The impact of carbon capture and storage on a decarbonized German power market

Spiecker, Stephan; Eickholt, Volker

doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2014.02.020

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The model covers the European power system and generation investments are modelled endogenously (cf. Spiecker et al 2013 andSpiecker et al 2014). Besides economic effects, the impacts on security of supply utilising the probabilistic approach are also analysed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of Coordinated Capacity Mechanisms on the European Power Market

Bucksteeg¹,

Spiecker²

2019

The Energy Journal

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. AbstractThere is an ongoing debate on the introduction of capacity markets in most European countries while a few of them have already established capacity markets. Since the implementation of independent national capacity markets is not in line with the target of a pan-European internal electricity market we investigate the impacts of uncoordinated capacity markets compared with coordinated capacity markets. A probabilistic approach for the determination of capacity requirements is proposed and a European electricity market model (E2M2s) is applied for evaluation. The model simultaneously optimizes investments and dispatch of power plants.Besides the impact on generation investments, market prices and system costs we analyse effects on production and security of supply. While coordinated capacity markets reveal high potentials for cross border synergies and cost savings, uncoordinated and unilateral implementations can lead to inefficiencies, in particular free riding effects and endanger security of supply due to adverse allocation of generation capacity.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…power system. For details seeSwider and Weber (2007),Spiecker et al (2013) andSpiecker et al (2014).Load and RES fluctuations are captured in the model by analysing power supply and demand for eight typical days within one year. Thereby a working day and a non-working day are considered for every season.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Coordinated Capacity Mechanisms on the European Power Market

Bucksteeg¹,

Spiecker²

2019

The Energy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scientists have developed several other capture and storage procedures, with the German power market as an example (Spiecker et al 2014;Kelektsoglou 2018;Koukouzas et al 2009;McGrail et al 2006;Schaef et al 2010). These procedures help countries attract more investment (Kristjánsdóttir 2019a(Kristjánsdóttir , 2020 and become more competitive (Kristjánsdóttir 2017).…”

Section: Cost Structure Issues and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbfix and Sulfix in Geothermal Production, and the Blue Lagoon in Iceland: Grindavík Urban Settlement, and Volcanic Activity

Kristjánsdóttir

2021

BJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses ways to maintain reservoir sustainability in the area surrounding the Blue Lagoon in Iceland, near the urban settlement of Grindavík on the Reykjanes Peninsula in Iceland. The Svartsengi geothermal power plant operations have pioneered the simultaneous production of electricity and hot water from a geothermal reservoir. The Blue Lagoon is a warm geothermal pool using brine from the power plant. This paper reports on the processes and procedures at the Blue Lagoon and the Svartsengi power station, aimed at increasing sustainability of the geothermal resource by injecting the geothermal brine back to ground, to ensure the geothermal resource sustainability in the area. This paper also discusses and explains in details the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from geothermal plant operations in Iceland. When the steam from a geothermal reservoir emerges from the ground, it comes up with enough energy to drive turbine generators for electricity production. However, this involves releasing several greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, including hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and carbon dioxide (CO2). This research spotlights a geothermal power plant in Hellisheiði, Iceland, and the use of the CarbFix procedure of capturing and storing carbon dioxide, reducing CO2 emissions from the harnessing of geothermal resources for electricity. CarbFix is a carbon capture and storage (CCS) or carbon mineralization procedure aimed at binding CO2 to rock. This procedure has been used at Hellisheiði power plant for the past decade in Iceland. Scientists have also developed the SulFix procedure, to capture sulphate H2S in ground. These procedures, SulFix and CarbFix, reduce outlet of greenhouse gases by storing them in basalt rock – also referred to as mineral carbonation or carbon capture and storage. This involves dissolving the greenhouse gases in water, and re-injecting them back into the ground through boreholes, in Hellisheiði. This current research also shows the geology in these areas and reports on calculations that have found re-injection of greenhouse gasses to ground to be economically feasible. The paper covers several scenarios that have already been tested to determine the financial feasibility of capture and storage. These have involved calculating the estimated internal rate of return (IRR), the return on investment (ROI) and the present value (NPV). Economic calculations have been made, showing the CarbFix project to be a feasible option contributing to decreased greenhouse gas emissions.

show abstract

“…In recent years, there has been an upsurge in interest in the application of optimization techniques to determine the cost-minimizing design of an integrated CCS infrastructure network (Bakken and von Streng Velken, 2008;Middleton and Bielicki, 2009;Kemp and Kasim, 2010;Klokk et al, 2010;Mendelevitch et al, 2010;Kuby et al, 2011;Spiecker et al, 2014). 7 While very much needed for indicative regional planning purposes (e.g.…”

Section: The Need For a Club Theoretic Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Joining the CCS club! The economics of CO 2 pipeline projects

Massol

Tchung-Ming

Banal‐Estañol

2015

European Journal of Operational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The large-scale diffusion of Carbon Capture, transport and Storage (CCS) imposes the construction of a sizeable CO 2 pipeline infrastructure. This paper examines the economics of a CO 2 pipeline project and analyzes the conditions for a widespread adoption of CCS by a group of emitters that can be connected to that infrastructure. It details a modeling framework aimed at assessing the break-even value for joint CCS adoption, that is the critical value in the charge for CO 2 emissions that is required for each of the emitters to decide to implement capture capabilities. This model can be used to analyze how the tariff structure and the regulatory constraints imposed on the CO 2 pipeline operator modify the overall cost of CO 2 abatement via CCS. This framework is applied to the case of a real European CO 2 pipeline project. We find that the obligation to use cross-subsidy-free pipeline tariffs has a minor impact on the minimum CO 2 price required to adopt the CCS. In contrast, the obligation to charge non-discriminatory prices can either impede the adoption of CCS or significantly raises that price. Besides, we compared two alternative regulatory frameworks for CCS pipelines: a common European organization as opposed to a collection of national regulations. The results indicate that the institutional scope of that regulation has a limited impact on the adoption of CCS compared to the detailed design of the tariff structure imposed to pipeline operators.

show abstract

The impact of carbon capture and storage on a decarbonized German power market

Cited by 13 publications

References 25 publications

Impact of Coordinated Capacity Mechanisms on the European Power Market

Impact of Coordinated Capacity Mechanisms on the European Power Market

Carbfix and Sulfix in Geothermal Production, and the Blue Lagoon in Iceland: Grindavík Urban Settlement, and Volcanic Activity

Joining the CCS club! The economics of CO 2 pipeline projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About