IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v382y2025ics0306261924026114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Net energy analysis and net carbon benefits of CO2 capture and transport infrastructure for energy applications and industrial clusters

Author

Listed:
  • Isoli, Niccolò
  • Chaczykowski, Maciej

Abstract

Carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS) will play one of the major roles in eradicating the contributions of industrialized countries to climate change and reaching net zero goals. CCUS clusters, where several industrial facilities create a network of emitters and share CO2 transport and storage infrastructure, can provide strategic benefits for developing carbon management technologies. This work contributes to the assessment of CO2 capture and transport infrastructure in terms of energy penalties and carbon footprints and enables a targeted improvement of the CCUS cluster sequencing process. In particular, the objective of this simulation-based study was to facilitate the identification of the technical and environmental characteristics of capture plants and pipeline networks for power, industrial and hydrogen projects, as part of cluster sequencing competition. To this end, a net energy analysis was used to assess the energy cost/benefit ratio of power decarbonisation projects, while carbon return on investment analysis provided results for emissions of carbon capture infrastructure in industrial and hydrogen decarbonisation projects, enabling the identification of the priority network elements for achieving the expected decarbonisation outcome. The hydraulic modeling approach and the results of the steady-state simulation of the pipeline network were used for the extension of the boundaries of the net energy analysis and taking into account the effect of transport infrastructure. Two case studies covering the Polish CCUS landscape are presented, the first related to the power sector and the second to industrial and hydrogen decarbonisation projects. The studies include preliminary sizing of capture plants and pipeline transport infrastructure, based on the assumption of the offshore storage site (or receiving terminal) in the Baltic Sea. The network has a tree structure and consists of 81 branches, 50 sending nodes, 3 compressor stations and one receiving node in the storage site location. The emission sources are coal- and natural gas-fired power plants, refineries, cement and fertilizer plants. The results show that the energy return on energy invested ratio of potential carbon capture projects in Polish energy market ranges from 8.3:1 to 14.7:1, while the carbon return on carbon invested ratio of industrial carbon capture projects ranges from 4.1:1 to 12.9:1. Therefore, the modeling framework incorporating net energy and net carbon analysis provides criteria for the evaluation of CO2 sources that facilitate cluster sequencing programs and support future CCUS deployment.

