skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Modelling the impacts of climate policy on the deployment of carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage across electric power regions in the United States

Abstract

This paper summarizes the results of a first-of-its-kind holistic, integrated economic analysis of the potential role of carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) technologies across the regional segments of the United States of America (USA) electric power sector, over the time frame 2005-2045, in response to two hypothetical emissions control policies analyzed against two potential energy supply futures that include updated and substantially higher projected prices for natural gas. A key feature of this paper’s analysis is an attempt to explicitly model the inherent heterogeneities that exist in both the nation’s current and future electricity generation infrastructure and candidate deep geologic CO2 storage formations. Overall, between 180 and 580 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired integrated gasification combined cycle with CCS (IGCC+CCS) capacity is built by 2045 in these four scenarios, requiring between 12 and 41gigatons of CO2 (GtCO2) of storage in regional deep geologic reservoirs across the USA. Nearly all of this CO2 is from new IGCC+CCS systems, which start to deploy after 2025. Relatively little IGCC+CCS capacity is built before that time, primarily under unique niche opportunities. For the most part, CO2 emissions prices will likely need to be sustained at well over $10-20/ton CO2 before CCS begins tomore » deploy on a large scale within the electric power sector. Within these broad national trends, a highly nuanced picture of CCS deployment across the USA emerges. Across the four scenarios studied here, some North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) regions do not employ any CCS while others build more than 100 GW of CCS-enabled generation capacity. One region sees as much as 50% of their geologic CO2 storage reservoirs’ total theoretical capacity consumed by 2045, while the majority of the regions still have more than 90% of their potential storage capacity available to meet storage needs in the second half of the century and beyond.« less

Authors:
; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
909680
Report Number(s):
PNWD-SA-7449
TRN: US200723%%132
DOE Contract Number:
AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 1(2):261-270; Journal Volume: 1; Journal Issue: 2
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
03 NATURAL GAS; CAPACITY; CARBON DIOXIDE; CLIMATES; COMBINED CYCLES; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ELECTRIC POWER; ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCILS; NATURAL GAS; POTENTIAL ENERGY; STORAGE; USA; Carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage; electric power; climate change

