Search

Direct air capture (DAC) is a key component in the transition to net-zero society. However, its giga-tonne deployment faces daunting challenges in terms of availability of both financial resources and, most of all, large quantities of low-carbon energy. Within this context, small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) might potentially facilitate the deployment of DAC. In the present study, we present a detailed thermodynamic analysis of integrating an SMR with solid sorbent DAC. We propose different integration designs and find that coupling the SMR with DAC significantly increases the use of thermal energy produced in the nuclear reactor: from 32% in a stand-alone SMR to 76%-85% in the SMR-DAC system. Moreover, we find that a 50-MW SMR module equipped with DAC could remove around 0.3 MtCO2 every year, while still producing electricity at 24%-42% of the rated power output. Performing a techno-economic analysis of the system, we estimate a net removal cost of around 250 €/tCO2. When benchmarking it to other low-carbon energy supply solutions, we find that the SMR-DAC system is potentially more cost-effective than a DAC powered by high-temperature heat pumps or dedicated geothermal systems. Finally, we evaluate the potential of future deployment of SMR-DAC in China, Europe, India, South Africa and the USA, finding that it could enable up to around 96 MtCO2/year by 2035 if SMRs prove to be cost-competitive. The impact of regional differences on the removal cost is also assessed.

Uncertainties are an inherent and important element of novel systems with limited large-scale industrial experience and must be taken into account in order to enable the design of cost-efficient energy systems. This paper investigates the optimal design of carbon capture and storage from a waste-to-energy plant under uncertainties. With the aim of providing a better understanding of the impact of uncertainties on the design and cost of CCS chains, as well as the capture technology selection, the case of a hypothetical 40 MW waste-to-energy plant located in Norway is considered. The impact of key technical and cost uncertainties on the cost of different CO₂ capture and CCS chain options are investigated using an in-house techno-economic CCS assessment tool combined with an uncertainty quantification framework. When the different capture options are compared on a deterministic basis, the advanced amine yields the best performances (CO₂ avoidance cost of 153 €/tCO₂, avoided), followed by the membrane process based on partial capture (200 €/tCO₂, avoided) and MEA-based capture (217 €/tCO₂, avoided). However, in contrast with the advanced amine, the partial capture considered in the membrane process does not enable net negative CO₂ emissions. Once technical and cost uncertainties are taken into account, the advanced amine-based capture remains the best option, however the MEA-based capture outperform the membrane process. Finally, the stochastic optimization showed that the uncertainties considered do not impact the optimal capture capacity in this case. The full CCS chain perspective is then included through two chain options: a nearby offshore saline aquifer or an offshore CO₂ EOR storage located further away. The EOR-based chain leads to the best performances (187 vs. 202 €/tCO₂, avoided) both on a deterministic basis and when different uncertainty scenarios are considered. However, as a shared transport and storage infrastructure is considered, uncertainty regarding

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an essential technology to mitigate global CO2 emissions from power and industry sectors. Despite the increasing recognition of its importance to achieve the net-zero target, current CCS deployment is far behind targeted ambitions. A key reason is that CCS is often perceived as too expensive. The costs of CCS have however traditionally been looked at from the industrial plant perspective, which does not necessarily reflect the end user’s one. This paper addresses the incomplete view by investigating the impact of implementing CCS in industrial facilities on the overall costs and CO2 emissions of end-user products and services. As an example, we examine the extent to which an increase in costs of raw materials (cement and steel) due to CCS impacts the costs of building a bridge. Results show that although CCS significantly increases cement and steel costs, the subsequent increment in the overall bridge construction cost remains marginal (∼1%). This 1% cost increase, however, enables a deep reduction in CO2 emissions (∼51%) associated with the bridge construction. Although more research is needed in this area, this work is the first step to a better understanding of the real cost and benefits of CCS., Energie and Industrie