E-Mail Alert

Add your e-mail address to receive forthcoming issues of this journal:

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Special Issue "Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Bio-Energy vs Fossil Fuels"

Quicklinks

A special issue of Energies (ISSN 1996-1073).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 December 2014)

Special Issue Editor

Guest Editor
Dr. Jennie C. Stephens

The University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, USA
Website | E-Mail

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Investments in the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology are justified by long-term global climate mitigation potential. The coupling of CCS research with fossil-fuels, however, raises concerns that CCS investments could be contributing to perpetuating fossil-fuel dependence and slowing down the transition away from fossil-fuels, thus detracting from long-term climate mitigation efforts. While CCS coupled with coal or natural gas offers possible reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, CCS coupled with bio-energy offers the possibility of a net reduction of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere. Given the high-levels of continued government investment in CCS, this special issue explores the challenges, opportunities, linkages, and distinctions of advancing CCS with fossil-fuels versus advancing CCS with bio-energy. Interdisciplinary perspectives that offer insights on the decoupling of CCS from fossil-fuels are invited, as is research on the long-term climate mitigation potential for CCS with bio-energy. Analysis that integrates the social and political dimensions of CCS advancement is particularly welcome.

Associate Professor Jennie C. Stephens
Guest Editor

Submission

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. Papers will be published continuously (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are refereed through a peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Energies is an international peer-reviewed Open Access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs).


