life cycle greenhouse gas analysis of power generation optionsdocket7970.com/8-1-13/anr/attachment...

NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

ENERGY

Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Analysisof Power Generation Options:Understanding the Effects of a Life Cycle PerspectiveUnderstanding the Effects of a Life Cycle Perspective

Timothy J. Skone, P.E.Office of Strategic Energy Analysis and Planning (OSEAP)National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) U S DOENational Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), U.S. DOE

February 10, 2011Jay Braitsch, DOE, Fossil Energy

Attachment A.ANR:VGS.RTP.3-1h

VGS013281

NATIONAL ENE,GY TECHNOLOGY LA3OVATOVY

Agenda

• Overview of Power LCA Studies

• LCA Basics – NETL’s Approach

• Why LCA for Power GenerationWhy LCA for Power Generation

• Life Cycle GHG Profiles for Natural Gas and Coal

• A Deeper Look at Barnett Shale LC GHG Profile

• Compilation Results

• Key Findings

• Areas of Exploration

2

Areas of Exploration

VGS013282


Overview of Power LCA Studies

3

VGS013283


Purpose of Power LCA Studies

• Baseline Different Technologies– U.S. energy policy decisions are using LCA to gy y g

evaluate energy choices — wide-scale GHG reporting requirements already in place

• Understand technology strengths andNETL has a

library of over• Understand technology strengths and weaknesses when viewed from a life cycle perspective

f f &

library of over 300 custom unit

processes to model power

• Identify areas of R&D innovation (through depth and transparency of analysis)

• Build National leadership capability in LCA at

systems and address

questions from • Build National leadership capability in LCA at

the Lab

• In Summary: Inform & Defend Technology P

stakeholders

4

Programs

VGS013284


Performed an Environmental Assessmentof 23 Power Generation Pathways

Type Description Included in Comparisons

Study Year

IGCC Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (wo-CCS) •IGCC/CCS IGCC with Carbon Capture & Storage (w-CCS) •

2009

IGCC/CCS IGCC with Carbon Capture & Storage (w CCS)NGCC-LNG Natural Gas Combined Cycle fueled with imported liquefied natural gas NGCC-LNG/CCS NGCC fueled with imported LNG with CCS EXPC Existing Pulverized Coal BaselineEXPC/CCS Existing Pulverized Coal with CCS EXPC/CCS + R Existing Pulverized Coal with CCS with replacement power from gridEXPC/CCS + R Existing Pulverized Coal with CCS with replacement power from grid SCPC Super Critical Pulverized Coal •SCPC/CCS Super Critical Pulverized Coal with CCS •NGCC NGCC fueled with 5 sources of domestic gas, including shale •NGCC/CCS Natural Gas Combined Cycle fueled with domestic gas with CCS •GTSC Simple Cycle Gas Turbine from domestic gas •

2010

GTSC Simple Cycle Gas Turbine from domestic gas •GTSC/CCS Simple Cycle Gas Turbine from domestic gas with CCS Nuc (Gen II - Gas) Existing U.S. nuclear fleet (Gen II) using gaseous diffusion enrichment Nuc (Gen II - Cent) Gen II nuclear with centrifuge enrichment •Nuc (Gen III+ - Gas) Advanced nuclear (Gen III+) with gaseous diffusion N (G III C t) G ti III l ith t ifNuc (Gen III+ - Cent) Generation III+ nuclear with centrifuge •Wind (Adv.) Advanced (> 2.5 MW) wind turbine •Wind (Adv./GTSC) Advanced wind using a GTSC as backup •Wind (Adv./Grid) Advanced wind using U.S. grid as backup Wind (Conv.) Conventional (< 2.5 MW) wind turbine

5

Wind (Conv./GTSC) Conventional wind using GTSC backup Wind (Conv./Grid) Conventional wind, grid backup

VGS013285


NETL Life Cycle Assessment Reports

Available at http://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analyses/:• Life Cycle Analysis: Existing Pulverized Coal (EXPC) Power Plant• Life Cycle Analysis: Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Power

