Special Issue "Carbon Capture and Storage"
Quicklinks
A special issue of International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (ISSN 1660-4601).
Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 December 2010)
Special Issue Editor
Guest Editor
Dr. Malcolm A. Wilson
Office of Energy and Environment, University of Regina, 3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, Saskatchewan, S4S 0A2, Canada
Website: http://www.uregina.ca/oee/
E-Mail: malcolm.wilson@uregina.ca
Interests: carbon capture and storage; post-combustion capture; geological storage; risk assessment of geological storage; life-cycle assessment; policy development
Special Issue Information
Dear Colleagues,
In spite of recent issues surrounding climate change data and its handling, there is little doubt that our massive geo-engineering experiment of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere will have undesirable consequences for the environment and for human health. To reduce the rate of change, it will be essential to deploy all emissions reduction techniques. One of the most effective ways of reducing emissions in the short to medium term (i.e., over the next 5–10 decades) will be to utilize carbon capture and storage, with particular reference to storage deep in the subsurface. Indeed, based on IEA forecasts, the world will need to be storing some 10 billion tons per year of CO2 by 2050. It is important that this process begins immediately and that we fully understand the implications of CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) from a technical, environmental, economic and social perspective. The purpose of this special edition is to help provide some clarity to the debate around CCS and its global implications.
Dr. Malcolm A. Wilson
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. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 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
- CCS
- carbon capture and storage
- CO2 capture
- CO2 transport
- CO2 geological storage
- storage alternatives
- life cycle assessment
- understanding geological uncertainty
- risk
- capture readiness
- health impacts
- environmental impacts
- regulation
- implications to clean development mechanism
- storage capacity
Published Papers (5 papers)
|
Received: 28 June 2010; in revised form: 19 July 2010 / Accepted: 31 July 2010 / Published: 6 August 2010
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (243 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: This paper presents a review of the research on CO2 capture by lime-based looping cycles undertaken at CanmetENERGY’s (Ottawa, Canada) research laboratories. This is a new and very promising technology that may help in mitigation of global warming and climate change caused primarily by the use of fossil fuels. The intensity of the anticipated changes urgently requires solutions such as more cost-effective technologies for CO2 capture. This new technology is based on the use of lime-based sorbents in a dual fluidized bed combustion (FBC) reactor which contains a carbonator—a unit for CO2 capture, and a calciner—a unit for CaO regeneration. However, even though natural materials are cheap and abundant and very good candidates as solid CO2 carriers, their performance in a practical system still shows significant limitations. These limitations include rapid loss of activity during the capture cycles, which is a result of sintering, attrition, and consequent elutriation from FBC reactors. Therefore, research on sorbent performance is critical and this paper reviews some of the promising ways to overcome these shortcomings. It is shown that reactivation by steam/water, thermal pre-treatment, and doping simultaneously with sorbent reforming and pelletization are promising potential solutions to reduce the loss of activity of these sorbents over multiple cycles of use.
|
|
Received: 7 December 2010 / Accepted: 18 January 2011 / Published: 26 January 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (793 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is the lead federal agency for the development and deployment of carbon sequestration technologies. Its mission includes promoting scientific and technological innovations and transfer of knowledge for safe and permanent storage of CO2 in the subsurface. To accomplish its mission, DOE is characterizing and classifying potential geologic storage reservoirs in basins throughout the U.S. and Canada, and developing best practices for project developers, to help ensure the safety of future geologic storage projects. DOE’s Carbon Sequestration Program, Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (RCSP) Initiative, administered by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), is identifying, characterizing, and testing potential injection formations. The RCSP Initiative consists of collaborations among government, industry, universities, and international organizations. Through this collaborative effort, a series of integrated knowledge-based tools have been developed to help potential sequestration project developers. They are the Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United States and Canada, National Carbon Sequestration Database and Geographic System (NATCARB), and best practice manuals for CCS including Depositional Reservoir Classification for CO2; Public Outreach and Education for Carbon Storage Projects; Monitoring, Verification, and Accounting of CO2 Stored in Deep Geologic Formation; Site Screening, Site Selection, and Initial Characterization of CO2 Storage in Deep Geologic Formations. DOE’s future research will help with refinement of these tools and additional best practice manuals (BPM) which focus on other technical aspects of project development.