Keywords

  • climate mitigation
  • fossil-fuel technologies
  • bio-energy
  • coal

Published Papers (5 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-5
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessArticle Social Science Insights for the BioCCS Industry
Energies 2015, 8(5), 4024-4042; doi:10.3390/en8054024
Received: 21 February 2015 / Revised: 21 April 2015 / Accepted: 30 April 2015 / Published: 8 May 2015
Cited by 3 | PDF Full-text (526 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
BioCCS is a technology gaining support as a possible emissions reduction policy option to address climate change. The process entails the capture, transport and storage of carbon dioxide produced during energy production from biomass. Globally, the most optimistic energy efficiency scenarios cannot avoid
[...] Read more.
BioCCS is a technology gaining support as a possible emissions reduction policy option to address climate change. The process entails the capture, transport and storage of carbon dioxide produced during energy production from biomass. Globally, the most optimistic energy efficiency scenarios cannot avoid an average temperature increase of +2 °C without bioCCS. Although very much at the commencement stage, bioCCS demonstration projects can provide opportunity to garner knowledge, achieve consensus and build support around the technology’s properties. Yet many challenges face the bioCCS industry, including no guarantee biomass will always be from sustainable sources or potentially result in carbon stock losses. The operating environment also has no or limited policies, regulations and legal frameworks, and risk and safety concerns abound. Some state the key problem for bioCCS is cultural, lacking in a ‘community of support’, awareness and credibility amongst its own key stakeholders and the wider public. Therefore, the industry can benefit from the growing social science literature, drawing upon other energy and resource based industries with regard to social choice for future energy options. To this end, the following scoping review was conducted in order to ascertain gaps in existing public perception and acceptance research focusing on bioCCS. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Bio-Energy vs Fossil Fuels)
Open AccessArticle News Media Analysis of Carbon Capture and Storage and Biomass: Perceptions and Possibilities
Energies 2015, 8(4), 3058-3074; doi:10.3390/en8043058
Received: 16 December 2014 / Revised: 24 February 2015 / Accepted: 27 March 2015 / Published: 20 April 2015
Cited by 3 | PDF Full-text (219 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
In the US, carbon capture and storage (CCS) has received most of its attention when coupled with the fossil fuel industry as a mitigation strategy for climate change. CCS, which is constituted as a broad suite of capture and sequestration technologies and techniques,
[...] Read more.
In the US, carbon capture and storage (CCS) has received most of its attention when coupled with the fossil fuel industry as a mitigation strategy for climate change. CCS, which is constituted as a broad suite of capture and sequestration technologies and techniques, does not preclude coupling with other energy industries such as bioenergy (bioenergy and CCS or BECCS). In this paper, we examined news media coverage of CCS and biomass individually in locations throughout the US where these technologies are being explored to determine how they are perceived and what possibilities lay in their coupling for climate change mitigation. From our analyses, we found that individually, both CCS and biomass are perceived generally as beneficial for energy development by the news media, though they are not often mentioned in combination. Combined references do, however, speak to their value for climate change mitigation and as an alternative to fossil fuels. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Bio-Energy vs Fossil Fuels)
Open AccessArticle A Path Forward for Low Carbon Power from Biomass
Energies 2015, 8(3), 1701-1715; doi:10.3390/en8031701
Received: 15 December 2014 / Revised: 14 January 2015 / Accepted: 9 February 2015 / Published: 27 February 2015
Cited by 4 | PDF Full-text (652 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The two major pathways for energy utilization from biomass are conversion to a liquid fuel (i.e., biofuels) or conversion to electricity (i.e., biopower). In the United States (US), biomass policy has focused on biofuels. However, this paper will investigate
[...] Read more.
The two major pathways for energy utilization from biomass are conversion to a liquid fuel (i.e., biofuels) or conversion to electricity (i.e., biopower). In the United States (US), biomass policy has focused on biofuels. However, this paper will investigate three options for biopower: low co-firing (co-firing scenarios refer to combusting a given percentage of biomass with coal) (5%–10% biomass), medium co-firing (15%–20% biomass), and dedicated biomass firing (100% biomass). We analyze the economic and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impact of each of these options, with and without CO2 capture and storage (CCS). Our analysis shows that in the absence of land use change emissions, all biomass co-combustion scenarios result in a decrease in GHG emissions over coal generation alone. The two biggest barriers to biopower are concerns about carbon neutrality of biomass fuels and the high cost compared to today’s electricity prices. This paper recommends two policy actions. First, the need to define sustainability criteria and initiate a certification process so that biomass providers have a fixed set of guidelines to determine whether their feedstocks qualify as renewable energy sources. Second, the need for a consistent, predictable policy that provides the economic incentives to make biopower economically attractive. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Bio-Energy vs Fossil Fuels)
Open AccessArticle EROI Analysis for Direct Coal Liquefaction without and with CCS: The Case of the Shenhua DCL Project in China
Energies 2015, 8(2), 786-807; doi:10.3390/en8020786
Received: 2 December 2014 / Accepted: 14 January 2015 / Published: 23 January 2015
Cited by 3 | PDF Full-text (843 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Currently, there are considerable discrepancies between China’s central government and some local governments in attitudes towards coal to liquids (CTL) technology. Energy return on investment (EROI) analysis of CTL could provide new insights that may help solve this dilemma. Unfortunately, there has been
[...] Read more.
Currently, there are considerable discrepancies between China’s central government and some local governments in attitudes towards coal to liquids (CTL) technology. Energy return on investment (EROI) analysis of CTL could provide new insights that may help solve this dilemma. Unfortunately, there has been little research on this topic; this paper therefore analyses the EROI of China’s Shenhua Group Direct Coal Liquefaction (DCL) project, currently the only DCL commercial project in the world. The inclusion or omission of internal energy and by-products is controversial. The results show that the EROIstnd without by-product and with internal energy is 0.68–0.81; the EROIstnd (the standard EROI) without by-product and without internal energy is 3.70–5.53; the EROIstnd with by-product and with internal energy is 0.76–0.90; the EROIstnd with by-product and without internal energy is 4.13–6.14. Furthermore, it is necessary to consider carbon capture and storage (CCS) as a means to control the CO2 emissions. Considering the added energy inputs of CCS at the plant level, the EROIs decrease to 0.65–0.77, 2.87–3.97, 0.72–0.85, and 3.20–4.40, respectively. The extremely low, even negative, net energy, which may be due to high investments in infrastructure and low conversion efficiency, suggests CTL is not a good choice to replace conventional energy sources, and thus, Chinese government should be prudent when developing it. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Bio-Energy vs Fossil Fuels)
Open AccessArticle Carbon Capture and Storage Development Trends from a Techno-Paradigm Perspective
Energies 2014, 7(8), 5221-5250; doi:10.3390/en7085221
Received: 5 June 2014 / Revised: 8 July 2014 / Accepted: 11 August 2014 / Published: 14 August 2014
Cited by 9 | PDF Full-text (6280 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The world’s energy needs have been continually growing over the past decade, yet fossil fuels are limited. Renewable energies are becoming more prevalent, but are still a long way from being commonplace worldwide. Literature mining is applied to review carbon capture and storage
[...] Read more.
The world’s energy needs have been continually growing over the past decade, yet fossil fuels are limited. Renewable energies are becoming more prevalent, but are still a long way from being commonplace worldwide. Literature mining is applied to review carbon capture and storage (CCS) development trends and to develop and examine a novel carbon capture and storage technological paradigm (CCSTP), which incorporates CCSTP competition, diffusion and shift. This paper first provides an overview of the research and progress in CCS technological development, then applies a techno-paradigm theory to analyze CCSTP development and to provide a guide for future CCS technological trends. CCS could avoid CO2 being released into the atmosphere. Moreover, bioenergy with CCS (BECCS) can make a significant contribution to a net removal of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. In this study, we compare the different CCSTP developmental paths and the conventional techno-paradigm by examining the S-curves. The analyses in this paper provide a useful guide for scholars seeking new inspiration in their research and for potential investors who are seeking to invest research funds in more mature technologies. We conclude that political barriers and public acceptance are the major distinctions between the CCSTP and the conventional techno-paradigm. It is expected that policy instruments and economic instruments are going to play a pivotal role in the accomplishment of global carbon reduction scenarios. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Bio-Energy vs Fossil Fuels)
Figures

Journal Contact

MDPI AG
Energies Editorial Office
St. Alban-Anlage 66, 4052 Basel, Switzerland
energies@mdpi.com
Tel. +41 61 683 77 34
Fax: +41 61 302 89 18
Editorial Board
Contact Details Submit to Energies
Back to Top