Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)  (Read 11277 times)


ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 580
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2014, 11:56:44 PM »
They seemed to have neglected to mention
1) the massive extra cost involved in in constructing the CCS
2) the 25% plus additional cost to the electricity generated at the plant and
3) that all the captured CO2 is being sold to increase oil extraction.

Not much to get excited about.

Previous CCS systems implemented in the Canadian west didn't last many years at all before being shut down.

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #2 on: November 03, 2014, 01:13:33 AM »
further details

https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/boundary_dam.html

95% capture rate being suggested seems impressive.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2014, 06:00:18 AM »
They seemed to have neglected to mention
1) the massive extra cost involved in in constructing the CCS
2) the 25% plus additional cost to the electricity generated at the plant and
3) that all the captured CO2 is being sold to increase oil extraction.

Not much to get excited about.

Previous CCS systems implemented in the Canadian west didn't last many years at all before being shut down.

The project would go bankrupt were it not for their ability to sell the CO2 for oil extraction.  The opportunities for marketing the CO2 are fairly limited, they had to downsize the original plant design as there wasn't a market for all the CO2 that would have been produced. 

Wind and solar just keep getting cheaper.  It's really looking like we've got some inexpensive vanadium redox flow battery technology coming on line.  Look for storage at or below $0.05/kWh.  That plus <4c wind and solar is going to be a new coal plant killer.

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2014, 03:38:09 PM »
Wind and solar just keep getting cheaper. 

Yes but wind and solar don't reduce CO2 in the air. I think we need some practice at grabbing CO2 when it is high in order to improve to the stage where we can sequestrate CO2 from air.

We are already at about 478 CO2e and avoiding 2C 'dangerous' CC only allow CO2e to go up to 530 if that is a brief overshoot. Total emissions of about 11 years of current emissions taking us to 500 CO2e simply isn't going to last us forever - we need a lot of capture from air, as well as from power station emissions.

domen_

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2014, 05:56:20 PM »
Coal and natural gas with CCS also don't reduce CO2 in the air. Only biomass+CCS reduces CO2 in the air.

Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, one of the German top climatologist (he was also advisor to Merkel's government on these issues for some years) is very much in favor of biomass+CCS.

I also think it's a good idea. But in the real world economics is the issue. There would have to be some kind of regulatory framework to make this work.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2014, 08:36:49 AM »
Biomass + CCS is an interesting idea.  It might be expensive and to make a meaningful reduction in atmospheric CO2 it would have to be very large scale.

I suppose a bit here and a bit there is better than doing nothing....

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9100
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2014, 02:48:07 PM »
What's happening with CCS in the real world.  "Now the bad news."
Today his government has changed its tune, estimating costs at $200 to bury each ton of carbon. He called CCS a “science experiment.”

Other Alternatives

“The carbon reductions are extraordinarily expensive relative to other alternatives,” Prentice said in an Oct. 31 interview in Calgary.

Economists say a carbon tax of half that amount would spur development of low-carbon technologies like wind power.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-04/this-process-averts-climate-change-now-the-bad-news.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #8 on: July 23, 2015, 09:20:21 PM »
Inexpensive carbon mitigation (sequestration)?

I read a mention of (probably) this process several months ago in a book, and just happened upon this article in an industry blog.
Discovery To Reduce Human Impact On Global Warming


HOUSTON (Oct. 28, 2009) – Two New Jersey scientists have discovered a simple chemical process to break down carbon dioxide (CO2) and eliminate nuisance pollutants, such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in refining operations. Their discovery could redefine how science looks at energy. SWAPSOL Corp. will present to industry on Oct. 28, “Carbon Focus Day,” at the Global Refining Strategies Summit in Houston.

The invention changes preconceived notions about energy and chemistry. Raymond Stenger, environmental engineer, and James Wasas, an entrepreneurial chemist, developed the Stenger-Wasas Process (SWAP) based on a previously unknown exothermic interaction between H2S and CO2 that eliminates both. The SWAP is independently verified by standard analytical instruments to convert CO2 by more than 99 percent into carbon-sulfur polymers (Carsuls), water and sulfur in the presence of H2S over an abundant and inexpensive catalyst. The SWAP can also recycle waste hydrocarbons (compounds containing carbon and hydrogen) and break down CO2 in a self-sustaining cycle.


See also Practical Applications for the Stenger-Wasas Process (SWAP)
The (SWAP) is not a CO2 capture process. It is a CO2 and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) conversion and elimination process.

