Brice FreemanProject Manager, Environmental Controls
3rd Annual Wyoming CO2 Conference Casper, WyomingJune 24, 2009
Status of Post-Combustion Carbon Capture Technology Development
2© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
3© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
About EPRI
• Founded in 1973 as an independent, nonprofit center for public interest energy and environmental research.
• Objective, tax-exempt, collaborative electricity research organization.
• Participating companies provide over90% of North American electricity generated.
• Broad technology portfolio ranging from near-term solutions to long-term strategic research.
4© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
EPRI’s Role in the Technology Development to Commercialization Cycle
Technology Incubation and Validation
BasicResearch
andDevelopment
TechnologyCommercialization
CollaborativeTechnology
DevelopmentIntegrationApplication
National LaboratoriesUniversities
SuppliersVendors
EPRI
5© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Global Climate Change Legislation
6© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Technology EIA 2008 Reference Target
Efficiency Load Growth ~ +1.05%/yr Load Growth ~ +0.75%/yr
Renewables 55 GWe by 2030 100 GWe by 2030
Nuclear Generation 15 GWe by 2030 64 GWe by 2030
Advanced Coal Generation
No Heat Rate Improvement for Existing Plants
40% New Plant Efficiencyby 2020–2030
1-3% Heat Rate Improvement for 130GWe Existing Plants
46% New Plant Efficiency by 2020; 49% in 2030
CCS None Widely Deployed After 2020
PHEV None 10% of New Light-Duty Vehicle Sales by 2017; 33% by 2030
DER < 0.1% of Base Load in 2030 5% of Base Load in 2030
Achieving all targets is very aggressive, but potentially feasible.
*Energy Information Administration (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook (AEO)
2008 Prism...Technical Potential for CO2 ReductionsU.S. Electric Sector
2030 Projected Annual CO2 Emissions (2008)(due to economic and population growth)
CO2 Annual Emissions (2008)
7© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
U.S. CO2 Emissions from Electricity Production in 2006
4,065 TWh Generated
Global Emissions in 2006
• 30 Gt CO2/year
U.S. Emissions in 2006
• 5.8 Gt CO2
• ~20% of global CO2
U.S. Electric Utility in 2006
• 2.4 Gt CO2
• 41% of U.S. CO2
• 33% of U.S. GHGs
TWh = Terawatt-hour = 1012 Watt-hour
Gt = Gigatonne = 109 tonne = 1015 kg
8© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Understanding Future Generation Mixes
9© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
10© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CO2 Capture in Coal Power Systems
11© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Challenges for CO2 Capture – Scale & Energy
• High Energy:
– “Conventional” capture processes will impose about 30% parasitic load on power plants and increase the cost of electricity (COE) 60-80%.
• DOE goal is 35% increase in COE, including capture (dominates), compression, transportation, injection, storage, and measurement, monitoring, verification (MMV)
• Need be widely applicable
12© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Scope & Approach
• Scope– Find, vet, and accelerate promising CO2 capture
technologies
• Approach – Understand concept at first-principles level– Focus on chemistry, process, energy penalty– Identify intrinsic and extrinsic barriers– Accelerate technologies with largest potential
impact within funding limits and other constraints
• Results– > 55 technologies assessed– 3 selected for support; more under discussion
13© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
EPRI Finding Many Processes Being Developed for Post-Combustion CO2 Capture
Carbon Capture Technology Groups
• Amines (many)
• Carbonates
• Ammonia
• Hydroxide
• Limestone
• Metal Organics
• Zeolites
• Carbonaceous
• Fibers
• Microporous
• Micro-algae
• Cyanobacteria
• Mineralization
• Cyro
Adsorption Membranes Biological OtherAbsorption
~ 30 processes found 2/07 (Report #1012796)> 50 processes now (Report #1016995)
14© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture Technologies Investigated
Absorption Absorption (cont’d) Adsorption (cont’d)
3H Technologies – Self Concentrating Solvent RITE – COCS U. Akron - Metal Monoliths
Aker Clean Carbon – Just Catch Sargas University of Michigan – MOF
Akermin – Stabilized Enzyme Siemens UCSC – AWL
Alstom – Chilled Ammonia Process TNO – Coral IVCAP
Alstom and Toshiba – CO2 Wheel Toshiba Heavy Reflux PSA
Cansolv U. of Erlangen – Hyperbranched Polyamine U. Wyoming – Carbonaceous Adsorbent
CASTOR and CAESAR Solvents U. Notre Dame and Others – Ionic Liquids Membranes
