DACdels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/basc/miscellaneous/dac...–DAC carbon is cost competitive...

DAC

Peter Eisenberger

National Academy Webinar

Oct 5 2017

Main Points

• DAC can be low cost – Privately funded efforts have made a lot of progress since APS – APS flaw - Sherwood does not apply (Klaus )

• Low pressure drop contactor

– Very different processes from APS report • GT example ( Can provide more details if requested)

• DACU(S) has great economic potential (Details in written submission)

– CO2 is useful and is ALSO a good feedstock for carbon – DAC carbon is cost competitive with fossil carbon – Low on learning curve/ mass production capability/jobs (Klaus) – Avoids transportation costs /Provides supply control

• Public funding of DAC R&D needed – Role in CDR – High priority- a publically funded commercial demo to verify costs – R&D on DAC and uses of the CO2 (Details in written submission)

GT Pilot Plant at SRI - Operational & Tested in October 2010

5 Carbon Engineering and Climeworks also have had large scale pilot plants –DAC works –cost is the issue

4

2017 -Global Thermostat Commercial Modules

Containerized Version to be installed in 2018

Containerized GT-DAC 3x 40’ ISO process containers 4,000 tonnes CO2 / year

Full-scale GT-DAC 18m tall, 50m long, 6m wide 50,000 tonnes CO2 / year Larger installations are comprised of multiple modules

Pathway to Low Cost DAC Low Capex – High throughput Low Opex –efficient use of low grade steam

Step 1: Air Input

• GT uses monolith contactors like those in a tailpipe catalytic converter

• Contactors provide high surface contact areas at low pressure drop

• Enables movement of large air volumes with effective contact of CO2 at low cost

• Sherwood does not apply

Step 2: Carbon Capture

• GT sorbents proven highly effective by Georgia Tech - confirmed by SRI, BASF,

Corning, and DN Veritas

• Process to deposit immobilized amines in pores of the contactor walls at high

loading by Corning, Haldor Topsoe, Applied Catalysts

Step 3: Regeneration

• CO2-rich sorbent is heated by condensing low-temperature process heat 95 C steam

• CO2 is collected and sorbent is regenerated (thermal and sweep gas cycle)

• 98.5 % + pure CO2 can be stored or used in multiple commercial applications

• 16 minute cycle per panel for DAC

Step 4: Heat Transfer

• Neighboring module has completed Step 2, and enters its regeneration box

• That box is evacuated, and connected to the hot box from which CO2 was just

removed

• Water evaporates from hot monoliths (cooling them) and condenses on cool

monoliths, warming them

• This sharing provides 50% of the heat for the cool monoliths

GT Module Adsorption

Phase

Regeneration

Phase

Monolith Contactors

+ Sorbent

“Cartridge”

95° Steam CO2

Collection

GT Module Adsorption

Phase

Regeneration

Phase Ambient Air

Monolith Contactors

+ Sorbent

“Cartridge”

`

GT Module Adsorption

Phase

Regeneration

Phase

Ambient Air

Monolith Contactors

+ Sorbent

“Cartridge”

GT Module Adsorption

Phase

Regeneration

Phase

Monolith Contactors

+ Sorbent

“Cartridge”

Evacuated

steam from hot

box to

neighboring

box/module

5

6

Differences from APS Study -Enabling Low Cost DAC

Contactor Efficiency • Honeycomb monoliths have very high {Surface Area} / {Pressure Drop} / {$}

• Channels parallel to the direction of flow minimize pressure drop , maximizing contact area, diffusion of CO2 onto active material orthogonal to flow

• High throughput (5m/sec), low pressure drop,100- 200 pascals • low capital cost/tonne

• Sherwood rule not followed(Klaus) –first steps costs of contacting and capturing comparable to downstream costs of regeneration /distribution and use • Klaus / wind / passive approach

Regeneration Efficiency & Heat Recovery • By using steam as sweep gas in addition to heat transfer fluid, the temperature of

regeneration is significantly reduced • Evolved CO2 is rapidly swept away from the surface, depressing the effective PCO2

experienced by the desorbing media • Sensible heat is recycled by coupling two regeneration boxes in opposite phase

• 50% reduction in sensible heat requirement by preheating a full canister by evaporatively cooling an empty canister