More about the company at www.swapsol.com
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #9 on: July 23, 2015, 09:42:24 PM »
Unrelated patent application dated May 2, 2015
SYNGAS PRODUCTION BY CO2 REDUCTION PROCESS

Abstract:
A process for producing synthesis gas (syngas) comprising the endothermic reaction between CO2 and H2S, wherein the energetic supply is provided by the exothermic oxidation of a small portion of H2S to SO2 according to the following reaction scheme: R2: H2S + 1.5 O2 → SO2 + H2O said process being carried out according to the following overall theoretical reaction scheme R1, not taking into account the aforementioned exothermic reaction R2, R1: CO2 + 2 H2S → CO + H2 + S2 + H2O wherein the amount of fed oxygen is comprised between 5% and 25% by volume over the total volume of fed reactants gaseous mixture.

Internet search of "CO2 H2S exothermic reaction" gets several 'hits'.  This patent application just shows folks are still looking at the process.  I note the SWAPSOL effort (previous post) appears to have stopped in 2011.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #10 on: July 23, 2015, 10:16:50 PM »
An outside contractor (sulfur recovery technology expert) apparently wrote of the SWAP process in 2011:
“What is clear from the data is that the SWAP can provide cost advantages over competing processes, especially in view of the fact that the competing cost data needs to be inflated for a four year time period. Compared to the industry standard (the Claus process), the SWAP provides a cost advantage in excess of 40 % (after adjustments for inflation); the advanced SWAP process increases the potential advantage to 70%.”
The focus of this is clearly for cleaning contaminants for petroleum refiners. 

Because there are references to 'landfill gas cleanup' I would think this process has some open air applications as well.  I'm dreaming of the possibility of harnessing H2S producing volcanos to remove CO2 from the atmosphere!
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2015, 03:19:52 PM »
New cell taps captured CO2 for a range of clean energy uses
Umair Irfan, E&E reporter
Published: Thursday, August 20, 2015  [subscription required, but I bet you can read about this elsewhere]

A simple electrochemical cell could turn carbon dioxide from the air into materials used in many clean energy applications, researchers have found.

At scale, the setup could produce carbon nanofibers in a way that actually reduces greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere.

"Instead of sequestration, atmospheric carbon dioxide is directly transformed into stable, useful, compact, valuable carbon products," said Stuart Licht, a chemistry professor at George Washington University who developed the apparatus.

He presented his work at a press conference yesterday at the American Chemical Society's annual meeting in Boston.

The technique started with steel and nickel electrodes immersed in a molten lithium carbonate solution. When a current is applied, the electrodes split the lithium carbonate into lithium oxide and carbon. The carbon deposits on the electrode, while the lithium oxide reacts with carbon dioxide from the air, reforming the starting material.

"By these means, lithium carbonate is continuously replenished," Licht said.

Over time, carbon forms into nanofibers. Researchers demonstrated that 1 amp of current produced 0.1 gram of nanofibers over the course of an hour.
...
Licht also noted that, theoretically, using atmospheric carbon dioxide to make useful things could slow climate change, but other researchers have found that the economics make such an idea implausible (ClimateWire, Dec. 13, 2011).
emphases added, but paragraph is at the end of the original article
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9100
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #12 on: August 20, 2015, 03:51:23 PM »
You mean like this?   :D

From Greenhouse Gas to the Dreamliner, Nanofibers Offer New Life for CO2
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/19082015/greenhouse-gas-dreamliner-nanofibers-offer-new-life-co2-carbon-geoengineering
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2015, 03:54:09 PM »
I couldn't have won the bet without you! :-*
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

skanky

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2015, 11:42:02 AM »
Drax pulls out of CCS on cost grounds, due to government pulling renewable subsidy:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34356117

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9100
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #15 on: January 29, 2016, 01:20:29 PM »
Not Storage, but here's a method for Carbon Capture and Recycling.