|
|
Received: 24 December 2010; in revised form: 23 February 2011 / Accepted: 8 March 2011 / Published: 11 March 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (536 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: There are two distinct objectives in monitoring geological carbon sequestration (GCS): Deep monitoring of the reservoir’s integrity and plume movement and near-surface monitoring (NSM) to ensure public health and the safety of the environment. However, the minimum detection limits of the current instrumentation for NSM is too high for detecting weak signals that are embedded in the background levels of the natural variations, and the data obtained represents point measurements in space and time. A new approach for NSM, based on gamma-ray spectroscopy induced by inelastic neutron scatterings (INS), offers novel and unique characteristics providing the following: (1) High sensitivity with a reducible error of measurement and detection limits, and, (2) temporal- and spatial-integration of carbon in soil that results from underground CO2 seepage. Preliminary field results validated this approach showing carbon suppression of 14% in the first year and 7% in the second year. In addition the temporal behavior of the error propagation is presented and it is shown that for a signal at the level of the minimum detection level the error asymptotically approaches 47%.
|
|
Received: 15 February 2011; in revised form: 11 March 2011 / Accepted: 25 March 2011 / Published: 31 March 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (738 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: For over a decade, the United States Department of Energy, and engineers, geologists, and scientists from all over the world have investigated the potential for reducing atmospheric carbon emissions through carbon sequestration. Numerous reports exist analyzing the potential for sequestering carbon dioxide at various sites around the globe, but none have identified the potential for a statewide system in Florida, USA. In 2005, 83% of Florida’s electrical energy was produced by natural gas, coal, or oil (e.g., fossil fuels), from power plants spread across the state. In addition, only limited research has been completed on evaluating optimal pipeline transportation networks to centralized carbon dioxide repositories. This paper describes the feasibility and preliminary locations for an optimal centralized Florida-wide carbon sequestration repository. Linear programming optimization modeling is used to plan and route an idealized pipeline network to existing Florida power plants. Further analysis of the subsurface geology in these general locations will provide insight into the suitability of the subsurface conditions and the available capacity for carbon sequestration at selected possible repository sites. The identification of the most favorable site(s) is also presented.
|
|
Received: 14 February 2011; in revised form: 25 March 2011 / Accepted: 12 April 2011 / Published: 9 May 2011
Show/Hide Abstract
| Download PDF Full-text (275 KB) | Download XML Full-text
Abstract: For carbon capture and storage (CCS) to be a truly effective option in our efforts to mitigate climate change, it must be sustainable. That means that CCS must deliver consistent environmental and social benefits which exceed its costs of capital, energy and operation; it must be protective of the environment and human health over the long term; and it must be suitable for deployment on a significant scale. CCS is one of the more expensive and technically challenging carbon emissions abatement options available, and CCS must first and foremost be considered in the context of the other things that can be done to reduce emissions, as a part of an overall optimally efficient, sustainable and economic mitigation plan. This elevates the analysis beyond a simple comparison of the cost per tonne of CO2 abated—there are inherent tradeoffs with a range of other factors (such as water, NOx, SOx, biodiversity, energy, and human health and safety, among others) which must also be considered if we are to achieve truly sustainable mitigation. The full life-cycle cost of CCS must be considered in the context of the overall social, environmental and economic benefits which it creates, and the costs associated with environmental and social risks it presents. Such analysis reveals that all CCS is not created equal. There is a wide range of technological options available which can be used in a variety of industries and applications—indeed CCS is not applicable to every industry. Stationary fossil-fuel powered energy and large scale petroleum industry operations are two examples of industries which could benefit from CCS. Capturing and geo-sequestering CO2 entrained in natural gas can be economic and sustainable at relatively low carbon prices, and in many jurisdictions makes financial sense for operators to deploy now, if suitable secure disposal reservoirs are available close by. Retrofitting existing coal-fired power plants, however, is more expensive and technically challenging, and the economic sustainability of post-combustion capture retrofit needs to be compared on a portfolio basis to the relative overall net benefit of CCS on new-build plants, where energy efficiency can be optimised as a first step, and locations can be selected with sequestration sites in mind. Examples from the natural gas processing, liquefied natural gas (LNG), and coal-fired power generation sectors, illustrate that there is currently a wide range of financial costs for CCS, depending on how and where it is applied, but equally, environmental and social benefits of emissions reduction can be considerable. Some CCS applications are far more economic and sustainable than others. CCS must be considered in the context of the other things that a business can do to eliminate emissions, such as far-reaching efforts to improve energy efficiency.
|
Last update: 3 January 2012
