Techno‐economic assessment of carbon capture, utilization and storage for coal‐fired power generation, and CO 2 ‐enhanced oil recovery in the USA: an Ohio case study
[1];
- Energy Department Battelle Memorial Institute Columbus OH USA, The Bredesen Center University of Tennessee Knoxville TN USA
- Energy Department Battelle Memorial Institute Columbus OH USA
- Energy Department Battelle Memorial Institute Columbus OH USA, California Department of Conservation Bakersfield CA USA
- Energy Department Battelle Memorial Institute Columbus OH USA, California Public Utilities Commission San Francisco CA USA
Abstract The economic feasibility of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) enhanced oil recovery (EOR) to offset CO 2 capture costs from a coal‐fired power plant are evaluated for 36 source‐sink scenarios in Ohio; one of the top ten states for fossil‐fuel use and CO 2 emissions in the United States. Six capture scenarios are examined for a representative 550 megawatt (MW) coal‐fired power plant, and three CO 2 ‐EOR injection scenarios are evaluated for both East Canton oil field and Gore consolidated oil field. The potential costs and credits associated with CO 2 storage related tax incentives are also considered. Power plant capture performance and costs integrated with field‐scale CO 2 ‐EOR techno‐economics suggest that there are potentially feasible scenarios for capture, transport, and CO 2 ‐EOR storage of 25%, 50%, and 90% of CO 2 emissions, respectively, from a 550 MW power plant. Economically feasible outcomes exhibiting net present values of $2191, $1380, and $1940 million are estimated for the 25%, 50%, and 90% capture scenarios, respectively. On average, the 45Q tax credit for CO 2 storage affords a $3–$7 per barrel decrease in the minimum oil price required to break‐even on the project. In all source‐sink scenarios qualifying as feasible, the CO 2 capture costs incurred by the power plant are offset by revenue from CO 2 ‐EOR and are not passed on to ratepayers during the 30‐year analysis time frame. The most economical outcome for supporting a commercial carbon capture, utilization, and storage project in Ohio is also identified, and the potential impact of CO 2 ‐EOR operational strategy on source‐sink feasibility is discussed. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
- Sponsoring Organization:
- USDOE
- Grant/Contract Number:
- FC26-05NT42589
- OSTI ID:
- 1566921
- Journal Information:
- Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Journal Name: Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology Journal Issue: 6 Vol. 9; ISSN 2152-3878
- Publisher:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)Copyright Statement
- Country of Publication:
- United Kingdom
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
A cash flow model of an integrated industrial CCS-EOR project in a petrochemical corridor: A case study in Louisiana
Economic and operational investigation of CO2 sequestration through enhanced oil recovery in unconventional reservoirs in Colorado, USA