Assessment of selected CCS technologies in electricity and synthetic fuel production for CO2 mitigation in South Africa

Telsnig, Thomas; Tomaschek, Jan; Ozdemır, Enver; Bruchof, David; Fahl, Ulrich; Eltrop, Ludger

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.038

Cited by 18 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The former can mainly be explained by the lower efficiencies assumed in this study; only air-cooled technology is used for new power plants in South Africa, which decreases the efficiency by 3 percentage points [42]. The latter is mainly caused by the assumption in this study that electricity for recompression and storage is generated by the same coal-fired power plants as modeled in this LCA, while [14] assume a high share of renewables in the 2040 electricity mix. As a result, the calculations in this study reveal considerably higher emissions released by the provision of coal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is not clear at present whether CTL plants or power plants would be the preferred "candidates" for a rollout of CCS. From an economic perspective, GHG abatement costs of CTL plants are considerably higher than those for power plants [14]. Most South African experts consider CTL to be an ideal opportunity for applying CCS, because carbon capture is an integrated process component delivering a highly concentrated CO 2 stream.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…LCAs for USC and IGCC power plants in South Africa have been explored recently [14]. When their results for IGCCs are compared with the study presented here, taking into account the different time horizons (2040 versus 2030), their figures yield lower specific GHG emissions in the case of CCS (107 g CO 2´eq /kWh el in 2040 compared to 250 g CO 2´eq /kWh el in 2030) and a higher GHG reduction rate (84% in 2040 compared to 67.5% in 2030).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This publication was followed by articles focusing more generally on the need for CCS in South Africa as well as the first studies on the more detailed assessment of storage potentials in selected basins [15][16][17]. Although both [12] and [14] applied a more holistic view to CCS in South Africa, they were unable to fully shed light on the storage capacities implicitly assumed as a basis for their assessment; they also did not consider a variety of long-term coal development options. This paper starts by describing the methodologies applied in the individual assessment parts (Section 2).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2013, [13] provided insights into the proposed CO 2 test injection project. [14] evaluated the costs and GHG emissions of selected coal-based power plants and fuel production facilities. This publication was followed by articles focusing more generally on the need for CCS in South Africa as well as the first studies on the more detailed assessment of storage potentials in selected basins [15][16][17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Integrated Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in South Africa’s Power Sector

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents an integrated assessment conducted in order to explore whether carbon capture and storage (CCS) could be a viable technological option for significantly reducing future CO 2 emissions in South Africa. The methodological approach covers a commercial availability analysis, an analysis of the long-term usable CO 2 storage potential (based on storage capacity assessment, energy scenario analysis and source-sink matching), an economic and ecological assessment and a stakeholder analysis. The findings show, that a reliable storage capacity assessment is needed, since only rough figures concerning the effective capacity currently exist. Further constraints on the fast deployment of CCS may be the delayed commercial availability of CCS, significant barriers to increasing the economic viability of CCS, an expected net maximum reduction rate of the power plant's greenhouse gas emissions of 67%-72%, an increase in other environmental and social impacts, and low public awareness of CCS. One precondition for opting for CCS would be to find robust solutions to these constraints, taking into account that CCS could potentially conflict with other important policy objectives, such as affordable electricity rates to give the whole population access to electricity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Integrated Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in South Africa’s Power Sector

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Technology options for reducing CO₂ in China's electricity sector in 2010–2030: From the perspective of internal and social costs

Wen

Zhang

et al. 2015

Greenhouse Gases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper creates a technology roadmap for China's electricity sector on CO2 mitigation based on cost‐effective analysis (CEA) and cost‐benefit analysis (CBA). We use mitigation targets for 2020 and 2030 to determine the required implementation degrees of 13 selected power‐generating technologies. According to the initial investment, operational costs, and external costs of major pollutants, we assigned a priority rank to each technology, which is derived on the basis of internal costs and social costs. A comparison of present value costs of major generating technologies shows that hydroelectricity bears the highest total cost, while cogeneration of heat and power bears the lowest cost. The technology with the highest total social benefit is also hydroelectricity, while carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) yields the lowest social benefit. By 2030, 6 of the 13 technologies can realize net internal benefits and all 13 technologies except CCS can realize net social benefits. The top three technologies based on internal levelized cost are: cogeneration of heat and power, biomass power generation, and wind power generation. Based on social levelized cost, the highest priority technologies are: integrated gasification combined cycle, biomass power generation, and wind power generation. © 2015 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

show abstract

Optimal design of carbon tax to stimulate CCS investment in China's coal‐fired power plants: A real options analysis

Zhang

2018

Greenhouse Gases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon tax is an important policy instrument to control greenhouse gases. How to design a suitable carbon tax rate is of significance for policy makers. This study aims to address this issue from a microeconomic perspective by exploring the decision behavior of a potential investor. A trinomial tree model based on real options theory is presented to evaluate carbon capture and storage (CCS) investment in coal‐fired power plants considering uncertain factors. The model is then applied to a case study and the main findings are as follows: (1) carbon tax policy will have a positive effect on the CCS investment. If the carbon price is not high enough to trigger CCS investment, a hybrid mechanism integrating carbon trading and carbon tax to stimulate CCS investment is required; (2) in applying the trinomial tree real options model, the optimal carbon tax rate should be 145.3 RMB/ton for supercritical pulverized coal (SCPC) (or 79.54 RMB/ton for integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC)) plants under current market condition and at current technological levels; (3) the optimal carbon tax rate is sensitive to uncertainties. Specifically, the optimal tax rate depends largely on not only the cost of the CCS investment but also the portfolio of carbon price volatility and the initial carbon price level. These conclusions provide the theoretical foundations for decision making regarding CCS investment and related policy making. © 2018 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Assessment of selected CCS technologies in electricity and synthetic fuel production for CO2 mitigation in South Africa

Cited by 18 publications

References 13 publications

Integrated Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in South Africa’s Power Sector

Integrated Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in South Africa’s Power Sector

Technology options for reducing CO₂ in China's electricity sector in 2010–2030: From the perspective of internal and social costs

Optimal design of carbon tax to stimulate CCS investment in China's coal‐fired power plants: A real options analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Assessment of selected CCS technologies in electricity and synthetic fuel production for CO2 mitigation in South Africa

Cited by 18 publications

References 13 publications

Integrated Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in South Africa’s Power Sector

Integrated Assessment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in South Africa’s Power Sector

Technology options for reducing CO2 in China's electricity sector in 2010–2030: From the perspective of internal and social costs

Optimal design of carbon tax to stimulate CCS investment in China's coal‐fired power plants: A real options analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Technology options for reducing CO₂ in China's electricity sector in 2010–2030: From the perspective of internal and social costs