IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/greenh/v11y2021i1p144-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting for the role of transport and storage infrastructure costs in carbon negative bioenergy deployment

Author

Listed:
  • Udayan Singh
  • Erica M. Loudermilk
  • Lisa M. Colosi

Abstract

Deployment of bioenergy with CO2 capture and storage (BECCS) is projected to be crucial in reducing the United States’ CO2 emissions intensity. In this paper, we utilize a spatially explicit costing model to evaluate how regional biophysical factors and geography affect BECCS viability. We find that the cost of biomass provision and CO2 transport and storage are an average of $20/t‐CO2 and $16/t‐CO2 for aquatic and terrestrial BECCS, respectively. Assuming rapid technological development in the CO2 capture domain, this corresponds to 40–72% of land area in the conterminous United States exhibiting systems integration costs compatible with 2030 carbon prices (median $90/t‐CO2). Results are strongly influenced by the cost of geologic sequestration, in particular storage quality (as driven by depth, permeability, etc.) and available capacity, rather than simply proximity to nearby CO2 sources. For this reason, the Southeast presents appealing BECCS readiness owing to high biomass productivity (several counties with yield >100 000 dry ton of biomass per year) interspersed with well‐explored sinks with large sequestration potential and optimal reservoir quality with permeability >500 mD. We also find that geologic storage capacity is unlikely to be a major biophysical constraint, as sink utilization in most states would likely remain below 10% at the projected rates of BECCS deployment to achieve the 2 °C target and as low as 1% in Texas, Oklahoma, and Alabama. The analysis also reveals subtle secondary outcomes; for example, to what extent different regions may be well poised to adopt different, complementary negative emissions technologies based on specific confluences of circumstances. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Udayan Singh & Erica M. Loudermilk & Lisa M. Colosi, 2021. "Accounting for the role of transport and storage infrastructure costs in carbon negative bioenergy deployment," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 11(1), pages 144-164, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:greenh:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:144-164
    DOI: 10.1002/ghg.2041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.2041
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ghg.2041?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Viana, H. & Cohen, Warren B. & Lopes, D. & Aranha, J., 2010. "Assessment of forest biomass for use as energy. GIS-based analysis of geographical availability and locations of wood-fired power plants in Portugal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(8), pages 2551-2560, August.
    2. Ferreira, L.R.A. & Otto, R.B. & Silva, F.P. & De Souza, S.N.M. & De Souza, S.S. & Ando Junior, O.H., 2018. "Review of the energy potential of the residual biomass for the distributed generation in Brazil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 440-455.
    3. Clair Gough & Paul Upham, 2011. "Biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS or Bio‐CCS)," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 1(4), pages 324-334, December.
    4. Feijoo, Felipe & Iyer, Gokul C. & Avraam, Charalampos & Siddiqui, Sauleh A. & Clarke, Leon E. & Sankaranarayanan, Sriram & Binsted, Matthew T. & Patel, Pralit L. & Prates, Nathalia C. & Torres-Alfaro,, 2018. "The future of natural gas infrastructure development in the United states," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 149-166.
    5. Viebahn, Peter & Daniel, Vallentin & Samuel, Höller, 2012. "Integrated assessment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in the German power sector and comparison with the deployment of renewable energies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 238-248.
    6. Middleton, Richard S. & Bielicki, Jeffrey M., 2009. "A scalable infrastructure model for carbon capture and storage: SimCCS," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 1052-1060, March.
    7. Rubin, Edward S. & Chen, Chao & Rao, Anand B., 2007. "Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4444-4454, September.
    8. Dharmender Yadav & Munish K. Chandel & Pramod Kumar, 2016. "Suitability of CO 2 capture technologies for carbon capture and storage in India," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 6(4), pages 519-530, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sun, Xiaolong & Alcalde, Juan & Bakhtbidar, Mahdi & Elío, Javier & Vilarrasa, Víctor & Canal, Jacobo & Ballesteros, Julio & Heinemann, Niklas & Haszeldine, Stuart & Cavanagh, Andrew & Vega-Maza, David, 2021. "Hubs and clusters approach to unlock the development of carbon capture and storage – Case study in Spain," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 300(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lee, Suh-Young & Lee, Jae-Uk & Lee, In-Beum & Han, Jeehoon, 2017. "Design under uncertainty of carbon capture and storage infrastructure considering cost, environmental impact, and preference on risk," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 725-738.