PlantPlant• Life Cycle Analysis: Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) Power Plant• Life Cycle Analysis: Supercritical Pulverized Coal (SCPC) Power Plant• Life Cycle Analysis: Power Studies Compilation Report

Analysis complete, report in draft form:• Life Cycle Assessment of Wind Power with GTSC Backup• Life Cycle Assessment of Nuclear Power in the United States

Other related Life Cycle Analysis publications available on NETL web-site:• Life Cycle Analysis: Power Studies Compilation Report (Presentation, LCA X

Conference)• An Assessment of Gate-to-Gate Environmental Life Cycle Performance of y

Water-Alternating-Gas CO2-Enhanced Oil Recovery in the Permian Basin (Report)

• A Comparative Assessment of CO2 Sequestration through Enhanced Oil Recovery and Saline Aquifer Sequestration (Presentation, LCA X Conference)

6

VGS013286


LCA Basics – NETL’s Approach

7

VGS013287


Life Cycle Assessment

• Compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs, and the potential environmental impacts of a product or

h h i lif l f i lprocess throughout its life cycle, from raw material acquisition to the final disposal

LC Stage #1Raw Material Acquisition

(RMA)

LC Stage #2Raw Material

Transport(RMT)

LC Stage #3Energy

Conversion Facility(ECF)

LC Stage #4Product

Transport(PT)

LC Stage #5End Use

Upstream Emissions Downstream Emissions

• The ability to compare different technologies depends on the functional unit (denominator); for this study:

1 MWh f l t i it d li d t th d8

– 1 MWh of electricity delivered to the end user

VGS013288

1101 NATIONAL ENEVGY TECHNOLOGY LA3OVATOgY

V

With CCS System i ' i I

1 I 1 I

Train & Rail Manufacturing

e e

Train Operation

'Stage #3:Energy Conversion Facility Construction

Installation Plant Construction/ Installation

1

Plant Operation Carbon Capture (CC),

Operation CO2 Pipeline, Operation

CO2 Sequestration, Operation

l i 1 1

II II

Plant DecommissioningDecommissioning

7 •

♦•

1

I I I

JI

Deinstallation • •

'Stage #2:Raw Material Transport

I-Stage #4:Product Transport

Transco ssion & Distribution, Operation

End Use

• \

rStage #1: Raw Material Acquisition

Mine Constructions Mine Decommissioning Coal ExtractionOperation

Expanded Boundary for LCA of Power Systems

LCA study boundary extends from extraction of

raw materials from theraw materials from the earth (e.g., coal mining)

thru delivery of the power to the end customer.

Techno-economic Analysis

Study Boundary

9

Boundary

VGS013289


NETL Environmental Life Cycle Study Metrics

• Greenhouse Gases– CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6

Converted to Global Warming Potential using IPCC 2007 100-year CO2CO2, C 4, 2O, S 6

• Criteria Air Pollutants– NOX, SOX, CO, PM10, Pb

• Air Emissions Species of Interest

2equivalents

CO2 = 1CH4 = 25N O 298Air Emissions Species of Interest

– Hg, NH3, Radionuclides• Solid Waste• Raw Materials

N2O = 298SF6 = 22,800

Raw Materials– Energy return on investment

• Water Use– Withdrawn water consumption water returned to source– Withdrawn water, consumption, water returned to source

• Land Use– Acres transformed greenhouse gases

10

Acres transformed, greenhouse gases

VGS013290


Why LCA for Power Generation?

11

VGS013291


The Case for Life Cycle View of Power

• We tend to think that the environmental impacts of electricity generation occur at the power plant, and,

ll ’ i hgenerally, we’re right– In 2008, 33% of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions came from

coal combustion (for power) (EIA, 2010)

• Regulation and technology are reducing those impacts– Flue Gas Desulfurization for SOx

S l ti C t l ti R d ti f NO– Selective Catalytic Reduction for NOx– Electrostatic Precipitators for Particulates– Carbon Capture & Sequestration for CO2

• As this happens, the relative impact from other stages of power production gets larger