Carbon dioxide captured from air can be directly converted into methanol fuel
(Phys.org)—For the first time, researchers have demonstrated that CO2 captured from the air can be directly converted into methanol (CH3OH) using a homogeneous catalyst. The benefits are two-fold: The process removes harmful CO2 from the atmosphere, and the methanol can be used as an alternative fuel to gasoline. The work represents an important step that could one day lead to a future "methanol economy," in which fuel and energy storage are primarily based on methanol.
...
Over the past several years, chemists have been investigating various ways of recycling CO2 into useful products. For example, treating CO2 with hydrogen gas (H2) can produce methanol, methane (CH4), or formic acid (HCOOH). Among these products, methanol is especially attractive because of its use as an alternative fuel, in fuel cells, and for hydrogen storage.

http://phys.org/news/2016-01-carbon-dioxide-captured-air-methanol.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9100
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #16 on: April 28, 2016, 10:18:18 PM »
Could carbon farming be the answer for a 'clapped-out' Australia?
Farmers signing up for the carbon emissions reduction fund have to meet strict guidelines but there is significant profit and energy savings to be made
Similar to the carbon offset programme, carbon sequestration could be a viable solution, with farmers encouraged to store carbon dioxide (CO2) in soil and trees and prevent additional emissions from animal waste methane. And again, farmers take part in an auction, albeit a more sedate, less visible one, to make it profitable.

The ins and outs of the fund take some navigation, however. At the auction, bidders undertake to store a set amount of carbon or not emit a set amount of CO2, within a fixed time period and for the lowest price they can profitably deliver carbon abatement.

Each endeavour for landowners, whether it is storing carbon or cutting CO2 emissions, is classified as a project and the methods used to deliver their outcomes are set out by the regulator. For example, a farmer who undertakes to boost his soil’s carbon content by changing his grazing practices or by increasing organic compost has to nominate a specific method to achieve the improvement.

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/apr/28/could-carbon-farming-be-the-answer-for-a-clapped-out-australia
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #17 on: April 30, 2016, 03:06:29 AM »
vaclav smith shows why CCS is not going to work, at all, and the reason is numbers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9zHpdkGFtQ&feature=youtu.be&a

doing the math he shows that to remove and sequester 1/2 of anthropogenic co2 emissions, we will have to sequester 5 billion cubic meters of liquid co2 each year. . .quite a bit more in volume than the earth's oil production. 
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #18 on: May 02, 2016, 07:39:24 PM »
Its Vaclav Smil. He has been writing for quite a while on the scale and complexity of replacing/decarbonizing the current energy infrastructure. Basically, it will be very slow, painful, and provide much less energy than most currently assume. CCS is a bridge to nowhere, just like natural gas.

His "Energy Transitions" book is a great primer.
http://www.amazon.com/Energy-Transitions-History-Requirements-Prospects-ebook/dp/B004HO57NA/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

Another great talk by him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5guXaWwQpe4

DungeonMaster

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Citizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 129
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #19 on: May 02, 2016, 11:39:59 PM »
If I remember correctly, all this buzz around CCS was created by the coal industry during Bush's presidency, to spread the idea that science-to-come would find tech solutions "to this CO2 thing", when they denied it was a problem. It appeared around the "clean coal" themes they tried to sell us - basically, an other strategy to deny coal and oil responsability and to delay any action. But CS was never meant to work, just to buy more time to emit while making money.
This forum helps me to feel less uncomfortable about "doing something" about the melting Arctic and the warming world.
Read again  Maslowski paper : why Arctic could melt in 2016 +/- 3Y !

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #20 on: May 03, 2016, 12:46:05 AM »
And now we have "Bio Energy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS)" from the IPCC so that we can overshoot the CO2 targets with the nice warm feeling that we can go zero, or even negative, carbon through technology later. Another BAU-facilitating mirage.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9100
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2016, 12:48:55 AM »
Energy Department Suspends Funding for Texas Carbon Capture Project, Igniting Debate
The Obama administration has suspended funding for a large, troubled carbon capture and storage project, a decision being challenged by politicians from both parties and environmental advocates alike.

While the Texas Clean Energy Project is not officially dead, continued refusal by the Department of Energy to extend any more money would effectively kill it, according to its builder. That would make it the fifth CCS project the DOE has backed away from.
...
Due to Summit's inability to obtain the required commercial debt and equity project financing and the adverse effect of changing energy markets on the demand for coal-based power plants, we are concerned about the viability of the Project and the Department's continued involvement," the inspector general's report said. "Although construction of the plant was originally planned for completion in June 2014, the Project remains in the project definition phase. Additionally, we found that the Department had taken actions that increased its financial risk in the Project."

