Abstract
Based on the operating data of a 40 tCO2/day (2 megawatt (MW)) class carbon capture and utilization (CCU) pilot plant, the scaled-up 400 tCO2/day (20 MW) class CCU plant at 500 MW power plant was economically analyzed by applying the levelized cost of energy analysis (LCOE) and CO2 avoided cost. This study shows that the LCOE and CO2 avoided cost for 400 tCO2/day class CCU plant of mineral carbonation technology were 26 USD/MWh and 64 USD/tCO2, representing low LCOE and CO2 avoided cost, compared to other carbon capture and storage CCS and CCU plants. Based on the results of this study, the LCOE and CO2 avoided cost may become lower by the economy of scale, even if the CO2 treatment capacity of the CCU plant could be extended as much as for similar businesses. Therefore, the CCU technology by mineral carbonation has an economic advantage in energy penalty, power plant construction, and operating cost over other CCS and CCU with other technology.
Highlights
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the atmosphere from anthropogenic activities continue to grow worldwide [1,2,3], as CO2 emissions in the period 2010 to 2014 grew about 31.9 to 35.5 GtCO2 per year, an average rate of 2.75% per year [4], escalating global warming
Based on the operating data and input cost of a 40 tCO2/day (2 megawatt (MW)) class carbon capture and utilization (CCU) pilot plant at a coal-fired power plant, the scaled-up 400 tCO2/day (20 MW) class CCU plant at 500 MW coal-fired power plant was economically analyzed by applying the levelized cost of energy analysis (LCOE) and CO2 avoided cost, considering the energy penalty
The additional capex for installing the 400 tCO2/day class CCU plant at the 500 MW coal-fired power plant is based on the 2018 price level, which was applied for the preliminary design of the 400 tCO2/day class CCU plant
Summary
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the atmosphere from anthropogenic activities continue to grow worldwide [1,2,3], as CO2 emissions in the period 2010 to 2014 grew about 31.9 to 35.5 GtCO2 per year, an average rate of 2.75% per year [4], escalating global warming. IEA has published a research report, “cost and performance of carbon dioxide capture from power generation, IEA, 2011,” comparing the economic feasibility of CCS-applied technologies (post-combustion, pre-combustion, oxy-combustion) between the levelized cost of energy analysis (LCOE) and CO2 avoided cost [24]. Based on the operating data and input cost of a 40 tCO2/day (2 megawatt (MW)) class CCU pilot plant at a coal-fired power plant, the scaled-up 400 tCO2/day (20 MW) class CCU plant at 500 MW coal-fired power plant was economically analyzed by applying the LCOE and CO2 avoided cost, considering the energy penalty. We have calculated the LCOE and CO2 avoided cost for mineral carbonation, resulting in 26 USD/MWh and 64 USD/tCO2 each, and conducted comparative studies with other CCS and CCU technologies, which were higher cost for each factor.
Full Text
Topics from this Paper
Megawatt
Carbon Capture
Power Plant Construction
Coal-Fired Power Plant
Power Plant
+ Show 5 more
Create a personalized feed of these topics
Get StartedSimilar Papers
Social Science Research Network
Apr 16, 2019
SSRN Electronic Journal
Jan 1, 2019
Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology
Jun 1, 2019
One Earth
Feb 1, 2022
Environmental Science & Technology
May 7, 2013
Research Papers in Economics
Aug 4, 2014
Politeknik Dergisi
Mar 1, 2021
Apr 1, 2023
Energy Procedia
Jan 1, 2011
iScience
Mar 1, 2019
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
Oct 1, 2014
Energy Procedia
Jul 1, 2017
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management
Dec 1, 2010
Energy Procedia
Feb 1, 2009
Sustainability
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023
Sustainability
Sep 27, 2023