12

VGS013292

■ ■

■ ■


GWP from IGCC19% increase in emissions

900

1,000

797

93114.0

3.2 0.87.5% increase in

combustion emissions to

deliver 1 MWh to end user

700

800

CO

2e/M

Wh)

797

60.0

end user

(7% transmission line loss)

400

500

600

Pote

ntia

l (kg

C

73.3

200

300

400

obal

War

min

g

Plant Construction, Installation, DecommissioningElectricity TransmissionTrain Transportation

0

100

200

Glo

pCoal ExtractionIncreased Combustion for Transmission LossBaseline Combustion

13

Combustion Only Full Life Cycle

VGS013293

■

■

fC r- NATIONAL ENE,GY TECHNOLOGY LA3OVATOVY

GWP from IGCC with CCS

250

Combustion is only 47% of IGCC w/ CCS life cycle emissions

217Upstream emissions

200

CO

2e/M

Wh)

Plant Construction, Installation, Decommissioning

217Upstream emissions increase by 18% to

provide extra feedstock to

overcome CCS efficiency drop

150

Pote

ntia

l (kg

C

Electricity Transmission

Train Transportation

Coal Extraction103100

obal

War

min

g Coal Extraction

Increased Combustion for Transmission LossBaseline Combustion

103

0

50Glo

14

0Combustion Only Full Life Cycle

VGS013294


The Case for Life Cycle View of Power

• Additionally, as alternative forms of power generation come on theof power generation come on the grid, with little or no impact at the power plant, the impacts occur in places we hadn’toccur in places we hadn t considered before– Impact from wind power occurs in

the manufacturing and1.65MW Turbine in Northfield, Minnesota

Source: Carleton Collegethe manufacturing and transportation of the turbines, and the construction of the wind farmFor nuclear the impacts occur in– For nuclear, the impacts occur in the mining and enrichment of uranium

Ranger Uranium Open-pit Mine Australia

15

Ranger Uranium Open pit Mine, AustraliaSource: Reuters, Rio Tinto

VGS013295


Not included in these LCAs

• Projections of fuel resource availability (and scarcity) for coal, natural gas, and uranium

Time horizon of these studies (30 years) 20

25

30

ctio

n (T

CF)

AD Gas (on/offshore) Alaska Coalbed MethaneTight gas NA Offshore NA Conventional

– Time horizon of these studies (30 years) are not likely to see extreme shortages

– Nuclear power plants are based on a 60 year time horizon.

5

10

15

S. N

atur

al G

as E

xtra

c

• High-impact, low-probability events (accidents) such as oil spills, mining accidents, Chernobyl/TMI

EIA AEO 2011 Early Release

0

U.S

• Mid-point or end-point impact assessment beyond conversion of GHG to 100-year GWP

– Acidification– Eutrophication– Smog– Biodiversity– Human Health

16

– etc.Kingston Fossil Plant coal fly ash slurry spill (Wade Payne/Associated Press)

VGS013296


Life Cycle GHG Profiles forNatural Gas and Coal

Understanding what’s behind the numbers

17

VGS013297

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

I I I I I L I_ _ _ _ ! ! ! ! --------

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i

1 1 1

r

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 I

1 1 1

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

.- 1 1 1 L I

- ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! M_

- 1

I I I I I I I

MC: NATIONAL ENEVGY TECHNOLOGY LA3OVATOgY

Natural Gas LCA Process FlowImported LNGp

(Upstream Only) Domestic NG

Drill Site Construction

NG Extraction/ Operation

Drill Site Decommiss

ioning

Stage #1 Raw Material Acquisition

NG Extraction/ Operation

Stage #1 Raw Material Acquisition

Pipeline Manufacturing

p

Pipeline Operation

g

Stage #2 Raw Material Transport

Construction

p

OffshorePipeline

OperationDecommissi

oningOnshorePipeline

Plant Construction/

Installation

Carbon CO2 CO2

Construction & Installation

With CCS SystemStage #3 Energy Conversion Facility

Stage #2 Raw Material Transport

Liquefaction

pOperation

Plant Operation

Carbon Capture,

Operation

CO2Pipeline,

Operation

CO2Sequestration,

Operation

Plant Decommissio

ning Deinstallation

g p

LNG Tanker Operation

LNG Taker Berthing

Decommissi

Transmission & Distribution,

Operation

Stage #4 Product TransportRegasification

OnshorePipeline

Operation

Construction Decommissioning

18

End Use

p

VGS013298


Fossil Feedstock Upstream GWP(NETL Profiles: 100-year GWP, kg CO2e/MMBTU fuel delivered)

