Apples and Apples: A Shortcut Assessment Framework for Early‐Stage Carbon Capture and Utilization Technologies Based on Efficiency, Feasibility, and Risk

Abstract

Climate change is one of the largest current challenges to humankind, requiring a steep emissions reduction. One promising approach is using CO2 as a resource. Research and development of carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technologies have increased in recent years, putting early‐stage techno‐economic assessment (TEA) in a key role to derive recommendations systematically, to allocate resources efficiently, and overall to push commercialization successfully. Shortcut TEA assessment approaches that reduce assessment detail and effort compared with conventional, full‐scope studies have gained popularity in recent years but have been criticized as comparing apples with oranges. Several open methodological questions remain such as how to implement global assessment standards, how to reduce subjective judgments, and how to compare technologies at different maturities. Herein, a shortcut assessment framework for early‐stage CCU technologies is proposed, based on the perspectives of efficiency, feasibility, and risk (Efferi). The Efferi framework implements the Global CO2 Initiative's Guidelines, enables comparisons at different technology maturities, and systematically reduces subjective judgments. The Efferi framework provides a starting point for a more robust and easy assessment of early‐stage CCU technologies, leading to clearer go/no‐go recommendations at reduced assessment effort and enabling fairer, “apples to apples” comparisons.

Life-Cycle and Techno-Economic Assessment of Early-Stage Carbon Capture and Utilization Technologies—A Discussion of Current Challenges and Best Practices

“…With increasing maturity and data availability, practitioners can also increase the goal's level of detail. While the screening of various reactions at low TRL requires a simplification of assumptions (e.g., only considering the stoichiometry of the primary reaction with complete conversion and perfect selectivity), the comparison of options for equipment types at medium TRL requires specific models for each type and expected operation conditions (Roh et al, 2020;Zimmermann et al, 2021). Thus, LCAs and TEAs can be conducted several times during the R&D process-for example, at each stage-gate, the goal and scope can be refined, asking more detailed questions and providing more specific evaluations at each stage.…”

“…At TRL 2, the reaction's stoichiometry and enthalpy, the theoretical foundation for any mass and energy balance, provide the first data points. At TRL 3, practitioners can enrich the mass and energy balance with available information such as yield and reaction conditions (Althaus et al, 2007;Meys et al, 2020;Roh et al, 2020;Zimmermann et al, 2021). At TRL 4 and higher, practitioners can estimate missing data points from expert interviews or common industry values, such as a standard purge rate or typical energy consumption of a specific separation process, as information about the planned unit operations becomes available (Piccinno et al, 2016).…”

“…With backcasting, we mean simplifying the characteristics of a commercial-stage incumbent or benchmark technology to data typically available at an early stage and then comparing them to the ones of the early-stage technology in focus. As this approach uses technology maturity as a scope, it is further called a "maturity-scope" assessment (Buchner et al, 2018;Zimmermann et al, 2021).…”

Life Cycle and Techno-Economic Assessment Templates for Emerging Carbon Management Technologies

“…This data can help compare technologies in terms of their environmental tradeoffs and costs per metric ton of CO 2 abated or removed. It can also help researchers and developers control prohibitively high economic or environmental costs in early developmental stages when costs are lower and ability to influence the developmental trajectory is higher (Zimmermann et al, 2021). Various studies indicate that 70-80% of both the eventual production costs and environmental effects of new products are locked in during the design stage (Dowlatshahi, 1992;Thomassen et al, 2019;Moni et al, 2020), reinforcing the importance of early assessment.…”

AssessCCUS: An Integrated Approach for Aggregating Resources to Enable Techno-Economic and Life Cycle Assessment of Carbon Management Technologies

“…While LCA and TEA can be performed for any kind of industrial process and there has been a significant amount of work done on developing general guidance for both methodologies (ISO, 2006;AACE International, 2021), customized guidelines are useful for CCUS technologies to help address common pitfalls and enable "apples-to-apples" comparisons (Zimmermann et al, 2021). Various organizations have created LCA and TEA guidance with a specific focus on CCUS technologies (Skone et al, 2019;Zimmermann et al, 2020;Roussanaly et al, 2021), and harmonization among these guidelines is important to enable comparable and consistent assessments of established and emerging technologies (Sick et al, 2020).…”