, you need some kind of wonder material," Evans said. "Here, we've managed to tick every box except stability in very humid conditions. However, using ALF would be inexpensive enough that a drying step becomes a viable option."

ALF is made from aluminum hydroxide and formic acid, two chemicals that are abundant and readily available on the market. It would cost less than a dollar per kilogram, Evans said, which is up to 100 times less expensive than other materials with similar performance. Low cost is important because carbon capture at a single plant could require up to tens of thousands of tons of filtration material. The amount needed for the entire world would be enormous.

On a microscopic scale, ALF resembles a three-dimensional wire cage with innumerable small holes. These holes are just large enough to allow CO2 molecules to enter and get trapped, but just small enough to exclude the slightly larger nitrogen molecules that make up the majority of flue gas.

Neutron diffraction work at the NCNR showed the team how the individual cages in the material collect and fill with CO2, revealing that the gas molecules fit inside certain cages within ALF like a hand in a glove, Evans said.

Despite its potential, ALF is not ready for immediate use. Engineers would need to design a procedure to create ALF at large scales. A coal-fired plant would also need a compatible process to reduce the humidity of the flue gas before scrubbing it. Evans said that a great deal is already understood about how to address these issues, and that they would not make the cost of using ALF prohibitive.

What to do with the CO2 afterward is also a major question, he said, though this is a problem for all carbon-capture materials. There are research efforts underway to convert it to formic acid - which is not only a naturally occurring organic material but also one of the two constituents of ALF.

The idea here is that ALF could become part of a cyclic process where ALF removes CO2 from the exhaust streams, and that captured CO2 is used to create more formic acid. This formic acid would then be used to make more ALF, further reducing the overall impact and cost of the material cycle.

"There is a great deal of research going on nowadays into the problem of what to do with all the captured CO2," Evans said. "It seems possible that we could eventually use solar energy to split hydrogen from water, and then combine that hydrogen with the CO2 to make more formic acid. Combined with ALF, that's a solution that would help the planet."

https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/This_simple_material_could_scrub_carbon_dioxide_from_power_plant_smokestacks_999.html


Aluminum formate, Al(HCOO)3: An earth-abundant, scalable, and highly selective material for CO2 capture


A combination of gas adsorption and gas breakthrough measurements show that the metal-organic framework, Al(HCOO)3 (ALF), which can be made inexpensively from commodity chemicals, exhibits excellent CO2 adsorption capacities and outstanding CO2/N2 selectivity that enable it to remove CO2 from dried CO2-containing gas streams at elevated temperatures (323 kelvin). Notably, ALF is scalable, readily pelletized, stable to SO2 and NO, and simple to regenerate. Density functional theory calculations and in situ neutron diffraction studies reveal that the preferential adsorption of CO2 is a size-selective separation that depends on the subtle difference between the kinetic diameters of CO2 and N2. The findings are supported by additional measurements, including Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, thermogravimetric analysis, and variable temperature powder and single-crystal x-ray diffraction."


https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ade1473

NeilT

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 388
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #374 on: November 07, 2022, 05:59:27 PM »
Much better than putting it on coal fired plants would be to convert the stations to biomass, grow the trees to burn, burn the trees and capture the CO2 in the ALF.

This would be a CO2 reduction scheme whilst still producing power needed.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

interstitial

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2921
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 577
  • Likes Given: 96
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #375 on: November 09, 2022, 01:07:47 AM »
Or use renewable for power and scrub the atmosphere with biomass.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #376 on: November 09, 2022, 02:29:48 PM »
That would make way more sense since we don´t actually have the biomass to substitute for the coal. Also trees take out more carbon as they get older and we are losing enough already.

Realistically this is good:
Quote
The idea here is that ALF could become part of a cyclic process where ALF removes CO2 from the exhaust streams, and that captured CO2 is used to create more formic acid. This formic acid would then be used to make more ALF, further reducing the overall impact and cost of the material cycle.

We are not going to be rid of coal for a while so if we could reduce it´s output cheaply that would be a win. It would not make it much more expensive but it also would not make it cheaper.

It´s like a bandage we put on until it´s healed (renewables will be cheaper).
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

NeilT

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 388
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #377 on: November 09, 2022, 06:36:11 PM »
We are not going to be rid of coal for a while

They said that in the UK.  A country which has hundreds of years of reserves of Coal under the ground which is being left.