20

25

RMA RMT

17.2

15

min

g Po

tent

ial

MB

TU)

9.1 8.9 9.2 9.78.8 8.9

9.510

year

Glo

bal W

arm

(kg

CO

2e/M

M

3.42.1

5

100-

0Domestic

Avg.LNG Coal Bed

MethaneBarnett Shale Offshore Associated

GasOnshore Illinois #6

(Gassy)Illinois #6 (Low Gas, Estimated)

Powder River Basin

(Estimated)

19

Natural Gas Coal

VGS013299

P

4

i

J


Fossil Feedstock Upstream GWP(NETL Profiles: 20-year GWP, kg CO2e/MMBTU fuel delivered)

25

22.924.0

20

25

RMA RMT

17.3 17.1 17.3 17.3 17.717.1

15

min

g Po

tent

ial

MB

TU)

10

year

Glo

bal W

arm

(kg

CO

2e/M

M

6.3

2.5

5

20-y

0Domestic

Avg.LNG Coal Bed

MethaneBarnett Shale Offshore Associated

GasOnshore Illinois #6

(Gassy)Illinois #6 (Low Gas, Estimated)

Powder River Basin

(Estimated)

20

Natural Gas Coal

VGS013300

C: 1'- NATIONAL ENE,GY TECHNOLOGY LA3OVATOVY

Upstream Transport SensitivityIllinois #6 (Low Gas) CtG Illinois #6 CtG Barnett Shale CtG

16

18

12

14

ng P

oten

tial

BTU

)

9.5 (640 km, 400 mi) 9.2 (1,400 km, 900 mi)

8

10

Glo

bal W

arm

inkg

CO

2e/M

MB

3.4 (640 km, 400 mi)

4

6

100-

yr G (

0

2

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000

21

Note: Study defaults indicated on each lineFeedstock Transport Distance (km)

VGS013301

r

p

P


Illinois No. 6 Coal Bed Methane Sensitivity14

10.3

11.4

12.5

12

tial

RMA RMT

7.2

8.2

9.3

8

10

arm

ing

Pote

nt/M

MB

TU)

4.0

5.0

6.1

4

6

0-yr

Glo

bal W

a(k

g C

O2e

/

1.9

2.9

2

100

00 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Standard Cubic Feet (scf) CH4 released per short ton coal mined

< 71 scf CH4/ton coal = low gassy mine

22

71 scf CH4/ton coal low gassy mine360 scf CH4/ton coal = NETL default study value

VGS013302


A Deeper Look into Barnett ShaleLife Cycle GHG Profile…

Understanding what’s behind the numbers

23

VGS013303

■ ■

I

MC: NATIONAL ENE,GY TECHNOLOGY LA3OVATIM

NETL Profile: 100-year GWP of Barnett Shale Gasby Process and GHG (100% of Vented Gas Flared)

9.20

8

9

10

oten

tial

CO₂ N₂O CH₄

3 584

5

6

7

al W

arm

ing

PoO

2e/M

MB

TU)

0.15

2.56

0.19 0.30 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.24

2.16

3.58

0.001

2

3

4

100-

year

Glo

b(k

g C

O

0 0 0.00 0.00 0

Con

st./I

nst.

ompr

essi

on

Deh

ydra

tion

NG

Fla

ring

Swee

teni

ng

Wel

l Dec

om.

elin

e C

onst

.

n E

lect

ricity

r Ope

ratio

n

ne L

eaka

ge

ine

Dec

om.