• Uses 4 gigajoules/tonne of low temperature 95 c heat- available at very low cost

R&D WILL PRODUCE OTHER NOVEL PROCESSES AND COST REDUCTIONS

7

Technology Partners-Based Upon Commercial Use

Partner Activity Relationship Terms

SRI International Pilot plant operation and R&D; lab testing Contract R&D

BASF Sorbent development/supply; lab testing Strategic Supplier

Haldor Topsoe, Corning Monolith development/supply Joint development, Strategic Supplier

Linde Carburetor Pilot/EPC Contractor EPC Contractor

Georgia Tech Sorbent R&D; contactor testing Contract R&D

Streamline Automation System design, engineering, fabrication Contract EPC

Carmagen Engineering System design, engineering, optimization Contract consulting

G.A. West Mass fabrication, EPC contractor Manufacturing

Applied Catalysts Contactor, sorbent development/supply Joint development, Strategic Supplier

8

Third Party Reports, Visits Operation

Visits, Operations

Corning, BASF, SABIC, Reliance, Linde, Praxair, NRG, 10’s of others

Detailed Third party reports completed by:

Det Norske Veritas (Global risk and technology assessment firm)

Linde (Leading world supplier of industrial gases and engineering services)

NRG / Sargent and Lundy (Owner / EPC of 1.6MMta Petra Nova CO2 capture plant)

Reports validate technology and cost curve advancements to <$50/MT for GT DAC

GT DAC CO2 Technology has been validated Third-party reports confirm technology and cost trajectory

General Characteristics for

40 GT per year DAC CDR Capacity

• Mass production possible (Klaus) –offers lower costs • Energy Use – run by renewable energy preferred

– Energy efficiency achieved by cogeneration

• Land Use – less than 1% the footprint needed for solar to meet our energy needs

• No environmental or operational constraints (Klaus) • At full capacity by 2050

– $50 per tonne x 40 GT = 2 trillion – less than 1% GGDP IN 2050 BUT IT IS NOT ONLY A COST IT WILL CREATE WEALTH AND JOBS

9

CCS

Plan till Paris

Permanent &

safe

disposal

CO2 from

concentrated

sources-

Avoided

Carbon

Capture from power

plants, cement, steel,

refineries, etc.

DACU(S) Renewable Energy and Materials Economy

DAC CO2

extraction from air

CO2 Uses

Carbon

Neutral

Fuels

CO2 Uses

Carbon

Negative

Materials

Monetization of DAC Negative CO2

1. Enhanced Oil Recovery (remote places not accessible by a pipeline) +

2. Industrial Gases (refrigeration for developing world) =

3. Gas to liquids +

4. Gas to methanol +

5. Synthetic fuel (CO2 + H2) =

6. Re-mineralization of desalinated water –

7. Algae Fuels( biochar) -

8. Algae Fertilizer (replaces energy intensive ammonia process) -

9. CO2 enrichment agricultural and horticultural applications -

10. Geothermal electricity –

11. Chemicals/Plastics -

12. Carbon Fibers , Carbon Nanotubes, Graphene Composites -

KEY

Carbon LCA with respect to atmosphere: + increase (avoided carbon)

= no change (avoided carbon)

- Carbon negative

DAC Carbon Competitive with Fossil Carbon

• CO2 Economically Viable at $50/tonne-high value of CO2 – Currently CO2 in developing world sold for over $1000 /tonne

– Adds less than 50 cts to a gallon of gasoline – hydrogen is the challenge

– One tonne of CO2 yields over $1000 dollars of plastic

– One tonne of CO2 yields close to $10,000 of carbon fiber

– One tonne of CO2 emitted from natural gas produces only $160 of electricity

• Energy to separate Carbon from Oxygen – Less than needed per structure to separate iron and aluminum

– Comparable to energy to produce carbon from hydrocarbons

• Generic Advantages – Low transportation costs

– Supply control

– Predictable Costs ( eg natural gas and oil volatile )

Conclusions

• Private efforts demonstrated low cost potential – Great Potential for wealth and job creation

• One is at the beginning of the DAC learning curve – Only limited largely privately funded efforts

• DAC potential not understood –though since Paris more interest – Absence of public efforts

• High priority – Publically funded commercial demo to show low cost

• R&D program – Sorbents – Contactors – Novel processes – Uses of CO2