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/12052016/department-energy-moniz-carbon-capture-ccs-climate-change-texas-clean-energy-project
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

crandles

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1756
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #22 on: May 31, 2016, 12:19:01 PM »
Baking soda 'sponge' could capture carbon emissions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36197603

ghoti

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 580
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #23 on: May 31, 2016, 03:59:45 PM »
This is not actually new just a new press release on a variation of an old theme. Still extremely energy expensive to recycle the material to remove the captured pure CO2 and then expensive to transport/store the CO2.

Same old same old. These methods could work if you stored (buried?) the dry material that absorbed the CO2 but then we'd probably have a landfill problem wouldn't we.


Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9100
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #24 on: June 10, 2016, 12:47:07 AM »
Iceland Experiment Successfully Turns CO2 Emissions into Rock
An experiment in Iceland has shown how carbon dioxide emissions can be trapped deep underground and converted into a solid mineral faster than previously thought. Locking CO2 underground—by combining the pollutant with water and injecting it into volcanic rock—could help combat climate change by keeping the primary greenhouse gas out of the air, scientists say.

In the initial experiment near a geothermal power plant outside Reykjavík, researchers injected 175 tons of carbon dioxide dissolved in water into a basaltic rock formation. It didn't take long for the mix to interact chemically with surrounding rock, forming the mineral carbonate. In a second experiment, scientists dissolved 73 tons of CO2 and hydrogen sulfide in water and injected the solution into the same area, with the same effect.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/09062016/iceland-study-ccs-carbon-capture-storage-climate-change-iceland-co2-rock
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1392
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #25 on: June 10, 2016, 01:20:22 AM »
That Iceland technique  needs a lot of water ...

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #26 on: June 20, 2016, 07:50:00 PM »
Bury the beast in basalt
Posted on June 15, 2016 by Steve Drury

More on the Iceland experiment.  Dr. Drury's piece ends with
After 18 months the pump that extracted groundwater directly from the lave flow for continuous monitoring of changes in the tracer and pH broke down. The fault was due to a build up of carbonate – a cause for astonishment and rapid evaluation of the data gathered. In just 18 months 95% of the 14C in the injected CO2 had been taken up by carbonation reactions. A similar injection experiment into the Snake River flood basalts in Washington State, USA, is said to have achieved similar results (not yet published). A test would be to drill core from the target flow to see if any carbonates containing the radioactive tracer filled either vesicles of cracks in the rock – some press reports have shown Icelandic basalt cores that contain carbonates, but no evidence that they contain the tracer .
 Although this seems a much more beneficial use of well-injection than fracking, the problem is essentially the same as reinjection of carbon dioxide into old oil and gas fields; the high cost. Alternatives might be to spread basaltic or ultramafic gravel over large areas so that it reacts with CO2 dissolved in rainwater or to lay bear fresh rocks of that kind by removal of soil cover.
The article includes some geological context of CO2 issues.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 9100
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #27 on: September 18, 2016, 01:12:56 AM »
The latest science -- from a lab setting.

New patent boosts CO2 capture hopes
A technology that could in theory catch 90% of carbon dioxide from coal-fired power stations has been patented by US government scientists.

Employing an enzyme-based membrane fabric 10 times thinner than a soap bubble, it could separate carbon dioxide from nitrogen or oxygen and speed up its dissolution in water by a factor of 10 million. And its triumphant designers say that, in laboratory trials, it does the job − at a cost-effective $40 a ton.
...
But the commercial technologies used now bubble CO2 into a chemical-based solution designed to absorb the gas. The process demands high pressure facilities and uses about a third of the energy the plant generates.

http://climatenewsnetwork.net/new-patent-boosts-co2-capture-hopes/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 12759
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2016, 04:30:43 AM »
The linked article is entitled: "We’re placing far too much hope in pulling carbon dioxide out of the air, scientists warn":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/10/13/were-placing-far-too-much-hope-in-pulling-carbon-dioxide-out-of-the-air-scientists-warn/?utm_term=.493dff2a49c3

Extract: "In a new opinion paper, published Thursday in the journal Science, climate experts Kevin Anderson of the University of Manchester and Glen Peters of the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research have argued that relying on the uncertain concept of negative emissions as a fix could lock the world into a severe climate-change pathway.

“[If] we behave today like we’ve got these get-out-of-jail cards in the future, and then in 20 years we discover we don’t have this technology, then you’re already locked into a higher temperature level,” Peters said."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

timallard

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 132
  • designer
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #29 on: October 16, 2016, 12:09:07 AM »
For 2015 we did 37-Gigatons CO2-eqv, frozen it's 37 cubic-km's of gas, 25% of it stays for over 10,000-years in the atmosphere, Catch-22 on CO2.