Tota

l

1

Wel

l C

Wel

lhea

d C

o

NG

D

NG

S W

Pipe

Ope

ratio

n

Com

pres

sor

Pipe

lin

Pipe

li

24

RMA RMT CtG

VGS013304

■ ■

MC: NATIONAL ENE,GY TECHNOLOGY LA3OVATOVY

100-year GWP of Modified Barnett Shale Gasby Process and GHG (51% of Vented Gas Flared)by Process and GHG (51% of Vented Gas Flared)

12.3212

14

ntia

l

CO₂ N₂O CH₄

34% Increase in Cradle to Gate Life Cycle GHG

8

10

12

War

min

g Po

ten

/MM

BTU

)

34% Increase in Cradle-to-Gate Life Cycle GHG Profile Compared to NETL (un-modified) Data

0.15

2.56

0.19

3.42

0.01 0.00 0.02 0.24

2.163.58

0.002

4

6

-yea

r Glo

bal W

(kg

CO

2e/

0.01 0.00 0.02 0.000

Con

st./I

nst.

ompr

essi

on

Deh

ydra

tion

NG

Fla

ring

Swee

teni

ng

Wel

l Dec

om.

Con

st./I

nst.

n E

lect

ricity

r Ope

ratio

n

ne L

eaka

ge

ne D

ecom

.

Tota

l100-

Wel

l C

Wel

lhea

d C

o

NG

D

NG

S W

Pipe

line

C

Ope

ratio

n

Com

pres

sor

Pipe

lin

Pipe

li

25

RMA RMT CtG

VGS013305

■ ■


20-year GWP of Modified Barnett Shale Gasby Process and GHG (51% Vented Gas Flared)

26.47

25ntia

l

CO₂ N₂O CH₄

by Process and GHG (51% Vented Gas Flared)

15

20

5

War

min

g Po

ten

e/M

MB

TU)

0.16

3.370.53

9.58

0.04 0.00 0.02 0.252.22

10.30

0.00

5

10

-yea

r Glo

bal W

(kg

CO

2e

0 6 0.04 0.00 0.02 0.000

Con

st./I

nst.

ompr

essi

on

Deh

ydra

tion

NG

Fla

ring

Swee

teni

ng

Wel

l Dec

om.

Con

st./I

nst.

n E

lect

ricity

r Ope

ratio

n

ne L

eaka

ge

ne D

ecom

.

Tota

l20-

Wel

l C

Wel

lhea

d C

o

NG

D

NG

S W

Pipe

line

C

Ope

ratio

n

Com

pres

sor

Pipe

lin

Pipe

li

26

RMA RMT CtG

VGS013306


Comparative ResultsComparative Results

27

VGS013307

F

■


Modified Unconventional Shale Gas Profile(51% Vented Gas Flared) Applied to Power Production

E C i F ilit (ECF) R M t i l A i iti (RMA)

1,109 1,200

Energy Conversion Facility (ECF) Raw Material Acquisition (RMA)Raw Material Transport (RMT) Product Transport (PT)

800

1,000

ng P

oten

tial

h)

2% Increase in Life Cycle GHG Profile for NGCC w/o CCS and 7% Increase for NGCC w/ CCS(Compared to NETL (un-modified) Data)

467 474 600

Glo

bal W

arm

in(k

g C

O2e

/MW

h

137 146 217

200

400

100-

year

G

0Domestic Avg. Modified Barn.

ShaleDomestic Avg. Modified Barn.

ShaleEXPC IGCC/ccs

28

NGCC NGCC/ccs Illinois #6 (Gassy)

VGS013308

1

1 11


NGCC/GTSC Life Cycle Global Warming Potential(Un-modified Unconventional Shale Gas Profile)

Energy Conversion Facility (ECF) Raw Material Acquisition (RMA) Raw Material Transport (RMT) Product Transport (PT)

800

900

Wh)

gy y ( ) q ( ) p ( ) p ( )

500

600

700

al (k

g C

O2e

/MW

300

400

500

arm

ing

Pote

ntia

100

200

Glo

bal W

a

-wo-CCS w-CCS wo-CCS w-CCS wo-CCS w-CCS wo-CCS w-CCS

Imported (LNG) Domestic Imported (LNG) Domestic

29

NGCC GTSC

VGS013309

■

I

R


Comparative Life Cycle GWP of Delivered Power(Un-modified Unconventional Shale Gas Profile)