In the 1970's Coal was the mainstay of UK power generation.  It took political action to change.  UK miners thought they could control the country by forcing power cuts by refusing to supply coal to the power stations.

Notably the UK moved away from coal to gas very rapidly thereafter.  All it took was political will and enough money.

Today the UK has virtually zero coal power generation and it has a clear phase out plan.  Yet if the UK were to be burning the same amount of coal as it were in 1970, the UK would be the #8 coal user in the world.

So when we say "We are not going to be rid of coal for a while", what we are actually saying is that there is not sufficient motivation to move away from coal.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #378 on: November 09, 2022, 07:57:25 PM »
Great motivational speech now go tour China and India for a start.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

NeilT

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6379
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 388
  • Likes Given: 22
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #379 on: November 09, 2022, 08:17:20 PM »
No point.  The art of the possible is not necessarily the likely.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Florifulgurator

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 756
  • Virtual world alter ego / अवतार of Martin Gisser
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 237
  • Likes Given: 373
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #380 on: November 09, 2022, 08:46:02 PM »
Great motivational speech now go tour China and India for a start.
Or Germany!

Yes, there's still no serious motivation to get serious. This thread shows it: We want glitzy rocket science, future triumphs of engineering. Simple solutions for today? Bah, not possible...

Here is my 20y old stone age tech plan: Make biochar, enhance soil with it.

In my area a new wood chips power/heating plant is being planned to deliver 20MW electricity and 90MW heat for a chemicals factory. Proudly climate neutral. Reduces half the fossil gas use. But no carbon sequestration by simply leaving char coal at a cost of ca. 10-20% of the energy. That would be too uneffective...
https://www.infraserv.gendorf.de/de-DE/Newsroom/Presseinformation/2022/2022_07_28_ISG_BSG_Biomasseheizkraftwerk

Meanwhile near Cologne the 1000+ year old farm village of Lützerath and some of Germany's best agricultural soil base (Löss, with a high carbon sequestration potential) is to be destroyed for open pit brown coal mining.

"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or committed communist, but rather people for whom the difference between facts and fiction, true and false, no longer exists." ~ Hannah Arendt
"The Force can have a strong influence on the weak minded." ~ Obi-Wan Kenobi

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #381 on: November 13, 2022, 05:37:31 PM »
New technology creates carbon neutral chemicals out of thin air

It is possible to capture carbon dioxide (CO2) from the surrounding atmosphere and repurpose it into useful chemicals usually made from fossil fuels, according to a study from the University of Surrey.

The technology could allow scientists to both capture CO2 and transform it into useful chemicals such as carbon monoxide and synthetic natural gas in one circular process.

Dr Melis Duyar, Senior Lecturer of Chemical Engineering at the University of Surrey commented:

"Capturing CO2 from the surrounding air and directly converting it into useful products is exactly what we need to approach carbon neutrality in the chemicals sector. This could very well be a milestone in the steps needed for the UK to reach its 2050 net-zero goals.

"We need to get away from our current thinking on how we produce chemicals, as current practices rely on fossil fuels which are not sustainable. With this technology we can supply chemicals with a much lower carbon footprint and look at replacing fossil fuels with carbon dioxide and renewable hydrogen as the building blocks of other important chemicals."

The technology uses patent-pending switchable Dual Function Materials (DFMs), that capture carbon dioxide on their surface and catalyse the conversion of captured CO2 directly into chemicals. The "switchable" nature of the DFMs comes from their ability to produce multiple chemicals depending on the operating conditions or the composition of the added reactant. This makes the technology responsive to variations in demand for chemicals as well as availability of renewable hydrogen as a reactant.

...

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/11/221110114314.htm
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #382 on: December 31, 2022, 11:33:17 AM »
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Richard Rathbone

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1757
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 390
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #383 on: December 31, 2022, 03:19:20 PM »
https://www.eureporter.co/environment/carbon-sinks/2022/12/30/carbon-capture-and-storage-projects-across-europe/

A list of carbon capture projects in Europe.

Is there any sign, outside of Norway, that any of these will actually happen?

