Trade-offs in cost and emission reductions between flexible and normal carbon capture and sequestration under carbon dioxide emission constraints
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

Trade-offs in cost and emission reductions between flexible and normal carbon capture and sequestration under carbon dioxide emission constraints

Filetype[PDF-553.47 KB]


Details You May Also Like

Details:

  • Journal Title:
    International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
  • Personal Author:
  • NOAA Program & Office:
    NOAA General Documents
  • Description:
    Relative to “normal” amine-based post-combustion capture carbon and sequestration (CCS), flexible CCS adds a flue gas bypass and/or solvent storage system. Here, we focus on flexible CCS equipped with a solvent storage system. A primary advantage of flexible over normal CCS is increased reserve provision. However, no studies have quantified system-level cost savings from those reserves, which could drive the public benefits and rationale for policy support of flexible over normal CCS. Here, we quantify total power system costs, including generation, reserve, and capital costs, as well as carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of generator fleets with flexible versus normal CCS. We do so under a moderate and strong CO2 emission limit. Relative to normal CCS, solvent storage-equipped flexible CCS reduces system-wide operational plus annualized CCS capital costs but increases system-wide CO2 emissions under the moderate limit, whereas it reduces system-wide costs and emissions under the strong limit. Under both limits, we find that reductions in reserve costs constitute 40–80% of the reductions in total operational costs with flexible CCS rather than normal CCS. Thus, flexible versus normal CCS deployment decisions pose cost and emissions tradeoffs to policymakers under a moderate emission limit as well as tradeoffs between near- and long-term policy objectives.
  • Keywords:
  • Source:
    International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 66, 25-34
  • DOI:
  • ISSN:
    1750-5836
  • Format:
    PDF
  • Publisher:
    Elsevier BV
  • Document Type:
    Journal Article
  • Rights Information:
    Accepted Manuscript
  • Compliance:
    Library
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at repository.library.noaa.gov

Version 3.27.1