Energ Con ersion Facilit (ECF) Ra Material Acq isition (RMA)

1,109 1,200

tial

Energy Conversion Facility (ECF) Raw Material Acquisition (RMA)Raw Material Transport (RMT) Product Transport (PT)

715

931 943

600

800

1,000

War

min

g Po

ten

e/M

Wh)

467

137217 241

507

200

400

600

year

Glo

bal W

(kg

Co 2

e

137

9 15 0

200

GC

C

C/c

cs

GTS

C

XPC

GC

C

C/c

cs

CPC

C/c

cs

ucle

ar

Win

d

GTS

C

100-

y

NG

NG

CC G E IG

IGC

C S

SCP C

Adv

ance

d N

u

Adv.

Adv

. Win

d/G

30

Gas Coal Alternative

VGS013310


Comparative Life Cycle GWP of Delivered Power(Un-modified Unconventional Shale Gas Profile)

Power Generation Source

Capacity(MW)

CapacityFactor

Raw Material Acquisition (RMA)

Raw Material Transport (RMT)

Energy Conversion Facility (ECF)

Product Transport(PT)

TOTAL

kgCO2e/MWh

kgCO2e/MWh

%of Total

kgCO2e/MWh

%of Total

kgCO2e/MWh

%of Total

kgCO2e/MWh

%of Total

NGCC 555 85% 20 4% 50 11% 390 84% 3 1% 463

Gas NGCC/ccs 474 85% 30 21% 60 42% 50 35% 3 2% 143

GTSC 360 85% 40 6% 70 10% 600 84% 3 0% 713

Coal

EXPC 434 85% 80 7% 10 1% 1020 92% 3 0% 1,113

IGCC 622 80% 70 8% 10 1% 840 91% 3 0% 923

IGCC/ccs 543 80% 90 40% 20 9% 110 49% 3 1% 223

SCPC 550 85% 70 8% 0 0% 860 92% 3 0% 933

SCPC/ccs 550 85% 100 41% 10 4% 130 53% 3 1% 243

Advanced N l 1,336 94% 3 33% 0 0% 3 33% 3 33% 9

Alternative

Nuclear 1,336 94% 3 33% 0 0% 3 33% 3 33% 9

Adv. Wind 200 30% 0 0% 0 0% 10 77% 3 23% 13

Adv. Wind/GTSC 560 30% / 70% 0 0% 0 0% 500 99% 3 1% 503

31

VGS013311


Key Findings & Conclusions

• For non-CCS plants: adding upstream and downstream life cycle GHG emissions increases total GWP by an average of 20%

F CCS l t ddi t d d t lif l• For CCS plants: adding upstream and downstream life cycle emissions makes up 50% of the environmental profile for fossil technologies

• As environmental regulations and technology reduce the impacts of fossil fuel combustion, both the relative and absolute impact of upstream processes increases

• Nuclear power plants demonstrate strong climate change and economic performance over advanced coal-fired power systems and advanced wind-power options

• Environmental and economic benefits of wind farms are significantly off-set by back-up power generation to provide a reliable load generation profile (i.e., similar to baseload)

32

VGS013312


Areas of Potential Improvement

• Enhance study and inventory of waste systems– Significant reduction in GWP (by recycling wind turbine components)– Include better information on long-term spent nuclear fuel storage andInclude better information on long term spent nuclear fuel storage, and

carbon storage or sequestration systems

• Model strategies to offset cooling water use

• Examine coal mine methane capture technology for upstream improvement of coal mining process

• Develop additional detail to better understand long horizontal wellsDevelop additional detail to better understand long horizontal wells (producing natural gas), including drilling of multiple wells from a single pad

• Study gas turbines built specifically to back up wind farmsy g p y p

• Evaluate ultra-supercritical power plant technology and other existing and advanced combustion system improvements and upgrades

