The cost of CO2 capture and storage

Rubin, Edward S.; Davison, John; Herzog, Howard J.

doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.05.018

Cited by 714 publications

(433 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

382

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Clean coal technology along with carbon capture and sequestration is competent to emerge as zero emission technology. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) has been identifies as a key technology for moderate global climate change (Rubin et al 2015). The comparatively high cost of the current CCS system is major hurdle in its extensive development at power plants and other industrial services (IPCC 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of operating parameters on coal gasification

Mishra

Gautam

Sharma

2018

Int J Coal Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coal combustion and gasification are the processes to utilize coal for production of electricity and many other applications. Global energy demand is increasing day by day. Coal is an abundant source of energy but not a reliable source as it results into high CO 2 emissions. Energy industries are expected to decrease the CO 2 emission to prevent global warming. Coal gasification is a process that reduces the CO 2 emission and emerges as a clean coal technology. Coal gasification process is regulated by several operating parameters. A Number of investigations have been carried out in this direction. A critical review of the work done by several researchers in the field of coal gasification has been compiled in this paper. The effect of several operating parameters such as coal rank, temperature, pressure, porosity, reaction time and catalyst on gasification has been presented here.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of operating parameters on coal gasification

Mishra

Gautam

Sharma

2018

Int J Coal Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To explore the sensitivity of results to assumptions on CCS, this study ran an additional scenario to consider more optimistic reductions of the costs of CCS for coal, gas, and biomass (implying roughly a reduction by 1% per year of the investment costs), denoted INDC to 2°C_CCS. In this scenario, for the People's Republic of China, the capital cost per kilowatt of installed capacity for a coal-fired power plant with integrated gasification combined cycle and CCS decreases from $3,170 to $2,120 in 2050 and $1,280 by 2100, compared to the cost of a standard pulverized coal plant at about $970 per kilowatt, which is in line with projected total capital costs of CCS (Havlík et al 2011;Rubin, Davison, and Herzog 2015).…”

Section: Testing Cost Assumptions For Carbon Capture and Storagementioning

confidence: 64%

The Economics of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in Developing Asia

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.

show abstract

“…Apart from storage costs for the different types, all values are regionally differentiated. Finally, we account for an average specific transport cost dependent on the distance calibrated as c ′ tr = 0.006667$/tCO 2 km (Rubin et al, 2015). The total cost of captured CO 2 transport and storage C t&s [$/year] is therefore evaluated according to the following equation, where the dimensions are time (t), regions (n), and type of storage (k st ): …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Rubin et al (2015) estimates a cost range of between 1 and 18 $/tCO 2 . Similar values are reported in IEAGHG (2011) and ZEP (2011) 2 .…”

Section: Co 2 Transportation and Storagementioning

confidence: 99%

Bearing the Cost of Stored Carbon Leakage

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is considered a key technology for stabilizing climate change. However, leakage of CO 2 from stored carbon can potentially undermine the value of carbon storage as a mitigation option. Thus, monitoring and verifiability of CO 2 storage should be encouraged through policy provisions such as accounting and pricing of leaked emissions. Here we assess different institutional and economic mechanisms for accounting for carbon leakage. Using an integrated assessment model we quantify the impacts on the climate, the economy and the mitigation strategies. Results show that carbon leakage can reduce the share of fossil based CCS by up to 35%, if it is controlled and correctly priced. Biomass based CCS is less affected. Accounting for leakage leads to an increase of climate policy costs of up to 0.4 percentage points due to increased emissions. • China, Latin America, the U.S., and Canada have the highest expected leakage.

show abstract

The cost of CO2 capture and storage

Cited by 714 publications

References 14 publications

Effect of operating parameters on coal gasification

Effect of operating parameters on coal gasification

The Economics of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in Developing Asia

Bearing the Cost of Stored Carbon Leakage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About