Search

Coal-fired power plants account for nearly 50% of U.S. electricity supply and about a third of U.S. emissions of CO2, the major greenhouse gas (GHG) associated with global climate change. Thermal power plants also account for 39% of all freshwater withdrawals in the U.S. To reduce GHG emissions from coal-fired plants, postcombustion carbon capture and storage (CCS) systems are receiving considerable attention. Current commercial amine-based capture systems require water for cooling and other operations that add to power plant water requirements. This paper characterizes and quantifies water use at coal-burning power plants with and without CCS and investigates key parameters that influence water consumption. Analytical models are presented to quantify water use for major unit operations. Case study results show that, for power plants with conventional wet cooling towers, approximately 80% of total plant water withdrawals and 86% of plant water consumption is for cooling. The addition of an amine-based CCS system would approximately double the consumptive water use of the plant. Replacing wet towers with air-cooled condensers for dry cooling would reduce plant water use by about 80% (without CCS) to about 40% (with CCS). However, the cooling system capital cost would approximately triple, although costs are highly dependent on site-specific characteristics. The potential for water use reductions with CCS is explored via sensitivity analyses of plant efficiency and other key design parameters that affect water resource management for the electric power industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The global climate problem becomes tractable if CO2 emissions from coal use are phased out rapidly and emissions from unconventional fossil fuels (e.g., oil shale and tar sands) are prohibited. This paper outlines technology options for phasing out coal emissions in the United States by ∼2030. We focus on coal for physical and practical reasons and on the U.S. because it is most responsible for accumulated fossil fuel CO2 in the atmosphere today, specifically targeting electricity production, which is the primary use of coal While we recognize that coal emissions must be phased out globally, we believe U.S. leadership is essential. A major challenge for reducing U.S. emissions is that coal provides the largest proportion of base loud power, i.e., power satisfying minimum electricity demand. Because this demand is relatively constant and coal has a high carbon intensity, utility carbon emissions are largely due to coal. The current U.S. electric grid incorporates little renewable power, most of which is not base load power. However, this can readily be changed within the next 2-3 decades. Eliminating coal emissions also requires improved efficiency, a "smart grid", additional energy storage, and advanced nuclear power. Any further coal usage must be accompanied by carbon capture and storage (CCS). We suggest that near-term emphasis should be on efficiency measures and substitution of coal-fired power by renewables and third- generation nuclear plants, since these technologies have been successfully demonstrated at the relevant (commercial( scale. Beyond 2030, these measures can be supplemented by CCS at power plants and, unneeded, successfully demonstrated fourth-generation reactors. We conclude that U.S. coal emissions could be phased out by 2030 using existing technologies or ones that could be commercially competitive with coal within about a decade. Elimination of fossil fuel subsidies and a substantial rising price on carbon emissions are the root requirements for a clean, emissions-free future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Carbon emissions from industry are dominated by production of goods in steel, cement, plastic, paper, and aluminum. Demand for these materials is anticipated to double at least by 2050, by which time global carbon emissions must be reduced by at least 50%. To evaluate the challenge of meeting this target, the global flows of these materials and their associated emissions are projected to 2050 under five technical scenarios. A reference scenario includes all existing and emerging efficiency measures but cannot provide sufficient reduction. The application of carbon sequestration to primary production proves to be sufficient only for cement. The emissions target can always be met by reducing demand, for instance through product life extension, material substitution, or "light-weighting". Reusing components shows significant potential particularly within construction. Radical process innovation may also be possible. The results show that the first two strategies, based on increasing primary production, cannot achieve the required emissions reductions, so should be balanced by the vigorous pursuit of material efficiency to allow provision of increased material services with reduced primary production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In contrast to conventional carbon capture systems for power plants and other large point sources, the system described in this paper captures CO2 directly from ambient air. This has the advantages that emissions from diffuse sources and past emissions may be captured. The objective of this research is to determine the feasibility of a NaOH spray-based contactor for use in an air capture system by estimating the cost and energy requirements per unit CO2 captured. A prototype system is constructed and tested to measure CO2 absorption, energy use, and evaporative water loss and compared with theoretical predictions. A numerical model of drop collision and coalescence is used to estimate operating parameters for a full- scale system, and the cost of operating the system per unit CO2 captured is estimated. The analysis indicates that CO2 capture from air for climate change mitigation is technically feasible using off-the-shelf technology. Drop coalescence significantly decreases the CO2 absorption efficiency; however, fan and pump energy requirements are manageable. Water loss is significant (20 mol H2O/mol CO2 at 15 °C and 65% RH) but can be lowered by appropriately designing and operating the system. The cost of CO2 capture using NaOH spray (excluding solution recovery and CO2 sequestration, which may be comparable) in the full-scale system is 96 $/ton-CO2 in the base case, and ranges from 53 to 127 $/ton-CO2 under alternate operating parameters and assumptions regarding capital costs and mass transfer rate. The low end of the cost range is reached by a spray with 50 µm mean drop diameter, which is achievable with commercially available spray nozzles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]