33

VGS013313

ABOUT DOE I ORGAN ATION I NEWS I CONTACT US

no HIGHLIGHTS NETLOG I MULTIMEDIA

Student sums

studying Wagas

at NITL was a

great learning

experience

the ENEMY lab GP,

Where energy challenges converge and energy solutions emerge

Underground Monitoring 01 Carbon Storage Site Begins 3n Ifissassippi

team from OCE's Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership is using scientific instrumentation, installed nearly two mile, beneath the surface of the earth, to track the movement of carbon dioxide bei. injected for oil recover, Read mace

MORE COAL OIL & GAS NEWS

Carbon Sequestration Allan Conte res Award ter Publication Excellence The Department of Energy's "carbon seusestrataa, Atlas of the United States and Canada" has captored an A,EX Grancl Award reeog mama pubbleation excellence. The atlas presents the Trot

OFFP.PF.r:EIFFY- ENERGY

to rely on sluan. afferdabla energy from our treelltional fuel reseureem Ls the pilnle,

Fossil Energy. Fossil fuels supply Be, of the natio0s

nergy, end ve ern nne.ng en sun h priority prnjmn. pollution-v coal plants. mere orocludlwe ell ana pas e. the continuing ree,inemg el

Reed remme ebbe.

U odergrawid Monitoring of Carbon Storage Site Regina in Mississippi

▪ COUNEILteem of regional peitners is using ac,entift iralrumentelkon, esteled oa y two miles teroo22e surface cite earin. to track the movement of

carbon clkskle being imaged for od recovery. Reed Mord

DOE S., AeoUrstiona10,11l4 Round err Van Coal Power loltsilys ODE today Issued 2e real Fuming 0 oporiontty Announcement FDA for nos. 3 of t.CEN which secla In arm.. Or commercial dCplOyeelit ctadvenced coelteoCnologiesto help suppy to U.S. can clean, abundant. and anorda. energy.

SPCA E -- • . -.- • • - = P-oorsir-Concem Testing TWO.11bWirE r - . - r _ Siam Energy Con,ersonA11011E8 (SECA) - - :L.GLP.9.51111preet-eisericept toss by 'Nen SA trdy 3.61 Jr 131n Calle/ ont.enl,..1671H1 Newport, annnerAnn


FOSSIL ENERGY

Fossil Energy

Clean Coal & Natural Gas POwftrEMS.

Carbon Sequesracon

Hydrogen & Other Clean Fuels Oil & Natural Gas Supply & Delivery

Natural Gas Reputation

us. Petroleum Reserves

NATIONAL NIINiGT TNCHNOLOGY LAM:RAO:RV

;err ISSUES. RI

;NEEHARcx

;TECHNOLOGIES

;ENERGY ANALYSES

ISOIECITAT IONS & EloSiNESS

lEnucATioN

IIEWSPOON

;CONTACT NET L

EVENTS CALENDAR

PUBLICATIONS

CAREERS & FELLOWSHIPS

PROJECTS IN YOUR STATE

carbon Capture. Sco.strotion FAQ1

Get enswers

10 to your carbon

capture .1. sequestteor qua.. GO.

Fleterence Shelf Newsletters.

,,rsufact

Ovals. ropd.apa, educannal

r comes,pre...taton and ..ore, no.

U.S. DEPARTMENT DE

7 ENERGY TELXNOLOGY EnE. CT IRDNMENT I VIME?.'

112=113111 Register to .,,,,aaisa Fossil

e-mrg Eney NEWS...MUM kry

en,

1:117=1:1 Ceieo e Sum

1=1:221:EMIM I Select si Field Site A

Latsurato, peers era !Neg. lams ...A.M.., roamed. Read klor,

Visit Our Websites

NETLOffi f il NETLwww.netl.doe.gov

Office of Fossil Energywww.fe.doe.gov

Timothy J. Skone, P.E.Lead General EngineerOSEAP - Planning Team(412) 386-4495

Robert James, PhDGeneral EngineerOSEAP - Planning Team(304) 285-4309

Joe Marriott, PhDAssociateBooz Allen Hamilton(412) 386-7557

34

(412) 386 [email protected]



VGS013314

life cycle greenhouse gas analysis of power generation optionsdocket7970.com/8-1-13/anr/attachment...

Documents