The idea to sequester that much CO2 a year will shatter strata to earthquakes along with acid poisoning from the CO2 touching groundwater or aquifers, Kansas joined the real estate boom in earthquake properties lately, prices are falling by the minute.

Dumped into the sea that much in a year bets will cause a benthic extinction, maybe it'll take 3-years?

That's rather immature and delusional geophysically speaking, it's the same problem with nuclear waste, eh?

End the Steam-Age for electrons, 80% of grid power is for thermal end uses move that to active-solar-HVAC, poof gone and who needs a new power plant?

Thus ending the grid will take less than 5-years, if it was a war maybe 2-months.

It's simply faster, cheaper and easier removing those from the grid by using onsite thermal collection & storage having zero emissions, far less copper and concrete-n-steel as carbon-footprint and doesn't go down in a big storm.
-tom

solartim27

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 422
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #30 on: October 30, 2016, 05:46:36 AM »
Anybody know if the numbers here are accurate?
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2016/oct/17/ticker-mega-composter-santa-ysabel/#
This is all about regenerative agriculture and carbon farming in San Diego County," said Kevin Muno, a cattle rancher and owner of the 80-acre Montado Farms, introducing the project. "By spreading a half-inch of compost on rangeland, we're able to sequester a ton of carbon per hectare [roughly 2.5 acres], increase grass growth by 40 to 60 percent, and reduce water use by three times....
Muno's statement was referring to the findings of the Marin Carbon Project, which has been studying the effects of composting on two rangeland sites in Northern California for nearly a decade.
http://www.marincarbonproject.org/home
« Last Edit: October 30, 2016, 07:39:43 AM by solartim27 »
FNORD

timallard

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 132
  • designer
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #31 on: October 30, 2016, 12:08:55 PM »
Anybody know if the numbers here are accurate?
http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2016/oct/17/ticker-mega-composter-santa-ysabel/#
This is all about regenerative agriculture and carbon farming in San Diego County," said Kevin Muno, a cattle rancher and owner of the 80-acre Montado Farms, introducing the project. "By spreading a half-inch of compost on rangeland, we're able to sequester a ton of carbon per hectare [roughly 2.5 acres], increase grass growth by 40 to 60 percent, and reduce water use by three times....
Muno's statement was referring to the findings of the Marin Carbon Project, which has been studying the effects of composting on two rangeland sites in Northern California for nearly a decade.
http://www.marincarbonproject.org/home


Certain lands respond well to grazing, others don't, with fencing humans forced ecosystems to change usually degrading the land with erosion.

Once there soils lack organics to hold moisture then to gain soil communities that transform minerals to forms plants can absorb raw dirt doesn't do that and why people use fertilizers ... which work to a degree yet not fully compared to healthy, rich soils  for max 'nutrition' in the plants as food for people our guts work the same way.

This is a best reference I've found so far for most ranchers & planners to read free online, have the book: http://quiviracoalition.org/Publications/Publications_for_Download/index.html

We must exit the Steam Age for electrons, most grid power is for thermal end-use 80%, not electricity 20%, so to switch will only take 5-years moving to solar-HVAC, maybe 2-months if it was a war, don't tell.

I like Dr. Hansen's solution of a "carbon fee" that takes the money from the polluters and distributes it to all citizens equally,  they spend it -->> the economy grows.

End subsidies, tax loopholes and this time they pay double taxes being criminal in their choices, eh? ... then put that capital into real solutions not putting it off another 30-years the slogans we're hearing are the same, oh it'll take 30-years to switch to fossil, it's a racket not a "service".
-tom

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1486
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #32 on: March 08, 2017, 05:45:07 PM »
Synchrotron sheds (X-ray) light on carbon chemistry at ocean surfaces
  • Breakthrough discoveries on the Earth's carbonate system with far ranging applications, including carbon sequestration and biology
Date:March 7, 2017 Source:American Institute of Physics
Excerpts:
Summary: Carbonate, bicarbonate, and carbonic acid emerge when atmospheric carbon dioxide dissolves in the oceans, which is the largest sink for this greenhouse gas. Researchers are interested in better understanding the carbonate system to potentially help facilitate carbon sequestration schemes, to help mitigate climate change. Recently, researchers made breakthrough discoveries about the carbonate species' behavior at saltwater surfaces, like that of the ocean.
According to one of the paper's authors, UC Berkeley chemistry professor Richard Saykally, a strong motivation for this research was understanding the chemical processes involved in carbon sequestration. They found that while neutral carbonic acid was most heavily present at the surface, as was expected, the more highly charged carbonate ion was more abundant than the weaker bicarbonate.