Citation Formats

Wise, Marshall A., Dooley, James J., Dahowski, Robert T., and Davidson, Casie L. Modelling the impacts of climate policy on the deployment of carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage across electric power regions in the United States. United States: N. p., 2007. Web. doi:10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00017-5.
Wise, Marshall A., Dooley, James J., Dahowski, Robert T., & Davidson, Casie L. Modelling the impacts of climate policy on the deployment of carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage across electric power regions in the United States. United States. doi:10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00017-5.
Wise, Marshall A., Dooley, James J., Dahowski, Robert T., and Davidson, Casie L. Mon . "Modelling the impacts of climate policy on the deployment of carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage across electric power regions in the United States". United States. doi:10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00017-5.
@article{osti_909680,
title = {Modelling the impacts of climate policy on the deployment of carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage across electric power regions in the United States},
author = {Wise, Marshall A. and Dooley, James J. and Dahowski, Robert T. and Davidson, Casie L.},
abstractNote = {This paper summarizes the results of a first-of-its-kind holistic, integrated economic analysis of the potential role of carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) technologies across the regional segments of the United States of America (USA) electric power sector, over the time frame 2005-2045, in response to two hypothetical emissions control policies analyzed against two potential energy supply futures that include updated and substantially higher projected prices for natural gas. A key feature of this paper’s analysis is an attempt to explicitly model the inherent heterogeneities that exist in both the nation’s current and future electricity generation infrastructure and candidate deep geologic CO2 storage formations. Overall, between 180 and 580 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired integrated gasification combined cycle with CCS (IGCC+CCS) capacity is built by 2045 in these four scenarios, requiring between 12 and 41gigatons of CO2 (GtCO2) of storage in regional deep geologic reservoirs across the USA. Nearly all of this CO2 is from new IGCC+CCS systems, which start to deploy after 2025. Relatively little IGCC+CCS capacity is built before that time, primarily under unique niche opportunities. For the most part, CO2 emissions prices will likely need to be sustained at well over $10-20/ton CO2 before CCS begins to deploy on a large scale within the electric power sector. Within these broad national trends, a highly nuanced picture of CCS deployment across the USA emerges. Across the four scenarios studied here, some North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) regions do not employ any CCS while others build more than 100 GW of CCS-enabled generation capacity. One region sees as much as 50% of their geologic CO2 storage reservoirs’ total theoretical capacity consumed by 2045, while the majority of the regions still have more than 90% of their potential storage capacity available to meet storage needs in the second half of the century and beyond.},
doi = {10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00017-5},
journal = {International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 1(2):261-270},
number = 2,
volume = 1,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Apr 02 00:00:00 EDT 2007},
month = {Mon Apr 02 00:00:00 EDT 2007}
}
  • Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) have the potential to be an economic means of reducing direct (or tailpipe) carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from the transportation sector. However, without a climate policy that places a limit on CO2 emissions from the electric generation sector, the net impact of widespread deployment of PHEVs on overall U.S. CO2 emissions is not as clear. A comprehensive analysis must consider jointly the transportation and electricity sectors, along with feedbacks to the rest of the energy system. In this paper, we use the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s MiniCAM model to perform an integrated economic analysis ofmore » the penetration of PHEVs and the resulting impact on total U.S. CO2 emissions.« less
  • Cited by 5
  • Temporary and permanent carbon storage from biogenic sources is seen as a way to mitigate climate change. The aim of this work is to illustrate the need to harmonize the quantification of such mitigation across all possible storage pools in the bio- and anthroposphere. We investigate nine alternative storage cases and a wide array of bio-resource pools: from annual crops, short rotation woody crops, medium rotation temperate forests, and long rotation boreal forests. For each feedstock type and biogenic carbon storage pool, we quantify the carbon cycle climate impact due to the skewed time distribution between emission and sequestration fluxesmore » in the bio- and anthroposphere. Additional consideration of the climate impact from albedo changes in forests is also illustrated for the boreal forest case. When characterizing climate impact with global warming potentials (GWP), we find a large variance in results which is attributed to different combinations of biomass storage and feedstock systems. The storage of biogenic carbon in any storage pool does not always confer climate benefits: even when biogenic carbon is stored long-term in durable product pools, the climate outcome may still be undesirable when the carbon is sourced from slow-growing biomass feedstock. For example, when biogenic carbon from Norway Spruce from Norway is stored in furniture with a mean life time of 43 years, a climate change impact of 0.08 kg CO{sub 2}eq per kg CO{sub 2} stored (100 year time horizon (TH)) would result. It was also found that when biogenic carbon is stored in a pool with negligible leakage to the atmosphere, the resulting GWP factor is not necessarily − 1 CO{sub 2}eq per kg CO{sub 2} stored. As an example, when biogenic CO{sub 2} from Norway Spruce biomass is stored in geological reservoirs with no leakage, we estimate a GWP of − 0.56 kg CO{sub 2}eq per kg CO{sub 2} stored (100 year TH) when albedo effects are also included. The large variance in GWPs across the range of resource and carbon storage options considered indicates that more accurate accounting will require case-specific factors derived following the methodological guidelines provided in this and recent manuscripts. -- Highlights: • Climate impacts of stored biogenic carbon (bio-C) are consistently quantified. • Temporary storage of bio-C does not always equate to a climate cooling impact. • 1 unit of bio-C stored over a time horizon does not always equate to − 1 unit CO{sub 2}eq. • Discrepancies of climate change impact quantification in literature are clarified.« less
  • The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fifth Assessment (to be published in 2013-2014) will to a significant degree be built around four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) that are intended to represent four scenarios of future development of greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and concentrations that span the widest range of potential future atmospheric radiative forcing. Under the very stringent climate policy implied by the 2.6 W/m2 overshoot scenario, all electricity is eventually generated from low carbon sources. However, carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technologies never comprise more than 50% of total electricity generation in that very stringent scenariomore » or in any of the other cases examined here. There are significant differences among the cases studied here in terms of how CCS technologies are used, with the most prominent being is the significant expansion of biomass+CCS as the stringency of the implied climate policy increases. Cumulative CO2 storage across the three cases that imply binding greenhouse gas constraints ranges by nearly an order of magnitude from 170GtCO2 (radiative forcing of 6.0W/m2 in 2100) to 1600GtCO2 (2.6W/m2 in 2100) over the course of this century. This potential demand for deep geologic CO2 storage is well within published estimates of total global CO2 storage capacity.« less