Evaluation of CO2 liquefaction processes for ship-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) in terms of life cycle cost (LCC) considering availability

Seo, Youngkyun; You, Hwalong; Lee, Sanghyuk; Huh, Cheol; Chang, Daejun

doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.01.006

Cited by 58 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An additional group of 18 papers (10%) applied simulation-based methods to minimise the cost of CCS or CCS components, such as Seo et al [196] (d = 166) by evaluating the unavailability cost of CO 2 liquefaction processes for ship-based CCS, Lin et al [197] (d = 163) by ranking adsorbents for their performance in CCS, and Santibanez Gonzalez [198] (d = 153) by using an MILP model to design an infrastructure supply chain network in the case of the cement industry in Brazil. While such analyses could fit into cluster C7 ("techno-economically optimising models and tools"), in these cases, some particular cited sources that might have been the deciding factor to assign these papers to C10 instead.…”

Section: Cluster C5 (Pink 255 Nodes 6%)-the Chemistry Of Capture Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scrutinising the Gap between the Expected and Actual Deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage—A Bibliometric Analysis

Viebahn

Chappin

2018

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For many years, carbon capture and storage (CCS) has been discussed as a technology that may make a significant contribution to achieving major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. At present, however, only two large-scale power plants capture a total of 2.4 Mt CO 2 /a. Several reasons are identified for this mismatch between expectations and realised deployment. Applying bibliographic coupling, the research front of CCS, understood to be published peer-reviewed papers, is explored to scrutinise whether the current research is sufficient to meet these problems. The analysis reveals that research is dominated by technical research (69%). Only 31% of papers address non-technical issues, particularly exploring public perception, policy, and regulation, providing a broader view on CCS implementation on the regional or national level, or using assessment frameworks. This shows that the research is advancing and attempting to meet the outlined problems, which are mainly non-technology related. In addition to strengthening this research, the proportion of papers that adopt a holistic approach may be increased in a bid to meet the challenges involved in transforming a complex energy system. It may also be useful to include a broad variety of stakeholders in research so as to provide a more resilient development of CCS deployment strategies.

show abstract

Section: Cluster C5 (Pink 255 Nodes 6%)-the Chemistry Of Capture Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scrutinising the Gap between the Expected and Actual Deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage—A Bibliometric Analysis

Viebahn

Chappin

2018

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The systems that employ an expander to increase the system efficiency are excluded because it increases the production loss caused by failure during operation (the Kapitz and Heykandt systems). The four systems are a Linde Hampson system, a dual-pressure Linde Hampson system, a precooled Linde Hampson system and a closed system (Seo et al, 2015). The first three are categorized as open systems, whereas the latter one is regarded as a closed system.…”

Section: Liquefaction Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Open systems are simpler than closed systems but are less efficient (Alabdulkarem et al, 2012). This study investigates the precooled Linde Hampson system and the closed system because the two systems show higher performance than the others (Seo et al, 2015).…”

Section: Liquefaction Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of CO 2 liquefaction pressures for ship-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) chain

Seo

Huh

Lee

et al. 2016

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Figure 4 shows the cascade cycle using propane-ethane, which was assumed to be the liquefaction system. The cascade cycle using propane-ethane was found to exhibit the highest efficiency of the various closed cycles [30,31].…”

Section: Design Of Ship Transportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of CO2 Transport Costs in South Korea Using a Techno-Economic Model

Kang¹,

Seo

Chang

et al. 2015

Energies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In this study, a techno-economic model was used to calculate the costs of CO2 transport and specify the major equipment required for transport in order to demonstrate and implement CO2 sequestration in the offshore sediments of South Korea. First, three different carbon capture and storage demonstration scenarios were set up involving the use of three CO2 capture plants and one offshore storage site. Each transport scenario considered both the pipeline transport and ship transport options. The temperature and pressure conditions of CO2 in each transport stage were determined from engineering and economic viewpoints, and the corresponding specifications and equipment costs were calculated. The transport costs for a 1 MtCO2/year transport rate were estimated to be US$33/tCO2 and US$28/tCO2 for a pipeline transport of ~530 km and ship transport of ~724 km, respectively. Through the economies of scale effect, the pipeline and ship transport costs for a transport rate of 3 MtCO2/year were reduced to approximately US$21/tCO2 and US$23/tCO2, respectively. A CO2 hub terminal did not significantly reduce the cost because of the short distance from the hub to the storage site and the small number of captured sources. OPEN ACCESSEnergies 2015, 8 2177

show abstract

Evaluation of CO2 liquefaction processes for ship-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) in terms of life cycle cost (LCC) considering availability

Cited by 58 publications

References 20 publications

Scrutinising the Gap between the Expected and Actual Deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage—A Bibliometric Analysis

Scrutinising the Gap between the Expected and Actual Deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage—A Bibliometric Analysis

Comparison of CO 2 liquefaction pressures for ship-based carbon capture and storage (CCS) chain

Estimation of CO2 Transport Costs in South Korea Using a Techno-Economic Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About