"We want to generally advance our understanding of the global carbon cycle," Saykally said. "The aspects of this cycle that we have been focusing on begin with carbon dioxide in the atmosphere dissolving into salt water, followed by some very interesting chemistry."

Carbon dioxide is captured by the water surface and hydrated to form carbonic acid or bicarbonate, which can then ionize into either bicarbonate or carbonate where carbonate may react with dissolved magnesium or calcium ions to form limestone.

"We want to know all those steps going from gaseous carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to limestone," Saykally said. "Our goal is to understand all the details in all the steps in that process."
"So, the next step would be to look further into ion pairing, and essentially limestone or mineral formation, specifically, looking at the interaction of calcium and magnesium ions with carbonate," Lam said of one carbon sequestration possibility he discussed

(I'm not holding my breath for this miracle cure.)
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #33 on: April 12, 2017, 03:39:48 PM »
Just saw some really sad statistics.

A study on CCS related publications revealed 17750 publications since 1992. However the peak was 2013, with significant decline afterwards. For example since 2003 the peak on post combustion capture was more than 300 publications in 2014  while in 2016 The number was 150.  The completely opposite should have happened with increasing publications ... Why???
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1945
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #34 on: April 12, 2017, 03:47:55 PM »
Just saw some really sad statistics.

A study on CCS related publications revealed 17750 publications since 1992. However the peak was 2013, with significant decline afterwards. For example since 2003 the peak on post combustion capture was more than 300 publications in 2014  while in 2016 The number was 150.  The completely opposite should have happened with increasing publications ... Why???


By ~2013 the concept had been shown to be nothing more than hype?


Terry

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #35 on: April 12, 2017, 04:29:28 PM »
Just saw some really sad statistics.

A study on CCS related publications revealed 17750 publications since 1992. However the peak was 2013, with significant decline afterwards. For example since 2003 the peak on post combustion capture was more than 300 publications in 2014  while in 2016 The number was 150.  The completely opposite should have happened with increasing publications ... Why???


By ~2013 the concept had been shown to be nothing more than hype?


Terry

Wtv

CCS is not hype, just expensive.  I am wondering why would the universities reduce the research.  To solve the problem you need all possible tools... you are hoping renewables will ramp up fast enough so you won't need CCS. Projects and development in such a large scale is never that linear and easy...
« Last Edit: April 12, 2017, 04:35:31 PM by DrTskoul »
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

mitch

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #36 on: April 12, 2017, 06:35:26 PM »
The reduction in research most likely reflects priorities by the funding agencies. Very little research funding is internal to the universities. 

folke_kelm

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #37 on: April 13, 2017, 07:37:34 PM »
DrTskoul,

CCS is and always has been a hype. Of course it is a possibility in small scale, but for the required scale you have to ask geologists. You must have the numbers in mind when you talk about CCS.
80+ million barrels of oil a day, plus all coal, plus all natural gas have to be captured and injected into the ground. CO2 is as a fluid by far more mobile than oil or water, so it will require sites we do not have. Most oil deposits are not able to contain these vast amounts of carbon dioxide we have to capture.
One more point is, that we have to burn more than twice the amount of coal or oil to capture, compress an deposit carbon dioxide. This is not a way we should take, and this is, what research has got as a conclusion, this is why research stagnates. Look at the numbers and you will understand.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #38 on: April 13, 2017, 11:39:37 PM »
DrTskoul,

CCS is and always has been a hype. Of course it is a possibility in small scale, but for the required scale you have to ask geologists. You must have the numbers in mind when you talk about CCS.
80+ million barrels of oil a day, plus all coal, plus all natural gas have to be captured and injected into the ground. CO2 is as a fluid by far more mobile than oil or water, so it will require sites we do not have. Most oil deposits are not able to contain these vast amounts of carbon dioxide we have to capture.
One more point is, that we have to burn more than twice the amount of coal or oil to capture, compress an deposit carbon dioxide. This is not a way we should take, and this is, what research has got as a conclusion, this is why research stagnates. Look at the numbers and you will understand.

