Next Article in Journal
Highlighting the Sustainability Implications of Urbanisation: A Comparative Analysis of Two Urban Areas in Ghana
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatial Variation in Environmental Impacts of Sugarcane Expansion in Brazil
Previous Article in Journal
Understanding Landscape Identity in the Context of Rapid Urban Change in China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Biodiversity Impacts of Increased Ethanol Production in Brazil
Article

The Economic Accessibility of CO2 Sequestration through Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the US

1
Renewable Energy Systems Group, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
2
Transportation Analytics & Decision Science, Energy & Transportation Science Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
3
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
4
Isotope and Fuel Cycle Technology Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
5
Chemical Process Science Group, Energy & Transportation Science Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
6
Power and Energy Systems, Electrical & Electronics Systems Research Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
7
Computational Systems Modeling Group, Computational Sciences & Engineering Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
8
Department of Geography, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 16802, USA
9
Computational Urban Sciences Group, Computational Sciences & Engineering Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
10
Aquatic Ecology Group, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
11
ARM Data Science and Integration, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2020, 9(9), 299; https://doi.org/10.3390/land9090299
Received: 16 June 2020 / Revised: 15 August 2020 / Accepted: 24 August 2020 / Published: 27 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioenergy and Land)
Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) is one strategy to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. To assess the potential scale and cost of CO2 sequestration from BECCS in the US, this analysis models carbon sequestration net of supply chain emissions and costs of biomass production, delivery, power generation, and CO2 capture and sequestration in saline formations. The analysis includes two biomass supply scenarios (near-term and long-term), two biomass logistics scenarios (conventional and pelletized), and two generation technologies (pulverized combustion and integrated gasification combined cycle). Results show marginal cost per tonne CO2 (accounting for costs of electricity and CO2 emissions of reference power generation scenarios) as a function of CO2 sequestered (simulating capture of up to 90% of total CO2 sequestration potential) and associated spatial distribution of resources and generation locations for the array of scenario options. Under a near-term scenario using up to 206 million tonnes per year of biomass, up to 181 million tonnes CO2 can be sequestered annually at scenario-average costs ranging from $62 to $137 per tonne CO2; under a long-term scenario using up to 740 million tonnes per year of biomass, up to 737 million tonnes CO2 can be sequestered annually at scenario-average costs ranging from $42 to $92 per tonne CO2. These estimates of CO2 sequestration potential may be reduced if future competing demand reduces resource availability or may be increased if displaced emissions from conventional power sources are included. Results suggest there are large-scale opportunities to implement BECCS at moderate cost in the US, particularly in the Midwest, Plains States, and Texas. View Full-Text
Keywords: BECCS; bioenergy with carbon capture and storage; bioenergy; biopower; biomass resources; biomass logistics; biomass economics BECCS; bioenergy with carbon capture and storage; bioenergy; biopower; biomass resources; biomass logistics; biomass economics
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Langholtz, M.; Busch, I.; Kasturi, A.; Hilliard, M.R.; McFarlane, J.; Tsouris, C.; Mukherjee, S.; Omitaomu, O.A.; Kotikot, S.M.; Allen-Dumas, M.R.; DeRolph, C.R.; Davis, M.R.; Parish, E.S. The Economic Accessibility of CO2 Sequestration through Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the US. Land 2020, 9, 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9090299

AMA Style

Langholtz M, Busch I, Kasturi A, Hilliard MR, McFarlane J, Tsouris C, Mukherjee S, Omitaomu OA, Kotikot SM, Allen-Dumas MR, DeRolph CR, Davis MR, Parish ES. The Economic Accessibility of CO2 Sequestration through Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the US. Land. 2020; 9(9):299. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9090299

Chicago/Turabian Style

Langholtz, Matthew, Ingrid Busch, Abishek Kasturi, Michael R. Hilliard, Joanna McFarlane, Costas Tsouris, Srijib Mukherjee, Olufemi A. Omitaomu, Susan M. Kotikot, Melissa R. Allen-Dumas, Christopher R. DeRolph, Maggie R. Davis, and Esther S. Parish 2020. "The Economic Accessibility of CO2 Sequestration through Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the US" Land 9, no. 9: 299. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9090299

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop