carbon capture and sequestration update
DESCRIPTION
Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update. APPA Energy & Clean Air Task Force April 26, 2010. Capture Technology. Pre-combustion Separate carbon from hydrogen in fuel (syngas); 35-40% pure CO 2 stream Oxy-fuel combustion - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update
APPA
Energy & Clean Air Task Force
April 26, 2010
![Page 2: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Capture Technology
• Pre-combustion– Separate carbon from hydrogen in fuel
(syngas); 35-40% pure CO2 stream
• Oxy-fuel combustion– Separate O2 from N2 in combustion air,
produce a pure stream of CO2 and water
• Post-combustion– Separate 12-16% CO2 from the flue gas
stream
![Page 3: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Carbon Capture
• Amine based (MMA)
• Chilled ammonia
• Carbonate/bicarbonate
• Solid phase?
• Membranes?
CO2 and other gases
sorbent
CO2
CO2–sorbent complex
Other gases++
+
Recycled sorbent
Thermal
desorption
![Page 4: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Technical Challenges
• Sheer volume – need to scale up by over an order of magnitude
• Parasitic energy – 15-30% increase in fuel requirements
• Transport and disposal issues
![Page 5: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Notable Demonstrations
Pleasant Prairie We Energy 1 MW
Mountaineer AEP 20 MW
240 MW*
Antelope Valley Basin Electric 200 MW*
*planned
![Page 6: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
New Actor - Commercial
• Tenaska Trailblazer project (TX)
• 600 MW
• 85% capture, EOR
• Legally binding but not in air permit
![Page 7: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Sequestration
![Page 8: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
The National Carbon Focus
• DOE has established 7 regional partnerships to address carbon sequestration.
• DOE research, to date, has focused on regional sequestration projects involving the deepest geological basins.
![Page 9: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
The National Carbon Focus
• Regional carbon sequestration will require an extensive pipeline system for CO2 collection, compression, and transmission.
![Page 10: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Sequestration Potential
Oil & Gas Reservoir
Unmineable Coal Seams
Deep Saline Aquifers
![Page 11: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Missouri Demo Project• Given the lack of traditional carbon traps in the state of
Missouri, City Utilities began investigating alternative options for carbon sequestration.
• In 2005, City Utilities identified a formation beneath the Springfield area, the Lamotte Formation, which appeared to be a candidate for carbon sequestration.
• The Lamotte is a highly mineralized sandstone and is not a source of potable water. Very few wells penetrate the Lamotte.
• The Lamotte is separated from the potable Ozark Aquifer by the Derby-Doerun/Davis Confining Layer.
![Page 12: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Project Challenges• Reservoir storage volume –
– Relatively shallow depth requires CO2 injection as a gas rather than a supercritical fluid, requiring a larger initial storage volume.
• Interaction of CO2 gas and groundwater– The physical and chemical interaction of the CO2
gas and groundwater (displacement, diffusion, rate of movement, etc.) must be characterized.
![Page 13: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Project Challenges• CO2 Trapping Mechanisms
– stratigraphic/structural, – groundwater dissolution into groundwater, and – mineral precipitation.
• These mechanisms may behave differently for gaseous CO2 injection and must be properly characterized.
![Page 14: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Project Partners/Supporters
• City Utilities of Springfield• Missouri Department of Natural Resources• Missouri State University• Missouri University of Science & Technology (UMR)• Ameren • Aquila, Inc.• Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.• Empire District Electric Company• Kansas City Power & Light• U.S. EPA Region VII• Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC)• Missouri Public Utility Alliance (MPUA)• Missouri Energy Development Association (MEDA)
![Page 15: Carbon Capture and Sequestration Update](https://reader035.vdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062408/56814281550346895daead27/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)