* there is more than enough storage in US for all US emissions per DOE (https://energy.gov/fe/articles/does-carbon-utilization-and-storage-atlas-estimates-least-2400)
* if methane can be stored in natural gas reservoirs so is CO2
* you cannot include transportation and residential uses. Cannot capture that. You can only apply carbon capture at very large sources, basically electricity generating power plants and big industrial sources. That cuts down amount that can be captured.
* world class scale carbon capture and sequestration is already in existence and commercialized. Most of sequestration is for enhanced oil recovery ( EOR). It is wrong that only small scale is feasible.
* your energy needs calcs are wrong. Currently the levelized cost of electricity go up by 25 - 40% if CCS is included, mostly due to capital requirements.
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #39 on: April 14, 2017, 04:59:20 AM »
Please define "world class scale carbon capture and sequestration". Agree on the 40% extra cost, what % of the CO2 is actually captured. EOR opportunities will be limited, so the cost will have to flow through to the consumer.

If this is ever to be scaled up to what would be required, there would have to be a massive new pipeline etc. infrastructure to move the CO2 to the available reservoirs from where the coal-fired electricity generating plants are. Vaclav Smil has covered this very well. Currently, CCS implementations are far behind any of the scenarios used by the UN IPCC.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #40 on: April 14, 2017, 05:58:07 AM »
This facility captures more than 90 percent of the carbon dioxide (CO2) from a 240 MW slipstream of flue gas for the use and ultimate sequestration of 1.6 million tons of this greenhouse gas annually. Petra Nova came online in 2016.

At 240 MW, Petra Nova is the world's largest post-combustion carbon capture facility installed on an existing coal-fueled power plan

largest non power
Location: Weyburn Saskatchewan, Canada
Start Date: October 2000
Size: 3 Mt/yr: Over 30 Million tons injected since the project start

 World class scale : equipment are at the largest scale

Implementations depend on policy and cost not on scalability...

Goal should be to minimize ff power consumption and add ccs to the rest

“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #41 on: April 14, 2017, 09:29:37 PM »
There is a huge amount of variance in the reporting on Petra Nova, looks like the plant captures 90% of the carbon emissions from one of the plant's coal burning units (250MW capacity versus the plants total of 3,700 MW), so still relatively small scale. There was an assumption of $75 oil for profitability, so lower current prices have created profitability issues. The problem for all alternatives in an environment without a substantial carbon tax, not just CCS; 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2017/01/11/nrg-energy-ceo-carbon-capture-is-very-challenging-at-50-oil/#77ec647c5b22

Seems that Petra Nova is a lot better managed, and simpler technology, than the Kemper fiasco. Only just started operation though, so no track record to see how it performs over time. I found this very well balanced article on the possibilities for CCS.

http://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/4/12/15269628/carbon-capture-trump

The Net Power work, if it pans out, would be a game changer - additional cost offset by using the CO2 stream to generate more electricity. Still a lot of controversy over the safety of the storage underground. May be the same nonsense as "wind turbines make you sick and kill lots of birds", but can cause a lot of delay.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/science/donald-trump-carbon-capture-clean-coal.html

« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 09:47:36 PM by rboyd »

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #42 on: April 14, 2017, 10:21:34 PM »
Absence of carbon capture and storage is ‘biggest challenge to’ 2C limit

"There is a clear divergence from current trends and the scenarios. Most scenarios require thousands of CCS facilities by 2030, but there are only tens currently proposed"

https://www.carbonbrief.org/absence-carbon-capture-storage-biggest-challenge-2c-limit

Richard Rathbone

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 360
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #43 on: April 17, 2017, 01:43:34 PM »
Absence of carbon capture and storage is ‘biggest challenge to’ 2C limit

"There is a clear divergence from current trends and the scenarios. Most scenarios require thousands of CCS facilities by 2030, but there are only tens currently proposed"

https://www.carbonbrief.org/absence-carbon-capture-storage-biggest-challenge-2c-limit

None will actually happen. A requirement for CCS or closing the plant will result in closing the plant. Renewables have gone past the tipping point that made CCS obsolete before a carbon price high enough ever got implemented (except in Norway, where there has been a high enough carbon tax since 1991 to make it commercial in one niche).
https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/projects/sleipner%C2%A0co2-storage-project

Early closure of bankrupt facilities is what will prevent carbon budgets being exceeded if anything does.

