DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of carbon capture for petroleum refining, ammonia production, and thermoelectric power generation in the United States

Abstract

Un­der­stand­ing op­por­tu­ni­ties for car­bon cap­ture and stor­age (CCS) across sec­tors is im­por­tant for choos­ing among green­house gas mit­i­ga­tion strate­gies. This study ex­plores the cra­dle-to-gate life cy­cle en­vi­ron­men­tal im­pacts of amine sol­vent based car­bon cap­ture sys­tems on U.S. am­mo­nia pro­duc­tion, pe­tro­leum re­finer­ies, su­per­crit­i­cal and sub­crit­i­cal pul­ver­ized coal power plants, and nat­ural gas com­bined cy­cle plants. We use pub­licly avail­able data to cre­ate com­pre­hen­sive life cy­cle in­ven­to­ries for pe­tro­leum re­fin­ing and am­mo­nia pro­duc­tion for 2014. We use these processes and ad­di­tional mod­eled car­bon cap­ture processes to com­pare car­bon cap­ture on am­mo­nia pro­duc­tion and pe­tro­leum re­fin­ing to in­ven­to­ries for coal and nat­ural gas fired elec­tric­ity with car­bon cap­ture. This analy­sis found that par­tic­u­late mat­ter for­ma­tion po­ten­tial, eu­troph­i­ca­tion po­ten­tial, and wa­ter con­sump­tion in­crease in all sec­tors as a re­sult of in­stal­la­tion and op­er­a­tion of CCS tech­nolo­gies per kg CO2e abated, while the ef­fect on acid­i­fi­ca­tion po­ten­tial and par­tic­u­late mater for­ma­tion po­ten­tial is mixed. The dif­fer­ences in trade­offs among sys­tems are dri­ven pri­mar­ily by three fac­tors: the com­bus­tion emis­sions from fuel used to op­er­ate the cap­ture unit, the up­stream sup­ply chain to ob­tain that fuel, and the rel­a­tive im­pact of the car­bon cap­ture unit on base­line flue gas emis­sions (i.e. pos­si­ble co-ben­e­fits from cap­ture).

Authors:
ORCiD logo; ; ; ; ; ; ; ORCiD logo;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Renewable Power Office. Wind Energy Technologies Office
OSTI Identifier:
1571707
Alternate Identifier(s):
OSTI ID: 1603665
Grant/Contract Number:  
AC02-06CH11357
Resource Type:
Published Article
Journal Name:
International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Name: International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control Journal Volume: 91 Journal Issue: C; Journal ID: ISSN 1750-5836
Publisher:
Elsevier
Country of Publication:
Netherlands
Language:
English
Subject:
02 PETROLEUM; ammonia; carbon capture; life cycle assessment; petroleum refining; thermoelectric power

Citation Formats

Young, Ben, Krynock, Michelle, Carlson, Derrick, Hawkins, Troy R., Marriott, Joe, Morelli, Ben, Jamieson, Matthew, Cooney, Gregory, and Skone, Timothy J. Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of carbon capture for petroleum refining, ammonia production, and thermoelectric power generation in the United States. Netherlands: N. p., 2019. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102821.
Young, Ben, Krynock, Michelle, Carlson, Derrick, Hawkins, Troy R., Marriott, Joe, Morelli, Ben, Jamieson, Matthew, Cooney, Gregory, & Skone, Timothy J. Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of carbon capture for petroleum refining, ammonia production, and thermoelectric power generation in the United States. Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102821
Young, Ben, Krynock, Michelle, Carlson, Derrick, Hawkins, Troy R., Marriott, Joe, Morelli, Ben, Jamieson, Matthew, Cooney, Gregory, and Skone, Timothy J. Sun . "Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of carbon capture for petroleum refining, ammonia production, and thermoelectric power generation in the United States". Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102821.
@article{osti_1571707,
title = {Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of carbon capture for petroleum refining, ammonia production, and thermoelectric power generation in the United States},
author = {Young, Ben and Krynock, Michelle and Carlson, Derrick and Hawkins, Troy R. and Marriott, Joe and Morelli, Ben and Jamieson, Matthew and Cooney, Gregory and Skone, Timothy J.},
abstractNote = {Un­der­stand­ing op­por­tu­ni­ties for car­bon cap­ture and stor­age (CCS) across sec­tors is im­por­tant for choos­ing among green­house gas mit­i­ga­tion strate­gies. This study ex­plores the cra­dle-to-gate life cy­cle en­vi­ron­men­tal im­pacts of amine sol­vent based car­bon cap­ture sys­tems on U.S. am­mo­nia pro­duc­tion, pe­tro­leum re­finer­ies, su­per­crit­i­cal and sub­crit­i­cal pul­ver­ized coal power plants, and nat­ural gas com­bined cy­cle plants. We use pub­licly avail­able data to cre­ate com­pre­hen­sive life cy­cle in­ven­to­ries for pe­tro­leum re­fin­ing and am­mo­nia pro­duc­tion for 2014. We use these processes and ad­di­tional mod­eled car­bon cap­ture processes to com­pare car­bon cap­ture on am­mo­nia pro­duc­tion and pe­tro­leum re­fin­ing to in­ven­to­ries for coal and nat­ural gas fired elec­tric­ity with car­bon cap­ture. This analy­sis found that par­tic­u­late mat­ter for­ma­tion po­ten­tial, eu­troph­i­ca­tion po­ten­tial, and wa­ter con­sump­tion in­crease in all sec­tors as a re­sult of in­stal­la­tion and op­er­a­tion of CCS tech­nolo­gies per kg CO2e abated, while the ef­fect on acid­i­fi­ca­tion po­ten­tial and par­tic­u­late mater for­ma­tion po­ten­tial is mixed. The dif­fer­ences in trade­offs among sys­tems are dri­ven pri­mar­ily by three fac­tors: the com­bus­tion emis­sions from fuel used to op­er­ate the cap­ture unit, the up­stream sup­ply chain to ob­tain that fuel, and the rel­a­tive im­pact of the car­bon cap­ture unit on base­line flue gas emis­sions (i.e. pos­si­ble co-ben­e­fits from cap­ture).},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102821},
journal = {International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control},
number = C,
volume = 91,
place = {Netherlands},
year = {2019},
month = {12}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102821