Norwegian tax on emissions from oil and gas fields in the North Sea is high enough that reinjection has been going on in the Norwegian sector for almost as long as production.

I don't see any sign that anyone else is willing to pay for CCS. They'll just stop using fossil fuels instead.

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10410
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3530
  • Likes Given: 761
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #384 on: January 19, 2023, 06:42:20 PM »
CO2 Removal Is Essential, Along With Emissions Cuts, to Limit Global Warming, Says Report
https://phys.org/news/2023-01-co2-essential-emissions-limit-global.html

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) from the atmosphere is crucial to limit global warming, in addition to rapid cuts to emissions—that is the stark conclusion of today's first Oxford-led "State of Carbon Dioxide Removal" report.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/633458017a1ae214f3772c76/t/63c8876b8b92bf2549e83ed5/1674086272412/SoCDR-1st-edition.pdf

Dr. Smith, Executive Director of Oxford Net Zero and CO2RE, the national hub for greenhouse gas removal, and a lead author of the report, maintains, "To limit warming to 2°C or lower, we need to accelerate emissions reductions…the findings of this report are clear: we also need to increase carbon removal, by restoring and enhancing ecosystems and rapidly scaling up new CDR methods."

He adds, "Many new methods are emerging with potential. Rather than focusing on one or two options we should encourage a portfolio, so that we get to net zero quickly without over-relying on any one method."

But, the report warns, "The majority of mechanisms currently in operation are under-resourced and pay too little to enable a portfolio of [removal methods] that could support achievement of net zero."

Meanwhile, Dr. Oliver Geden of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, explains, "CDR is not something we could do, but something we absolutely have to do to reach the Paris Agreement temperature goal."

According to Dr. Geden, "More than 120 national governments have a net-zero emissions target, which implies using CDR, but few governments have actionable plans for developing it. This presents a major shortfall."

Virtually all pathways to limiting temperature rise require new CDR technologies, such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), biochar, enhanced rock weathering and direct air capture with carbon capture and storage (DACCS). Currently, these make up only a tiny fraction of current CDR, approximately 0.1%. But, if the CDR gap is to be closed, there needs to be rapid growth of these new CDR technologies—by a factor of 1,300 on average by 2050, according to the report.

Conor Hickey et al, A review of commercialisation mechanisms for carbon dioxide removal, Frontiers in Climate (2023).
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fclim.2022.1101525/full
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― anonymous

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #385 on: January 21, 2023, 03:55:06 PM »
Carbon capture nets 2 billion tonnes of CO2 each year — but it's not enough

More than 2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide is being removed from Earth’s atmosphere each year, according to an analysis of global efforts to capture and store the greenhouse gas.

But this will not be enough to meet the Paris Agreement goal of limiting global warming to less than 2 °C above pre-industrial temperatures, even with pledges from governments worldwide to increase carbon dioxide removal (CDR) rates and invest in new technologies.

The report, called The State of Carbon Dioxide Removal, provides the first global estimates of the total amount of carbon that is being sucked out of the air each year, and predicts how much this will have to increase under various emissions scenarios. It was published on 19 January.
...

To limit global warming to less than2 °C above pre-industrial temperatures, the report estimates that by 2030, the world will need to remove a further 0.96 million tonnes of carbon dioxide each year, compared with 2020. By 2050, this will have to rise even more, to around 4.8 million tonnes above 2020 levels. As it stands, governments worldwide have proposed an increase of only between 0.1 million and 0.65 million tonnes of CDR per year by 2030 and 1.5 billion to 2.3 billion tonnes per year by 2050.

“The size of that gap already rests on the assumption that we’re going to have rapid emissions reductions,” says Smith. Therefore, “deep emission cuts will be needed alongside any type of carbon removal”, says Sara Nawaz, an environmental researcher at the American University in Washington DC.

...

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00180-4
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 26184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1166
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #386 on: January 21, 2023, 04:22:13 PM »
One “good” thing about carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is that it is not “forever.”  It can be taken out and transformed into other substances comparatively easily.  So that effort will increase, as better methods prove themselves — and the financial incentive are developed, from governments and insurance companies, for example.

I expect the space industry — which is already recovering water from CO2 exhaled on the International Space Station, and has a test instrument on the surface of Mars transforming CO2 from that planet’s thin atmosphere — will be a leader in developing earthside carbon dioxide technology over the coming years, as it has for so many other inventions.