    2. Jayadev, Gopika & Leibowicz, Benjamin D. & Kutanoglu, Erhan, 2020. "U.S. electricity infrastructure of the future: Generation and transmission pathways through 2050," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    3. Jagu Schippers, Emma & Massol, Olivier, 2022. "Unlocking CO2 infrastructure deployment: The impact of carbon removal accounting," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    4. Cai, W. & Singham, D.I. & Craparo, E.M. & White, J.A., 2014. "Pricing Contracts Under Uncertainty in a Carbon Capture and Storage Framework," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 56-62.
    5. Nadine Heitmann & Christine Bertram & Daiju Narita, 2012. "Embedding CCS infrastructure into the European electricity system: a policy coordination problem," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 669-686, August.
    6. Rey, J.R.C. & Pio, D.T. & Tarelho, L.A.C., 2021. "Biomass direct gasification for electricity generation and natural gas replacement in the lime kilns of the pulp and paper industry: A techno-economic analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    7. Lee, Jui-Yuan & Tan, Raymond R. & Chen, Cheng-Liang, 2014. "A unified model for the deployment of carbon capture and storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 140-148.
    8. Tola, Vittorio & Pettinau, Alberto, 2014. "Power generation plants with carbon capture and storage: A techno-economic comparison between coal combustion and gasification technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1461-1474.
    9. Višković, Alfredo & Franki, Vladimir & Valentić, Vladimir, 2014. "CCS (carbon capture and storage) investment possibility in South East Europe: A case study for Croatia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 325-337.
    10. Middleton, Richard S. & Eccles, Jordan K., 2013. "The complex future of CO2 capture and storage: Variable electricity generation and fossil fuel power," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 66-73.
    11. Manzolini, G. & Sanchez Fernandez, E. & Rezvani, S. & Macchi, E. & Goetheer, E.L.V. & Vlugt, T.J.H., 2015. "Economic assessment of novel amine based CO2 capture technologies integrated in power plants based on European Benchmarking Task Force methodology," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 546-558.
    12. Siefert, Nicholas S. & Litster, Shawn, 2013. "Exergy and economic analyses of advanced IGCC–CCS and IGFC–CCS power plants," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 315-328.
    13. Richard S. Middleton & Jonathan S. Levine & Jeffrey M. Bielicki & Hari S. Viswanathan & J. William Carey & Philip H. Stauffer, 2015. "Jumpstarting commercial‐scale CO2 capture and storage with ethylene production and enhanced oil recovery in the US Gulf," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 5(3), pages 241-253, June.
    14. Bhumika Gupta & Salil K. Sen, 2019. "Carbon Capture Usage and Storage with Scale-up: Energy Finance through Bricolage Deploying the Co-integration Methodology," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 9(6), pages 146-153.
    15. Kemp, Alexander G. & Kasim, Sola, 2013. "The economics of CO2-EOR cluster developments in the UK Central North Sea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1344-1355.
    16. Devine, Mel T. & Russo, Marianna, 2019. "Liquefied natural gas and gas storage valuation: Lessons from the integrated Irish and UK markets," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1389-1406.
    17. Mohsen Jamali & Esmaeil Bakhshandeh & Mohammad Yaghoubi Khanghahi & Carmine Crecchio, 2021. "Metadata Analysis to Evaluate Environmental Impacts of Wheat Residues Burning on Soil Quality in Developing and Developed Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-13, June.
    18. Lai, N.Y.G. & Yap, E.H. & Lee, C.W., 2011. "Viability of CCS: A broad-based assessment for Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3608-3616.
    19. Sun, Alexander Y., 2020. "Optimal carbon storage reservoir management through deep reinforcement learning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    20. Massol, Olivier & Tchung-Ming, Stéphane & Banal-Estañol, Albert, 2018. "Capturing industrial CO2 emissions in Spain: Infrastructures, costs and break-even prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 545-560.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:greenh:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:144-164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2152-3878 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.