CO2 Sciences – CO2 Recycle U. Texas at Austin – Piperazine promotion Carbozyme – Contained Liquid Membrane
CO2 Solution WOWEnergies – WOWClean Membrane Technology and Research (MTR)
D3 Technologies – DTM Solvent Adsorption NanoGLOWA
Fluor – Econamine FG+ ADA-ES – Adsorbent Screening Research Triangle Institute – Fluorinated Polymer
GE Global Research – Oligomeric Solvents Catalyte RITE – Molecular Gate
Georgia Tech – Reversible Ionic Liquids CO2CRC – Solid Adsorbent Univ of – Polyionic Liquid
Global Research Tech (GRT) – Artificial Trees InnoSepara – Adsorption Process Direct Mineralization and Biofixation
HTC Purenergy NETL – Polyethyleneimine Calera
IFP – Dual Phase Ohio State Universtiy – CaO Carbon Trap Technologies
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) – KS-1 RTI – Dry Sorbent CCS Materials
PowerSpan – ECO2 SRI Int’l – Carbon Sorbent Skyonic – Skymine
Procede Group – MDEA:MEA TDA Research – Solid Sorbent Many Algal Biological Fixation
15© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Technologies
Capture Pathway
Technology Description Publicized Developers
Absorption •Scrub CO2 in absorber, strip in regenerator by heating
Alstom, Cansolv, Fluor, HTC, MHI, PowerSpan, etc..
Adsorption •Adsorb CO2 in contactor, desorb by reducing pressure or temperature
RTI, Univ. WY, ADA‐ES. Material synthesis at Notre Dame, UCLA)
Membrane •Separate CO2 w/molecular sieves or solution‐diffusion membranes
MTR, CORAL, RITE, Carbozyme
Mineraliza‐tion
•React CO2 with chemicals or minerals to form products or disposable solids
Skyonic, Calera, Carbon Sciences, U. Santa Cruz
Biological Fixation
•Flue gas scrubbing by micro‐algae. Biomass converted to fuel
Many dozens at lab scale
16© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
4.5%
5.0%
80% 85% 90% 95% 100%
% CO2 Captured
Para
satic
Loa
d as
% o
f Pla
nt O
utpu
t
10%11%12%13%14%15%16%17%18%19%20%
Minimum Energy for CO2 Capture
%CO2 in gas
If all capture energy comes from net power output, then the process independentthermodynamic minimum parasitic load for 40oC flue gas is ~3.5% to capture 90% CO2
17© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Minimum Energy for CO2 Capture
• Need a thermodynamic minimum of about 3.5% of energy from power plant to capture 90% CO2
– Minimum energy is equivalent to 0.165 GJ/t CO2
– Does not include compression– Assumes all energy comes from net electrical output– 40 C flue gas– 20.7 t CO2 /day/MWe
• Expect 3-5x the minimum energy for a good process• Current processes are closer to 10-12x minimum energy
18© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
19© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Fresh Water
PCBoiler SCR
SteamTurbine
ESP FGDCO2
Removale.g., MEA
CO2 to use or Sequestration
Flue Gasto Stack
Fly Ash Gypsum/Waste
Coal
Air
Output Penalty: Up to 30% Today
• CO2 capture needs• Ultra-low SO2, NO2, PM• Thermal energy for stripper• Considerable space
• Maximizing MW, efficiency requires optimal thermal integration
Pulverized Coal With CO2 Capture –Integration Issues
20© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture by Absorption, Typical Process
Source: CansolvTypical amine-based regenerative absorption capture system
Solution Scrubbing
Most mature solutions are amines (e.g. MEA)
Chemist need to balance:
cost
21© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Relative Comparison of Solvent Performance
4.2
3.5 3.53.2
2.82.5
0.8
0.160.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
Reg
ener
atio
n H
eat (
GJ/
tonn
e C
O2)
Ranges of Regeneration Energy
Range of current solvents (near-term)
Future potential (long-term)
22© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Trends in Solvent Development
• Increased concentration• Low temperature regeneration• Minimize degradation • SO2 tolerant • Investigate novel regen cycles – off
peak• Environmentally benign
New Class of Solvent: Ionic Liquids
23© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Most Developed Technologies on Coal >1 MW(size, location)
• Amine– Fluor MEA (None)– MHI Amine (1 MW, Japan)– Aker Amine (None)– HTC Amine (None)– Cansolv Amine (None)– Emerging – Alstom/Dow, Siemens
• Ammonia– Alstom Chilled Ammonia (1.7 MW, USA)– Powerspan ECO2 (1 MW, USA)
24© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Need Multiple:
Goals – Affordable, Energy Efficient, Accepted
2005 2010 2015 20202007 2010 2015 20252020
We Energies Chilled Ammonia PilotOther Pilots (Post-Combustion and Oxy-Combustion)
Pilots
Demonstration
Integration
Other Demonstrations
AEP MountaineerSouthern/SSEB Ph. III
UltraGen, others
Oxy-Combustion
IGCC + CCS Projects
Ion Transport Membrane O2 Scale-up
20 MW chilled ammoniascale-up with storage