Quote
The Sabatier reaction or Sabatier process produces methane and water from a reaction of hydrogen with carbon dioxide at elevated temperatures (optimally 300–400 °C) and pressures (perhaps 3 MPa) in the presence of a nickel catalyst.

NASA is using the Sabatier reaction to recover water from exhaled carbon dioxide and the hydrogen previously discarded from electrolysis on the International Space Station and possibly for future missions. …
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction

XPRIZE AND MUSK FOUNDATION NAME 23 WINNERS IN FIVE MILLION DOLLAR CARBON REMOVAL STUDENT COMPETITION
Nov 10 2021
https://www.xprize.org/prizes/elonmusk/articles/xprize-and-musk-foundation-name-23-winners-in-five-million-dollar-carbon-removal-student-competition

XPrize Carbon Removal selects 15 milestone winners
April 27, 2022
Each team will get $1 million of Elon Musk’s money to develop their carbon removal concept
https://cen.acs.org/environment/greenhouse-gases/XPrize-Carbon-Removal-selects-15/100/i15
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #387 on: January 21, 2023, 05:19:06 PM »
Prevention now is always cheaper then mitigating later because the carbon sinks work against us over time. Putting quotation marks around words only goes so far. It is not forever but a big portion is relative to human time. As we dump more and more carbon this goes up.

All the debts we do not incur don´t need to be solved by our children.

PS: Thanks for moving it.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 26184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1166
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #388 on: January 21, 2023, 06:12:59 PM »
Prevention now is always cheaper then mitigating later because the carbon sinks work against us over time. Putting quotation marks around words only goes so far. It is not forever but a big portion is relative to human time. As we dump more and more carbon this goes up.

All the debts we do not incur don´t need to be solved by our children.

We can’t stop CO2 emissions overnight, but we are reducing them, and developing new technologies to remove what’s there, which will become ubiquitous.

Our children will have a more challenging climate, but instead of oil refineries, they will have CO2 refineries.  And their great-grand-children will have a lower CO2 ppm.

Quote
PS: Thanks for moving it.
Thanks(?) for another FUD post to make us feel bad or upset, to which I could provide a counterbalance. ;)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #389 on: January 22, 2023, 01:08:23 PM »
Well we are not reducing emissions yet, it will be some years but that is still two more years of very high emissions.

Then when we do bend the curve down it will first be a small reduction of those same very high emissions. The graph shows a relative improvement but it is small compared to the total carbon budget. How quick it will accelerate remains to be seen.

This all adds more and more carbon at the very critical time we know as right now.

We did pledge to do something about a 2C overshoot which we then did not get around to.
If someone asked you if performing an experiment where we expose society to this stress would be a good idea you would say no.

A more challenging climate is one way to put it. Next to running more CO2 refineries they will also have to handle a severe depleted aquifer and the consequences of losing snow cover so a loss for some hydro capacity and a loss in transport capacity for major rivers. Also add the losses to sea level rise.

We should be upset by their plight. In a way it comes down to a guess how bad it will be. From your reply i take it you think it will be fine but that might be problematic. Time shall tell. And in general all the carbon we do not add does not need to be removed.

Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9826
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3593
  • Likes Given: 3996
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #390 on: January 25, 2023, 01:03:50 PM »
Quote
We can’t stop CO2 emissions overnight, but we are reducing them, and developing new technologies to remove what’s there, which will become ubiquitous.
We are NOT reducing emissions, as evidenced by the CO2 curve reported in another thread.
And the problem with CO2 removal is not technology, but the energy required to perform the process, as well as the costs of deploying whatever apparatus is necessary and getting rid of the resultant CO2 which is not easy to store/dispose in a permanent manner.
Not everything can be solved by technology. You may believe all the above points can be magicked away by some invention, but first principles say it is not in the cards.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 26184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1166
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #391 on: January 25, 2023, 03:54:01 PM »
Quote
We can’t stop CO2 emissions overnight, but we are reducing them, and developing new technologies to remove what’s there, which will become ubiquitous.
We are NOT reducing emissions, as evidenced by the CO2 curve reported in another thread.
And the problem with CO2 removal is not technology, but the energy required to perform the process, as well as the costs of deploying whatever apparatus is necessary and getting rid of the resultant CO2 which is not easy to store/dispose in a permanent manner.
Not everything can be solved by technology. You may believe all the above points can be magicked away by some invention, but first principles say it is not in the cards.

