IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v88y2011i11p3821-3831.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The cost of pipelining climate change mitigation: An overview of the economics of CH4, CO2 and H2 transportation

Author

Listed:
  • van der Zwaan, B.C.C.
  • Schoots, K.
  • Rivera-Tinoco, R.
  • Verbong, G.P.J.

Abstract

Gases like CH4, CO2 and H2 may play a key role in establishing a sustainable energy system: CH4 is the least carbon-intensive fossil energy resource; CO2 capture and storage can significantly reduce the climate footprint of especially fossil-based electricity generation; and the use of H2 as energy carrier could enable carbon-free automotive transportation. Yet the construction of large pipeline infrastructures usually constitutes a major and time-consuming undertaking, because of safety and environmental issues, legal and (geo)political siting arguments, technically un-trivial installation processes, and/or high investment cost requirements. In this article we focus on the latter and present an overview of both the total costs and cost components of the distribution of these three gases via pipelines. Possible intricacies and external factors that strongly influence these costs, like the choice of location and terrain, are also included in our analysis. Our distribution cost breakdown estimates are based on transportation data for CH4, which we adjust for CO2 and H2 in order to account for the specific additional characteristics of these two gases. The overall trend is that pipeline construction is no longer subject to significant cost reductions. For the purpose of designing energy and climate policy we therefore know in principle with reasonable certainty what the minimum distribution cost components of future energy systems are that rely on pipelining these gases. We describe the reasons why we observe limited learning-by-doing and explain why negligible construction cost reductions for future CH4, CO2 and H2 pipeline projects can be expected. Cost data of individual pipeline projects may strongly deviate from the global average because of national or regional effects related to the type of terrain, but also to varying costs of labor and fluctuating market prices of components like steel.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Zwaan, B.C.C. & Schoots, K. & Rivera-Tinoco, R. & Verbong, G.P.J., 2011. "The cost of pipelining climate change mitigation: An overview of the economics of CH4, CO2 and H2 transportation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(11), pages 3821-3831.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:88:y:2011:i:11:p:3821-3831
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.05.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030626191100314X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.05.019?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt2gk0j8kq is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt1804p4vw is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt7p3500g2 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Sagar, Ambuj D. & van der Zwaan, Bob, 2006. "Technological innovation in the energy sector: R&D, deployment, and learning-by-doing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(17), pages 2601-2608, November.
    5. repec:cdl:itsdav:qt9m40m75r is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Ferioli, F. & Schoots, K. & van der Zwaan, B.C.C., 2009. "Use and limitations of learning curves for energy technology policy: A component-learning hypothesis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2525-2535, July.
    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. Onyebuchi, V.E. & Kolios, A. & Hanak, D.P. & Biliyok, C. & Manovic, V., 2018. "A systematic review of key challenges of CO2 transport via pipelines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2563-2583.
    2. Strogen, Bret & Bell, Kendon & Breunig, Hanna & Zilberman, David, 2016. "Environmental, public health, and safety assessment of fuel pipelines and other freight transportation modes," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 266-276.
    3. Liemberger, Werner & Halmschlager, Daniel & Miltner, Martin & Harasek, Michael, 2019. "Efficient extraction of hydrogen transported as co-stream in the natural gas grid – The importance of process design," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 233, pages 747-763.
    4. Robert Kaczmarczyk, 2021. "Thermodynamic Analysis of the Effect of Green Hydrogen Addition to a Fuel Mixture on the Steam Methane Reforming Process," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Karaca, Ferhat & Camci, Fatih & Raven, Paul Graham, 2013. "City blood: A visionary infrastructure solution for household energy provision through water distribution networks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 98-107.
    6. v. Mikulicz-Radecki, Flora & Giehl, Johannes & Grosse, Benjamin & Schöngart, Sarah & Rüdt, Daniel & Evers, Maximilian & Müller-Kirchenbauer, Joachim, 2023. "Evaluation of hydrogen transportation networks - A case study on the German energy system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(PB).
    7. Pettinau, Alberto & Ferrara, Francesca & Amorino, Carlo, 2012. "Techno-economic comparison between different technologies for a CCS power generation plant integrated with a sub-bituminous coal mine in Italy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 32-39.
    8. van der Zwaan, Bob & Keppo, Ilkka & Johnsson, Filip, 2013. "How to decarbonize the transport sector?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 562-573.

    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. Elia, A. & Taylor, M. & Ó Gallachóir, B. & Rogan, F., 2020. "Wind turbine cost reduction: A detailed bottom-up analysis of innovation drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    2. Hernandez-Negron, Christian G. & Baker, Erin & Goldstein, Anna P., 2023. "A hypothesis for experience curves of related technologies with an application to wind energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Schoots, K. & Kramer, G.J. & van der Zwaan, B.C.C., 2010. "Technology learning for fuel cells: An assessment of past and potential cost reductions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2887-2897, June.
    4. Shayegh, Soheil & Sanchez, Daniel L. & Caldeira, Ken, 2017. "Evaluating relative benefits of different types of R&D for clean energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 532-538.
    5. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    6. Arias-Gaviria, Jessica & van der Zwaan, Bob & Kober, Tom & Arango-Aramburo, Santiago, 2017. "The prospects for Small Hydropower in Colombia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 204-214.
    7. Hayward, Jennifer A. & Graham, Paul W., 2013. "A global and local endogenous experience curve model for projecting future uptake and cost of electricity generation technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 537-548.
    8. Zheng, Cheng & Kammen, Daniel M., 2014. "An innovation-focused roadmap for a sustainable global photovoltaic industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 159-169.
    9. Upstill, Garrett & Hall, Peter, 2018. "Estimating the learning rate of a technology with multiple variants: The case of carbon storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 498-505.
    10. Strupeit, Lars, 2017. "An innovation system perspective on the drivers of soft cost reduction for photovoltaic deployment: The case of Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 273-286.
    11. Wilson, Charlie, 2012. "Up-scaling, formative phases, and learning in the historical diffusion of energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 81-94.
    12. Candelise, Chiara & Winskel, Mark & Gross, Robert J.K., 2013. "The dynamics of solar PV costs and prices as a challenge for technology forecasting," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 96-107.
    13. Arnaud de La Tour & Matthieu Glachant & Yann Ménière, 2013. "What cost for photovoltaic modules in 2020? Lessons from experience curve models," Working Papers hal-00805668, HAL.
    14. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    15. Grafström, Jonas & Poudineh, Rahmat, 2023. "No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    16. Harborne, Paul & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Pathways to commercial wind power in the US, Europe and Japan: The role of demonstration projects and field trials in the innovation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3580-3595, September.
    17. Yao, Xilong & Liu, Yang & Qu, Shiyou, 2015. "When will wind energy achieve grid parity in China? – Connecting technological learning and climate finance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 697-704.
    18. Rochedo, Pedro R.R. & Szklo, Alexandre, 2013. "Designing learning curves for carbon capture based on chemical absorption according to the minimum work of separation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 383-391.
    19. M. Jaber & Z. Givi, 2015. "Imperfect production process with learning and forgetting effects," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 129-152, January.
    20. Chang, Yu Sang, 2014. "Comparative analysis of long-term road fatality targets for individual states in the US—An application of experience curve models," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 53-69.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:appene:v:88:y:2011:i:11:p:3821-3831. 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.