Archive for category Costs

Carbon capture and storage to commence in India with NTPC

Posted by on Saturday, 19 March, 2011

National Thermal power corporation is an Indian company with expertise in power utilities, is better known as NTPC Ltd  in India.

 

Toshiba is the largest supplier of nuclear reactors in Japan. Given what has happened in Japan regarding the nuke melt down due to the earthquake and tsunami, Toshiba has to go slow on its nuclear division.

Whether the world is going to stop nuclear plants or not, there is going to be a slow down in new nuclear plants and in renewing old plants.

 

NTPC  is in talks with Toshiba Corp to build a pilot project in India to capture and store carbon emissions.

The Japanese power-equipment maker, Toshiba plans to develop its first 5-Mw carbon capture plant in India by 2016. This was confirmed by  Toshiba India Private Ltd Managing Director, Kenji Urai.

The project may be similar to the one set to start this year at a 47-Mw plant at Mikawa, Japan.

India plans to add about 64,000 Mw, or the equivalent of more than 50 new nuclear plants, in coal-fired electric plants in the five years through 2017. The country is seeking ways to reduce carbondioxide emissions, after agreeing to reduce the greenhouse gas in proportion to gross domestic product by 25 percent, compared to levels in 2005, by 2020.

 

It makes sense for India to build coal power plants with CCS technology.

Already the Government is facing stiff resistance for a coal fired power plant in Srikakulam, near Andhra.

India is a power starved country. India is probably the 5th largest co2 emitter. However, on a percapita basis, they are far below most other industrialised nations.

Carbon capture-and-storage technology typically traps emissions and pumps these underground, for what its promoters say is safe, permanent storage. So far, it has mostly been used in pilot projects and for storing only a portion of total plant emissions.

 

Critics say the cost is too high for its benefits. It’s certainly not economically feasible because  when with the  CCS equipment pre- fitted to a coal-based plant, it would double the investment.

Toshiba, Japan’s largest supplier of nuclear reactors, entered the Indian power market through a joint venture with Indian power utility JSW Energy Ltd.

 

Toshiba plans to sell $400 million of power-generation equipment in India by 2015. Through two joint ventures, Toshiba and JSW will open a plant in Chennai in July, to produce 3,000 Mw of boilers and turbines a year.

The joint venture is expecting orders from NTPC for four 660-Mw turbines this year and has already received orders for two 660-Mw turbines and generators from the Essar Group for its coal-fired Salaya plant in Gujarat.

The International Energy Agency supports carbon capture as a measure to limit greenhouse gases.

What happens when an earthquake hits the carbon geo sequestered, no one knows.

If  the leakage is slow, perhaps there will be time to do some damage control.

If all the co2 rushes out abruptly, it can cause mind boggling damage to mankind and climate.

The world needs about 3,400 projects,  by 2050 to reduce emissions.

 

Related Terms in the Glossary:

Carbon Capture and Storage

Greenhouse gas

 


Babcock Power and ThermoEnergy agree to develop ’TIPS’ clean coal technology

Posted by on Monday, 1 March, 2010

Based on pressurized oxy-fuel combustion technology, TIPS converts coal, natural gas, oil, and biomass into energy with near-zero air emissions. In addition, it captures CO2 in a pressurized form ready for sequestration or beneficial reuse such as enhanced oil recovery.

“The simplicity and efficiency of the TIPS approach offers a reliable and cost effective design for carbon-capture, near-zero emission power plants,” said Alex Fassbender, President of ThermoEnergy Power Systems. “With relatively few unit operations, TIPS enhances power plant reliability, while its process efficiency comes from recovering the latent heat of vaporization of produced and entrained water.”

“Adding a second reheat to the steam cycle efficiency, coupled with a simple, low-energy process to recover pipeline quality CO2 gives TIPS a competitive edge over other conversion technologies”, said Fassbender.

Babcock and ThermoEnergy engineers will begin work immediately to finalise the data needed to design, construct and operate a large-scale pilot plant at a host site.

Well, it appears to me that there is no major innovation in this, probably an incremental development in terms of increased efficiency of oxy-fuel combustion.

Source

Coal Gasification


Sargas Technology – Carbon Capture Under $20 Per Ton?

Posted by on Monday, 1 March, 2010

It uses a system of pressurised filters, absorbers and condensers.The technology, developed by Sargas Technology Group, can also remove 95 per cent of carbon dioxide from a flue gas stream, more than the 90 per cent of most carbon capture technologies, the inventors claim.

The technology requires the flue gas to be under pressure to work, so it cannot be used with existing plants where exhaust gases are at atmospheric pressure. However it can be used with new pressurised fluidized bed combustion systems, which are currently used in Sweden and Germany, and it can be used with new natural gas plants.

The company wants to build a 400 megawatt coal fired power plant to supply electricity for metals smelters in Norway, working together with aluminium company Alcan, Norwegian oil company Norsk Hydro, French metals producer Eramet and Norwegian group Tinfos.

Source


Low-Cost CO2 Mitigation in Electricity, Oil, and Cement Production

Posted by on Monday, 1 March, 2010

Abstract

Several low-cost opportunities exist for scrubbing CO2 from waste gas streams, utilizing spontaneous chemical reactions in the presence of water and inexpensive or waste alkaline compounds. These reactions convert CO2 to bicarbonate or carbonate in dissolved or solid form,
thus providing CO2 capture and low-risk CO2 storage underground, in the ocean, or in some cases on land. Useful by-products and co-benefits can also be generated by these processes. In certain
settings this approach will be significantly less energy intensive, less costly, and less risky than “conventional” molecular CO2 capture and geologic storage.

Full content here


Costs of CCS in 2100? – Carbon Capture Capital Cost Reductions

Posted by on Tuesday, 12 January, 2010

While I was doing some browsing with the question in title lurking in my mind (What Will be the Costs of CCS in 2100?), I came across the following:

“The more I have thought about these issues, the more I have become convinced that carbon capture is going to end up being the centerpiece of long-term geoengineering solutions. There are good reasons to be optimistic that in 50 to 100 years we will be able to remove carbon dioxide from the air for one-thousandth or one-millionth the current costs.” So writes Steven Levitt in his blog at NYTimes.

One thousandth or one millionth of the current costs? That sounds too outlandish. Well, OK, everyone gives the analogy of the computing industry and Moore’s Law, and so does Steve. But I doubt Moore’s Law can be applied to every technology possible. If that were true, solar PV will today be costing far, far less than what it is costing. In the last 30 years or so, solar PV capital costs have fallen to one tenth of their original, but application of Moore’s Law suggests a far, far larger decrease.

I think it will be more useful to identify those parts of CCS capital costs (and operational costs) that have significant potential for disruptive innovations. These cost components will have potential for such enormous decreases in costs or increases in performance. I’m not sure if the CCS technologies that are being pursued today indeed have such “disruptively innovatable” components