Environmental impact assessment of CCS chains – Lessons learned and limitations from LCA literature

Corsten, Mariëlle; Ramírez, Andrea; Shen, Li; Koornneef, Joris; Faaij, André

doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.12.003

Cited by 116 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results in this study have shown that impacts from upstream processes and emissions dominate all environmental impact categories except climate change to a larger extent than has been reported in previous LCAs on CCS, as is summarized in the literature review of Corsten et al [25]. In these reviewed studies, emissions at the power plant contributed the most to the environmental impacts, especially in cases without CCS.…”

Section: Literature Comparisonsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…The removal efficiency of the capture unit therefore depends on the composition of mercury in the flue gas. Total removal is estimated to be 25%, which is a conservative estimate within the range of 23-31% [25]. j TiO 2 is a catalyst for removing NO x .…”

Section: Co-firing (% Hhv)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Corsten et al [25] provide an overview of LCAs in the literature, indicating that integrating CCS to conventional coal/natural gas power plants decreases the global warming potential (GWP) by 65-75% from the life cycle perspective. Nevertheless, adverse impacts on other environmental themes due to the capture plant are reported, such as increased SO x and NO x emissions due to the efficiency penalty at the power plant when applying CO 2 capture (see also [26][27][28][29]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative life cycle assessment of biomass co-firing plants with carbon capture and storage

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Literature Comparisonsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Co-firing (% Hhv)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative life cycle assessment of biomass co-firing plants with carbon capture and storage

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These estimates, however, did not consider CO 2 emissions from the entire electricity production lifecycle. Including these emissions results in net CO 2 -equivalent emissions reductions of 47-97% depending on the fuel type, and conversion and capture technology assumptions (93). Moreover, application of pre-and post-combustion capture to both coal-and gas-fired power plants often results in an increase in eutrophication and acidification over the lifecycle (93).…”

Section: Fossil-ccsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Future of Low-Carbon Electricity

Greenblatt

Brown

Slaybaugh

et al. 2017

Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We review future global demand for electricity and major technologies positioned to supply it with minimal greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: renewables (wind, solar, water, geothermal, and biomass), nuclear fission, and fossil power with CO2 capture and sequestration. We discuss two breakthrough technologies (space solar power and nuclear fusion) as exciting but uncertain additional options for low-net GHG emissions (i.e., low-carbon) electricity generation. In addition, we discuss grid integration technologies (monitoring and forecasting of transmission and distribution systems, demand-side load management, energy storage, and load balancing with low-carbon fuel substitutes). For each topic, recent historical trends and future prospects are reviewed, along with technical challenges, costs, and other issues as appropriate. Although no technology represents an ideal solution, their strengths can be enhanced by deployment in combination, along with grid integration that forms a critical set of enabling technologies to assure a reliable and robust future low-carbon electricity system.

show abstract

“…The former is temperature and pressure dependent, and the absorption of CO 2 from the flue gas occurs at high pressure and low temperature. Whereas in the latter, the absorption of CO 2 from the flue gas depends on the acid-base neutralization reaction using basic solvents [142][143][144][145]. The most commonly-used solvents for absorption of CO 2 from flue gases are basically amines [146], chilled methanol [147] and ammonia solution [148].…”

Section: Absorptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Potential of CO2 Capture and Storage Technology in South Africa’s Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plants

Yoro

Sekoai

2016

Environments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The global atmospheric concentration of anthropogenic gases, such as carbon dioxide, has increased substantially over the past few decades due to the high level of industrialization and urbanization that is occurring in developing countries, like South Africa. This has escalated the challenges of global warming. In South Africa, carbon capture and storage (CCS) from coal-fired power plants is attracting increasing attention as an alternative approach towards the mitigation of carbon dioxide emission. Therefore, innovative strategies and process optimization of CCS systems is essential in order to improve the process efficiency of this technology in South Africa. This review assesses the potential of CCS as an alternative approach to reducing the amount CO 2 emitted from the South African coal-fired power plants. It examines the various CCS processes that could be used for capturing the emitted CO 2 . Finally, it proposes the use of new adsorbents that could be incorporated towards the improvement of CCS technology.

show abstract

Environmental impact assessment of CCS chains – Lessons learned and limitations from LCA literature

Cited by 116 publications

References 36 publications

Comparative life cycle assessment of biomass co-firing plants with carbon capture and storage

Comparative life cycle assessment of biomass co-firing plants with carbon capture and storage

The Future of Low-Carbon Electricity

The Potential of CO2 Capture and Storage Technology in South Africa’s Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About