Suggested Citation

  • Isoli, Niccolò & Chaczykowski, Maciej, 2025. "Net energy analysis and net carbon benefits of CO2 capture and transport infrastructure for energy applications and industrial clusters," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 382(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:382:y:2025:i:c:s0306261924026114
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.125227
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261924026114
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.125227?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhaoyang Kong & Xiucheng Dong & Bo Xu & Rui Li & Qiang Yin & Cuifang Song, 2015. "EROI Analysis for Direct Coal Liquefaction without and with CCS: The Case of the Shenhua DCL Project in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Court, Victor & Fizaine, Florian, 2017. "Long-Term Estimates of the Energy-Return-on-Investment (EROI) of Coal, Oil, and Gas Global Productions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 145-159.
    3. Lewis C. King & Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh, 2018. "Implications of net energy-return-on-investment for a low-carbon energy transition," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 334-340, April.
    4. Costa, Isabella & Rochedo, Pedro & Costa, Daniele & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena & Schaeffer, Roberto & Szklo, Alexandre, 2019. "Placing hubs in CO2 pipelines: An application to industrial CO2 emissions in the Iberian Peninsula," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 22-31.
    5. Chen, Siyuan & Liu, Jiangfeng & Zhang, Qi & Teng, Fei & McLellan, Benjamin C., 2022. "A critical review on deployment planning and risk analysis of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) toward carbon neutrality," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    6. Louis Delannoy & Pierre-Yves Longaretti & David. J. Murphy & Emmanuel Prados, 2021. "Assessing Global Long-Term EROI of Gas: A Net-Energy Perspective on the Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-16, August.
    7. Sgouris Sgouridis & Michael Carbajales-Dale & Denes Csala & Matteo Chiesa & Ugo Bardi, 2019. "Comparative net energy analysis of renewable electricity and carbon capture and storage," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 456-465, June.
    8. 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).
    9. Zhang, Jinrui & Meerman, Hans & Benders, René & Faaij, André, 2021. "Techno-economic and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions assessment of liquefied natural gas supply chain in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    10. Court, Victor & Fizaine, Florian, 2017. "Long-Term Estimates of the Energy-Return-on-Investment (EROI) of Coal, Oil, and Gas Global Productions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 145-159.
    11. David J. Murphy & Charles A.S. Hall & Michael Dale & Cutler Cleveland, 2011. "Order from Chaos: A Preliminary Protocol for Determining the EROI of Fuels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(10), pages 1-20, October.
    12. Graham Palmer, 2017. "A Framework for Incorporating EROI into Electrical Storage," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 1-19, June.
    13. Marco Raugei, 2019. "Net energy analysis must not compare apples and oranges," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 4(2), pages 86-88, February.
    14. Leung, Dennis Y.C. & Caramanna, Giorgio & Maroto-Valer, M. Mercedes, 2014. "An overview of current status of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 426-443.
    15. Singh, Udayan & Colosi, Lisa M., 2021. "The case for estimating carbon return on investment (CROI) for CCUS platforms," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    16. Jan-Horst Keppler & Stefan Lorenczik, 2020. "Projected Costs of Generating Electricity: 2020 Edition," Working Papers hal-03998435, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Delannoy, Louis & Longaretti, Pierre-Yves & Murphy, David J. & Prados, Emmanuel, 2021. "Peak oil and the low-carbon energy transition: A net-energy perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    2. Jacques, Pierre & Delannoy, Louis & Andrieu, Baptiste & Yilmaz, Devrim & Jeanmart, Hervé & Godin, Antoine, 2023. "Assessing the economic consequences of an energy transition through a biophysical stock-flow consistent model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    3. David J. Murphy & Marco Raugei & Michael Carbajales-Dale & Brenda Rubio Estrada, 2022. "Energy Return on Investment of Major Energy Carriers: Review and Harmonization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Louis Delannoy & Pierre-Yves Longaretti & David. J. Murphy & Emmanuel Prados, 2021. "Assessing Global Long-Term EROI of Gas: A Net-Energy Perspective on the Energy Transition," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Kevin Pahud & Greg de Temmerman, 2022. "Overview of the EROI, a tool to measure energy availability through the energy transition," Post-Print hal-03780085, HAL.
    6. Hong, Sanghyun & Kim, Eunsung & Jeong, Saerok, 2023. "Evaluating the sustainability of the hydrogen economy using multi-criteria decision-making analysis in Korea," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 485-492.
    7. Marco Vittorio Ecclesia & João Santos & Paul E. Brockway & Tiago Domingos, 2022. "A Comprehensive Societal Energy Return on Investment Study of Portugal Reveals a Low but Stable Value," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.
    8. Solomon, A.A. & Sahin, Hasret & Breyer, Christian, 2024. "The pitfall in designing future electrical power systems without considering energy return on investment in planning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 369(C).
    9. Bartłomiej Bajan & Joanna Łukasiewicz & Agnieszka Poczta-Wajda & Walenty Poczta, 2021. "Edible Energy Production and Energy Return on Investment—Long-Term Analysis of Global Changes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-16, February.
    10. Victor Court, 2019. "An Estimation of Different Minimum Exergy Return Ratios Required for Society," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 1-13, September.
    11. Adrien Fabre, 2018. "Evolution of EROIs of Electricity Until 2050: Estimation Using the Input-Output Model THEMIS," Policy Papers 2018.09, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    12. Hasret Sahin & A. A. Solomon & Arman Aghahosseini & Christian Breyer, 2024. "Systemwide energy return on investment in a sustainable transition towards net zero power systems," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    13. Lamorlette, A., 2023. "A coupled model of global energy production and ERoEI applied to photovoltaic and wind, an estimation of net production," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(PB).
    14. Luciano Celi, 2021. "Deriving EROI for Thirty Large Oil Companies Using the CO2 Proxy from 1999 to 2018," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 1-12, December.
    15. Huang, Chen & Gu, Baihe & Chen, Yingchao & Tan, Xianchun & Feng, Lianyong, 2019. "Energy return on energy, carbon, and water investment in oil and gas resource extraction: Methods and applications to the Daqing and Shengli oilfields," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    16. Aljoša Slameršak & Giorgos Kallis & Daniel W. O’Neill, 2022. "Energy requirements and carbon emissions for a low-carbon energy transition," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    17. Aguilera, Eduardo & Díaz-Gaona, Cipriano & García-Laureano, Raquel & Reyes-Palomo, Carolina & Guzmán, Gloria I. & Ortolani, Livia & Sánchez-Rodríguez, Manuel & Rodríguez-Estévez, Vicente, 2020. "Agroecology for adaptation to climate change and resource depletion in the Mediterranean region. A review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    18. David Grassian & Daniel Olsen, 2019. "Lifecycle Energy Accounting of Three Small Offshore Oil Fields," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-23, July.
    19. Walmsley, Timothy G. & Walmsley, Michael R.W. & Varbanov, Petar S. & Klemeš, Jiří J., 2018. "Energy Ratio analysis and accounting for renewable and non-renewable electricity generation: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 328-345.
    20. Sampedro, Jon & Kyle, Page & Ramig, Christopher W. & Tanner, Daniel & Huster, Jonathan E. & Wise, Marshall A., 2021. "Dynamic linking of upstream energy and freight demands for bio and fossil energy pathways in the Global Change Analysis Model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 302(C).

    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:eee:appene:v:382:y:2025:i:c:s0306261924026114. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    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.