Can CCS save coal fired power plants – The European perspective

Valentić, Vladimir; Žiković, Saša; Višković, Alfredo

doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.01.037

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The emissions benefits were $33/MWh overall in the entire Lake region, which would decrease the investment levelized cost of energy ($249/MWh on average) to $216/MWh when analyzing system costs. In a scenario where an OWF is an emissions reduction strategy for the electrical grid, the emissions benefits were found to cost less than emission abatement technology, such as carbon capture and storage technology (Freund 2003) (Valentić, Žiković and Alfredo 2016). In the total valuation perspective, the total benefits including the emissions reduction ($725 million on average) is about 49% of the investment cost ($1,470 million on average) in the Lake Michigan region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emissions reduction benefits of siting an offshore wind farm: A temporal and spatial analysis of Lake Michigan

Chiang

Johnson

Keoleian

2016

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Siting decisions of offshore wind farms can influence the magnitude of emissions reduction benefits. This paper calculates electricity generation and emissions reduction of CO 2 , NO x , and SO 2 , and values these reductions to determine the impact of the siting location for a 300 MW offshore wind farm in Lake Michigan. The most important patterns for emissions reduction were the monthly trends, where January, March, and December consistently had the highest electricity generation and emissions reduction benefits. Summer months such as July and August had the lowest emissions reduction benefits. The intra-day trends showed higher emissions reduction benefits during off-peak hours, due to a higher likelihood of coal units being the marginal generator. These diurnal differences were smaller in magnitude than the seasonal differences. Two benefit valuation scenarios were analyzed for a 20 year time period, one using marginal damages of pollution and a second using market prices for pollution allowances.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emissions reduction benefits of siting an offshore wind farm: A temporal and spatial analysis of Lake Michigan

Chiang

Johnson

Keoleian

2016

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the current literature trajectory, indispensable pattern coefficients and reflective indicators related to incubation-stage technology process options are ascertained. Enhancing the cost metrics by correlating chemical properties of the coal-based feedstock led to a cost quantum by incorporation of CCS with options for CCU (Višković et al, 2014;Valentić et al, 2016). There is evidence on smaller percentage of coal finance (Lesbirel, 1991).…”

Section: Coal-farming Technology Incubation: Ccs In Tandem With Carbon Capture and Usagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Legal and regulatory framework (Valentić, et al, 2016) Capital and carbon (Beamish and Biggart, 2017) Community-level buy-in for sustainable operations and supply chain…”

Section: Incentivizing Increase In Storage and Usagementioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon Capture Usage and Storage With Scale-Up: Energy Finance Through Bricolage Deploying the Co-Integration Methodology

Gupta

Sen

2019

IJEEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies surprisingly indicate that fossil fuels could constitute 81% of primary energy demand, to 2040, 60% would continue to be from coal. This could mean more greenhouse emissions. This paper addresses the research proposition that coal though black, yet, could be green with cointegration of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and carbon capture and usage (CCU). The incertitude surrounding the future of coal is a palpable and credible research gap. The other research chasm is the search of energy finance necessary to economically, societally and environmentally leverage the carbon removal. This issue is addressed as bricolage finance for optimal resource optimization. The bricolage supports societal entrepreneurialism that deploy funding sources from bottom-up developmental finance. The twin key outcomes here are: (i) Appropriately scaled-up, grassroots-sourced bricolage sustains the societal acceptance of CCS and CCU, (ii) enhances the environmental economics of coal-based thermal power plugged-in with CCU and CCS. The methodological essence of this approach is tri-trajectory literature review, that propose (i) technology-led CCU/CCS (ii) financial derivative based bricolage and (iii) economic recalibration through bottom-up approach for community-level buy-in. Practical application of this framework is probed with instances from less developed regions in Asia, Africa and Latin America. The data draws from published reports on coalintensive habitats, particularly in developing countries. Pattern coefficients and reflective indicators were deployed to predict, monitor, and reorient support or opposition for CCS implementation.

show abstract

“…Lockwood [97], Markusson et al [98,99], and Noureldein et al studied different uncertainties about CCS, including economic and technological ones [98,99]. Melien et al [100], Viebahn et al [101], and Valentic et al [102] focused on the cost of CCS in different locations. Other researchers have studied the feasibility of concrete CCS techniques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology Evolution in Membrane-Based CCS

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, many CO2 capture technologies have been developed due to growing awareness about the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In this paper, publications from the last decade addressing this topic were analyzed, paying special attention to patent status to provide useful information for policymakers, industry, and businesses and to help determine the direction of future research. To show the most current patent activity related to carbon capture using membrane technology, we collected 2749 patent documents and 572 scientific papers. The results demonstrated that membranes are a developing field, with the number of applications growing at a steady pace, exceeding 100 applications per year in 2013 and 2014. North American assignees were the main contributors, with the greatest number of patents owned by companies such as UOP LLC, Kilimanjaro Energy Inc., and Membrane Technology and Research Inc., making up 26% of the total number of published patents. Asian countries (China, Japan, and Korea) and international offices were also important knowledge sources, providing 29% and 24% of the documents, respectively. Furthermore, this paper highlights 10 more valuable patents regarding their degree of innovation and citations, classified as Y02C 10/10 according to the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) criteria.

show abstract

Can CCS save coal fired power plants – The European perspective

Cited by 11 publications

References 6 publications

Emissions reduction benefits of siting an offshore wind farm: A temporal and spatial analysis of Lake Michigan

Emissions reduction benefits of siting an offshore wind farm: A temporal and spatial analysis of Lake Michigan

Carbon Capture Usage and Storage With Scale-Up: Energy Finance Through Bricolage Deploying the Co-Integration Methodology

Technology Evolution in Membrane-Based CCS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About