The gross accounting of total emissions hides the reduction from small successes, but that doesn’t mean small successes are not important, or that they won’t become vastly more important in the near future.  (Adoption S-curve, etc.)

We were clever enough to invent devices that put carbon into the air.  We can figure out ways to remove it.

The sun provides the earth with more energy every hour than the world uses in a year. (Or some number like that.)  Energy needed to power the solution is not a problem.

EDIT:
The earth gets more solar energy in one hour than the entire world uses in a year
Quote
There is so much solar energy hitting the earth’s surface that even a single year of sunshine exceeds all known energy reserves of oil, coal, natural gas and uranium put together.
 

The energy from the sun dwarfs every other kind of renewable energy, in large part because wind, hydro, biomass, and waves are the direct result of the sun’s light and heat.
 

Solar generates 23,000 terawatt years of energy per year. Believe it or not, these solar energy numbers are conservative — they assume only 35% of sunlight gets through the atmosphere and they only measure sunlight falling on land masses.
https://www.freeingenergy.com/the-earth-gets-more-solar-energy-in-one-hour-than-the-entire-world-uses-in-a-year/
« Last Edit: January 25, 2023, 04:07:15 PM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9826
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3593
  • Likes Given: 3996
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #392 on: January 25, 2023, 04:50:56 PM »
Quote
We were clever enough to invent devices that put carbon into the air.  We can figure out ways to remove it.
The way to remove it is simply not to emit it.
Emitting and then scrubbing will give a net energy and resource loss. No economic sense in doing this.
Once we stop emitting, we can scrub what remains in the atmosphere.
Not that I grudge the small advances, I am just being realistic.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 26184
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1166
  • Likes Given: 436
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #393 on: January 25, 2023, 05:37:25 PM »
Quote
We were clever enough to invent devices that put carbon into the air.  We can figure out ways to remove it.
The way to remove it is simply not to emit it.
Emitting and then scrubbing will give a net energy and resource loss. No economic sense in doing this.
Once we stop emitting, we can scrub what remains in the atmosphere.
Not that I grudge the small advances, I am just being realistic.

Being realistic includes admitting that we can’t just stop all emissions right now. 
But we do need to develop the tech to start removing CO2 right away, because it will take decades to ramp effectively.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9826
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3593
  • Likes Given: 3996
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #394 on: January 25, 2023, 11:36:54 PM »
Agreed on both points.

morganism

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1972
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 232
  • Likes Given: 140
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #395 on: February 04, 2023, 12:05:52 AM »
Microbes are 'active engineers' in Earth's rock-to-life cycle
(...)
according to Chorover, provide a "smoking gun" link between the activities of carbon-consuming microbes and the transformation of rock to life-sustaining soil in the critical zone.

The site is part of a larger National Science Foundation Critical Zone Observatory program, which unlike traditional brick-and-mortar observatories provides a network of regional ecological environments rigged with scientific instrumentation across the United States.

Temperature, moisture and gas sensors at the site collect measurements every 15 minutes, and after compiling and correlating the data, "What we found was a strong relationship between the rate at which the rock was weathering to form soil and the activities of the microbiome in the subsurface," said Chorover, a principal investigator at the Catalina-Jemez observatory.

These minerals in the critical zone are continuously attacked by microorganisms, organic acids and water, Fang explained. As the minerals break down, microbes in the soil consume the new organic matter and transform it into material that feeds plants and other microorganisms, while releasing carbon dioxide.

Previous studies suggest that microbial decomposition of soil organic matter can be fueled when more "fresh" organics—such as plant matter—are introduced to the soil system. This process is called the "priming effect" by soil scientists. However, the relationship between mineral weathering and microbial priming remains unclear.