25 MW advanced amine with storage
125-200 MW follow-ons? Partial integration, EOR &/or storage
1.7 MW
Capture Demos – Risk Management, CompetitionStorage Demos – Understanding thru Different Geologies
25© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
1.7 MW Chilled Ammonia CO2 Capture (Alstom)
• Located at We Energies Pleasant Prairie Power Plant (P4)
• 37 pilot project participants• Testing underway, completion late
summer
Courtesy of Alstom
26© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PC with CCS – AEP ProjectOverview
Description• Alstom chilled ammonia
CO2 capture process– ~20 MWe “Product Validation Facility” (PVF) at AEP’s
Mountaineer station (~100,000 ton-CO2/yr)– Next development step after 1.7 MWe R&D pilot at We Energies’
Pleasant Prairie Power Plant
• Injection into two on-site wells (Rose Run Sandstone ~7800 ft and Copper Ridge B Zone ~8200 ft)
• 1–5 year injection program plus post-injection monitoring
PVF 2-23-09, Photo courtesy of AEP/Alstom. All rights reserved.
27© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PC with CCS – Southern ProjectOverview
Description• MHI KS-1 process
– ~25 MWe demonstration facility at a Southern Company station (~150,000 ton-CO2/yr)
– Builds upon a 0.5 MWe R&D pilot in Japan• Injection program under SECARB DOE Regional
Carbon Sequestration Project—ongoing• 10-year program: 4 years of injection plus 4 years of
post-injection monitoring
Source: MHI
28© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
29© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Adsorption
• Selectivity and capacity (isotherm) chiefly dictate performance.
• Based on isotherm, process can be designed for continuous CO2 separation based on vacuum swing, pressure swing, and/or temperature swing.
• Literature suggests that cost of adsorbents is 30-40% of CapEx
• Planned simulations of VSA, PSA, TSA to set targets– TSA (U. Wyoming collaboration)– PSA / VSA (internal modeling with
Comsol)
Selective binding of CO2 or other gases
onto a solid material.
30© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture by Adsorption
• Near-term – two adsorbent families– Supported reactants
Chemisorption• Amines and Carbonates
– Non-reacting adsorbents Physisorption
• Zeolites and Activated Carbon
• Longer-term – highly engineered metal organic frameworks
• Potential adsorbent advantages– Higher CO2 capacity– Lower regeneration energy– Lower spent material disposal costs
• Challenges– Contactor design– Thermal management– Attrition
Isotherms
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
P/Po
wt%
CO 2
Tlow
Thigh
Capture Regen.
Working Capacity
31© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Univ. of Wyoming Adsorption Development
• Uses carbonaceous materials to capture CO2. Use thermal cycling to regenerate.
• Materials show selectivity for CO2 over N2.
• Laboratory results show materials have little or no hysteresis and are not affected by moisture
• Project includes testing on flue gas
32© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
33© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture by Membrane Separation
Source: MTR• Difference in partial pressure, selectivity and permeability determine performance
• Widely used in chemical industry
• For power plant, no modification to steam cycle
• Potentially water positive
• Not validated on flue gas
34© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Membrane Technology and Research –Membrane Process
12% of plant output only for CO2 capture + 6% compressionSimultaneously “captures” water
35© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
36© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture by Mineralization
• React CO2 in a “once-through” process with commodity chemicals, industrial wastes or abundant minerals
• CO2 is transformed into an inert product… avoids underground storage
• Markets for products, availability of reactants, or energy penalties will be limited to niche applications
Cementious aggregate
Sodium Bicarbonate
37© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Challenges for CO2 Capture – Global Scale
Global top 100 chemicals production total ~ 0.5 Gt/yr; CO2 Emissions ~ 30 Gt/yrA + CO2 ACO2
Limited supplies of A & limited sales of ACO2Need to regenerate A or make A with CO2 constraints
* Source: American Chemistry Council
*
38© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Challenges for CO2 Capture – Scale
• Chemicals used in once-through capture process (without regeneration) will quickly exhaust global supplies of that chemical
• Sale of chemicals resulting from CO2 capture will overwhelm global markets if process is widely adopted, i.e., zero price.