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 2 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Save / Share:

Works referenced in this record:

Comparison of carbon balance measuring tools in an enhanced oil recovery project based on the carbon dioxide from the ammonia production process streams
journal, February 2017

  • Morales Mora, Miguel Angel; Pretelín Vergara, Froebel Carlos; Martínez Delgadillo, Sergio Alejandro
  • Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 144
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.114

Mining Available Data from the United States Environmental Protection Agency to Support Rapid Life Cycle Inventory Modeling of Chemical Manufacturing
journal, August 2016

  • Cashman, Sarah A.; Meyer, David E.; Edelen, Ashley N.
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 50, Issue 17
  • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b02160

From MEA to demixing solvents and future steps, a roadmap for lowering the cost of post-combustion carbon capture
journal, July 2011

  • Raynal, Ludovic; Bouillon, Pierre-Antoine; Gomez, Adrien
  • Chemical Engineering Journal, Vol. 171, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2011.01.008

Carbon capture and storage policy in the United States: A new coalition endeavors to change existing policy
journal, May 2011


A technical and economical evaluation of CO2 capture from FCC units
journal, February 2009


Heat supply alternatives for CO2 capture in the process industry
journal, May 2012

  • Johansson, Daniella; Sjöblom, Jonas; Berntsson, Thore
  • International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, Vol. 8
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.02.007

A Review of Post-combustion CO2 Capture Technologies from Coal-fired Power Plants
journal, July 2017


Advances in CO2 capture technology—The U.S. Department of Energy's Carbon Sequestration Program
journal, January 2008

  • Figueroa, José D.; Fout, Timothy; Plasynski, Sean
  • International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, Vol. 2, Issue 1, p. 9-20
  • DOI: 10.1016/S1750-5836(07)00094-1

Techno–Economic Evaluation of Technologies to Mitigate Greenhouse Gas Emissions at North American Refineries
journal, January 2017

  • Motazedi, Kavan; Abella, Jessica P.; Bergerson, Joule A.
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 51, Issue 3
  • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b04606

Updated US and Canadian normalization factors for TRACI 2.1
journal, May 2013

  • Ryberg, Morten; Vieira, Marisa D. M.; Zgola, Melissa
  • Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, Vol. 16, Issue 2
  • DOI: 10.1007/s10098-013-0629-z

Comparative assessment of CO2 capture technologies for carbon-intensive industrial processes
journal, February 2012

  • Kuramochi, Takeshi; Ramírez, Andrea; Turkenburg, Wim
  • Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, Vol. 38, Issue 1
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2011.05.001

Oxy-combustion Technology Development for Fluid Catalytic Crackers (FCC) – Large Pilot Scale Demonstration
journal, January 2013


Sourcing of Steam and Electricity for Carbon Capture Retrofits
journal, October 2017

  • Supekar, Sarang D.; Skerlos, Steven J.
  • Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 51, Issue 21
  • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b01973

Using national inventories for estimating environmental impacts of products from industrial sectors: a case study of ethanol and gasoline
journal, February 2015

  • Sengupta, Debalina; Hawkins, Troy R.; Smith, Raymond L.
  • The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 20, Issue 5
  • DOI: 10.1007/s11367-015-0859-x