A recent poll by the Magazine Scientific American sponsored by Shell over 50,000 readers answered the following question; Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is one method being developed to capture and store the CO2 that comes from burning fossil fuels--essential to help mitigate serious climate change. The International Energy Agency says it could account for nearly 19% of the total CO2 reductions needed by 2050.
Do you think CCS should be developed? (Check all that apply)
The response was a sounding NO (see graph);
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), alternatively referred to as Carbon Sapture and Sequestration, is a means of mitigating the contribution of fossil fuel emissions to global warming, based on capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from large point sources such as fossil fuel power plants, and storing it in such a way that it does not enter the atmosphere. It can also be used to describe the scrubbing of CO2 from ambient air as a geoengineering technique.
"Carbon capture and storage" has also been used to describe biological capture and subsequent storage of atmospheric CO2, such as the burial of "biochar"—the end product of "pyrolysis", the decomposition of organic material by heat in the absence of oxygen. However, the term is more conventionally applied to non-biological methods of capturing carbon dioxide from combustion at the source.
Although CO2 has been injected into geological formations for various purposes, the long term storage of CO2 is a relatively new concept. The first commercial example is Weyburn in 2000; integrated pilot-scale CCS power plant was to begin operating in September 2008 in the eastern German power plant Schwarze Pumpe run by utility Vattenfall, in the hope of answering questions about technological feasibility and economic efficiency.
CCS applied to a modern conventional power plant could reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere by approximately 80-90% compared to a plant without CCS. The IPCC estimates that the economic potential of CCS could be between 10% and 55% of the total carbon mitigation effort until year 2100 (Section 8.3.3 of IPCC report.)
Capturing and compressing CO2 requires much energy and would increase the fuel needs of a coal-fired plant with CCS by 25%-40% These and other system costs are estimated to increase the cost of energy from a new power plant with CCS by 21-91%. These estimates apply to purpose-built plants near a storage location; applying the technology to preexisting plants or plants far from a storage location will be more expensive. However, recent industry reports suggest that with successful research, development and deployment (RD&D), sequestered coal-based electricity generation in 2025 will cost less than unsequestered coal-based electricity generation today.For more information visit: http://www.scientificamerican.com/energypoll/poll2.cfm?sc=overlay-vote_q2
Tags: carbon capture and storage (ccs)
blog comments powered by Disqus