(Petra Nova is not CCS, the CO2 is used, not stored)

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #44 on: April 17, 2017, 03:04:34 PM »
Absence of carbon capture and storage is ‘biggest challenge to’ 2C limit

"There is a clear divergence from current trends and the scenarios. Most scenarios require thousands of CCS facilities by 2030, but there are only tens currently proposed"

https://www.carbonbrief.org/absence-carbon-capture-storage-biggest-challenge-2c-limit

None will actually happen. A requirement for CCS or closing the plant will result in closing the plant. Renewables have gone past the tipping point that made CCS obsolete before a carbon price high enough ever got implemented (except in Norway, where there has been a high enough carbon tax since 1991 to make it commercial in one niche).
https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/projects/sleipner%C2%A0co2-storage-project

Early closure of bankrupt facilities is what will prevent carbon budgets being exceeded if anything does.

(Petra Nova is not CCS, the CO2 is used, not stored)

What is the difference between underground utilization and storage?

Regarding CCS demise,  you assume a) that every single bit of FF use can be replaced by b) renewable penetration is going by to happen fast enough that CCS is not needed.

The bankrupt facilities let them die. However natural gas based power generation is far from bankrupt. You want to capture as much of that CO2 as possible... no?
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

rboyd

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #45 on: April 17, 2017, 09:07:28 PM »
At the rate at which we will need to cut emissions, the "all of the above" approach makes sense. The current coal-based power stations provide a limited number of implementation points that already have all the required grid connectivity. Quite a few of them are relatively new, some even being built within the last few years (e.g. Germany, Holland), so there is a huge cost to write these off. Such an approach also removed political barriers (e.g. the coal lobby in Germany).

An escalating pace of renewables implementation would not be highly net energy positive until the rate of increase slowed down, due to the up-front energy cost (including grid infrastructure builds etc.) and the smaller annual, annuity-style flow of energy. Therefore, a "Marshall Plan" style renewable build out would need more energy in the short-term. Same goes if we try to drive a rapid retirement of high-carbon infrastructure (e.g. SUV's) and building energy retrofits.

Petra Nova is storing CO2 underground, to displace oil. Splitting hairs on this is not beneficial to the discussion. I am no fan of the continued use of fossil fuels, but am realistic about how hard a rapid transformation of the energy system will be and that compromises will have to be made.




Archimid

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 678
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #46 on: April 26, 2017, 03:40:02 AM »
Scientist invents way to trigger artificial photosynthesis to clean air

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-04/uocf-siw042517.php

Extract:
A chemistry professor in Florida has just found a way to trigger the process of photosynthesis in a synthetic material, turning greenhouse gases into clean air and producing energy all at the same time.

Video from the author and link to paper in the link. Sounds intriguing. If true and scalable it can be the breakthrough we needed.  It not only stores carbon, it recharges the carbon with solar energy and produces fuel.

I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2111
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #47 on: April 26, 2017, 05:14:38 AM »
Formate -  HCO2.  Could be used in fuel cells to produce electricity.

Why wouldn't we end up with CO2 as a byproduct and the carbon back in the atmosphere?

"The idea would be to set up stations that capture large amounts of CO2, like next to a power plant. The gas would be sucked into the station, go through the process and recycle the greenhouse gases while producing energy that would be put back into the power plant."

If the process is not affordable while using only atmospheric carbon then it's worthless.  As it is it sounds like another possible rationale for continuing to burn fossil fuels.  So many synthetic fuel ideas fail along this line.

My guess is that the process will use more energy than just charging EV batteries directly from renewable sources. Generally one doesn't go through a lot of form changes without leaving energy behind.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 802
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #48 on: April 26, 2017, 12:12:27 PM »
Due to inefficiencies you would of course need more energy to generate the same energy equivalent.  Solar -> electricity vs Solar -> to fuel -> electricity or thermal energy.  The question is where you do the solar capture and where is the final energy release and what form of energy do you need.  E.g. large scale industrial steam generation ( do you use solar or Nuclear  to generate H2 to burn in a turbine ?)   
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Archimid

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 678
    • View Profile
Re: Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
« Reply #49 on: April 26, 2017, 04:00:07 PM »


Why wouldn't we end up with CO2 as a byproduct and the carbon back in the atmosphere?


If CO2 could somehow be "recharged" then we could keep reusing the molecules reducing emissions, but that is a very long way off.

After reading some more on this technology it seems like the principal flaw is that the photosynthethic molecules will need to be replenished, probably quite often.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.