"Our study shows, for the first time, how these essential soil processes are coupled, and these two processes continuously influence soil formation, CO2 emission and global climate," Fang said. "The linkages may even be associated with long-term elemental cycling and rapid turnover of soil carbon and nutrients on Earth.

https://phys.org/news/2023-02-microbes-earth-rock-to-life.html

Mineral weathering is linked to microbial priming in the critical zone, Nature Communications (2023). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-35671-x

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35671

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2062
  • Likes Given: 2001
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #396 on: May 18, 2023, 08:26:13 PM »
Huge net zero boost as 20 carbon storage facilities get the green light
The drive to net zero emissions has taken a significant step forward today (18 May) with the offer of awards for 20 carbon storage licences at offshore sites, including some near Aberdeen, Teesside, Liverpool and Lincolnshire.

The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) launched the UK’s first-ever carbon storage licensing round in June 2022, with applications closing in September. The 20 licences in total are around 12,000 square kilometres in size, a little bigger than Yorkshire, the UK’s largest county.

Once the new storage sites are in operation and in some cases first injection could come in as little as six years they could make a significant contribution to the aim of storing up to 30 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year by 2030, approximately 10% of total UK annual emissions, which were 341.5 million tonnes in 2021.

...

The licences include a range of geological store types and were selected following a process which considered attributes such as the geology, proximity to existing infrastructure as is found at Bacton off the coast of Norfolk and links to industrial clusters which are expecting carbon storage to help meet decarbonisation goals.

The need to share offshore space with other users of the seabed such as wind developers and petroleum operations was also considered as part of the NSTA’s licensing process, recognising the need for both early engagement and continued collaboration between existing licence and leaseholders where an area of the seabed is a key resource area for different sectors.

...

https://bdaily.co.uk/articles/2023/05/18/huge-net-zero-boost-as-20-carbon-storage-facilities-get-the-green-light
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4012
  • Autodidacticism is a complicated word
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 991
  • Likes Given: 1280
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #397 on: May 18, 2023, 09:33:10 PM »
Huge net zero boost as 20 carbon storage facilities get the green light
The drive to net zero emissions has taken a significant step forward today (18 May) with the offer of awards for 20 carbon storage licences at offshore sites, including some near Aberdeen, Teesside, Liverpool and Lincolnshire.

The North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) launched the UK’s first-ever carbon storage licensing round in June 2022, with applications closing in September. The 20 licences in total are around 12,000 square kilometres in size, a little bigger than Yorkshire, the UK’s largest county.

Once the new storage sites are in operation and in some cases first injection could come in as little as six years they could make a significant contribution to the aim of storing up to 30 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year by 2030, approximately 10% of total UK annual emissions, which were 341.5 million tonnes in 2021.

...

The licences include a range of geological store types and were selected following a process which considered attributes such as the geology, proximity to existing infrastructure as is found at Bacton off the coast of Norfolk and links to industrial clusters which are expecting carbon storage to help meet decarbonisation goals.

The need to share offshore space with other users of the seabed such as wind developers and petroleum operations was also considered as part of the NSTA’s licensing process, recognising the need for both early engagement and continued collaboration between existing licence and leaseholders where an area of the seabed is a key resource area for different sectors.

...

https://bdaily.co.uk/articles/2023/05/18/huge-net-zero-boost-as-20-carbon-storage-facilities-get-the-green-light
While reading this, I was thinking; 'This must cost a lot of money'. So let them go ahead with CCS. Money talks, BS walks... In the end, they will give up on this expensive insanity, and just invest in cheap solar and wind...

BUT! The more CO2 we can capture now, the better it is for the climate. So let them go ahead with this insanity. We'll find better use for the technology later on...
We humans are just a stupid virus. The planet will cure itself of us. And all we'll leave behind is just a few seconds on the geological timescale.

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 20946
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5319
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #398 on: May 18, 2023, 11:58:28 PM »
I also presume sending CO2 underground is eventually a dead end as the holes in the ground are of a finite size?
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

John_the_Younger

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 447
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 66
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #399 on: May 19, 2023, 01:03:36 AM »
Vaguely, all the oil and gas drawn out of the ground is room for CO2 to be sent down.  In some environments CO2 will react to make a solid fairly quickly (don't know how fast).  Much hydrofracted fluid is "disposed" by pumping into deep wells; although there are some earthquake issues when pumping too fast, there's lots of "room."  Generically, if you pump gas down into the Earth, it will displace water.  (If there is not a cap, the gas could bubble back to the surface.)