Total cost of carbon capture and storage implemented at a regional scale: northeastern and midwestern United States

Abstract

We model the costs of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in subsurface geological formations for emissions from 138 northeastern and midwestern electricity-generating power plants. The analysis suggests coal-sourced CO 2 emissions can be stored in this region at a cost of $52–$60 ton −1 , whereas the cost to store emission from natural-gas-fired plants ranges from approximately $80 to $90. Storing emissions offshore increases the lowest total costs of CCS to over $60 per ton of CO 2 for coal. Because there apparently is sufficient onshore storage in the northeastern and midwestern United States, offshore storage is not necessary or economical unless there are additional costs or suitability issues associated with the onshore reservoirs. For example, if formation pressures are prohibitive in a large-scale deployment of onshore CCS, or if there is opposition to onshore storage, offshore storage space could probably store emissions at an additional cost of less than $10 ton −1 . Finally, it is likely that more than 8 Gt of total CO 2 emissions from this region can be stored for less $60 ton −1 , slightly more than the $50 ton −1 Section 45Q tax credits incentivizing CCS.

Potential of the Middle Cambrian Aquifer for Carbon Dioxide Storage in the Baltic States

“…The economic evaluation of CO 2 storage in geological structures should be based not only on the storage capacity, but also on the emissions in the region, sources of emissions, and the location of a potential storage site. For example, onshore storage will generally be less expensive and technologically easier to implement than offshore CO 2 storage; carbon storage in shallow, high-permeability, depleted oil and gas reservoirs will cost less than storage in saline aquifers due to already existing infrastructure [83]. At the same time, the range of cost estimates for individual options is broad.…”

“…A fundamental cost component for CO 2 storage is wells for carbon injection, taking one of the largest shares in the total costs [84]. The cost of stored CO 2 is determined by the cost of capture for a given emitter, transport to the storage site, and storage itself, which depends on the type of storage media [83].…”

The future of carbon dioxide removal must be transdisciplinary

“…The application of the waste management framework to CDR is instructive and points to the need to store CO 2 safely and permanently. In the article 'Total cost of carbon capture and storage implemented at a regional scale: Northeastern and Midwestern United States' [12], William Schmelz and his co-authors model the cost of carbon capture and storage in geological formation, focusing on regional emissions from electricity generation in the Northeast and Midwestern parts of the USA. Taking into account the geographic locations of emission sources and transport of CO 2 via pipelines to appropriate storage sites, their analysis concludes that onshore geological storage is sufficient to sequester emissions from coal and natural-gas-powered facilities.…”

Circular Carbon Economy (CCE): A Way to Invest CO2 and Protect the Environment, a Review

“…These uses are considered to be the actual seizure of carbon dioxide, since they exploit carbon dioxide emissions for valuable materials. CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) effectively reduce carbon dioxide emissions [16].…”

“…These uses are considered to be the actual seizure of carbon dioxide, since they exploit carbon dioxide emissions for valuable materials. CO2 capture and storage (CCS) effectively reduce carbon dioxide emissions [16]. There are many techniques for removing carbon dioxide [17,18] that will be discussed from a technical and economic point of view, as well as the existence of masses of research methods that deal with the uptake and utilisation of carbon dioxide sequestration; however, the issue of taking advantage of carbon emissions, recycling and benefiting from them, and looking at carbon emissions from an economic perspective are topics that need more studies and research.…”