• Separating material must be regenerated or manufactured with net CO2 reduction
39© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
40© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
History of Algae Development
• Historic: macroalgae harvesting for food, dyes
• 1940 – wartime: oil production, food production
• 1950 – animal feed, seminal research on large scale production
• 1960 – wastewater treatment, fish farming
• 1970 – oils production, carbon mitigation• 1980 – Aquatic Species Program, strain
identification and categorization• 1990 – specialty nutraceuticals (e.g.
beta-carotene, Spirulina), NASA Mars mission
• 2000 – Algae renaissance
β-Carotene, $thousands/kg
Inca, Maya
41© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Algae 2.0: Why Now?
2000’s – Algae 2.0• Market/Regulatory changes
– High oil prices / Reduce foreign oil imports– High biofuels demand, feedstocks are scarce and $$– Renewable Portfolio Standards– Carbon emission regulation (coming soon)– Very willing and open private equity markets
($175.9M in 2008)• Technology Improvements
– Advancements in microbiology and genetic design– New photobioreactor designs– Improved computer aided controls– Integration of multiple industries (electricity,
municipal wastewater, biofuels)• All of these motivate the need for low-cost, high-yield,
large-scale algae production• 2010 – ???
Photobioreactors
Open Pond raceway
1951 Arthur D. Little tests at Parson’s Lab @ MIT
42© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture by Biofixation
• Rapidly forming new industry to supply biofuel feedstock
• Natural nexus with power plants (algae need CO2)
• Utility interest in the potential to remove CO2 via biofixation (photosynthesis), co-benefits
• Kinetics are fast compared to other biological options but slow vs. conventional capture
• Large land areas required:~45 acres/MWe
Valent’s High Density Vertical Bioreactor
Open ponds in Hawaii
43© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Large Field of Developers
• A2BE Carbon Capture, LLC
• Algae Biofuels Inc.
• Algaedyne Corporation
• AlgaeLab
• AlgaeLink
• Algafuel
• Algenol
• Algosource
• Aquaflow Bionomic Corporation
• Aquatic Biofuels
• Aurorabiofuels
• Bioalgene
• Bionavitas
• BioProcess Algae LLC
• Biox Corporation
• Blue Marble Energy
• Bodega Algae
• Canadian Pacific Algae
• Canrex Biofuels Ltd.
• Carbon Capture Corporation
• Carbon2Algae
• Columbia Energy Partners
• Catchlight Energy, LLC
• Cellana
• Columbia Energy Partners
• Culturing Solutions, Inc.
• Cyanotech
• Diversified Energy
• Energy Derived
• Euglene Co., Ltd.
• General Atomics
• Genifuel
• GenoFocus
• Global Green Solutions, Inc.
• Green Crude Production
• GreenFire Energy
• Greenfuel
• GreenShift Corp.
• GreenWater Energy
• Hawaii Bio Energy
• Independence Bio Products
• Kai BioEnergy
• Kegotank BioFuels
• Kent Bioenergy
• Kent Biosciences
• Kent SeaTech
• Kuehnle AgroSystems, Inc.
• Kent SeaTech
• Kuehnle AgroSystems, Inc.
• Lane Algae Group
• Livefuels
• Mana Fuels
• Might Algae Biofuels
• OriginOil
• Pacific Sun Energy
• PetroAlgae
• PetroSun
• Phycosource
• Round River Technologies
• Sapphire Energy
• SarTec
• SeaAg, Inc.
• Seambiotic
• Solix
• Solray
• SunEco Energy, Inc.
• Sunflower Integrated Bioenergy, LLC
• Sunrise Ridge Algae
• Sunx Energy
• Sylvatex Biofuels
• Ternion Bio Industries
• Tomorrow Biofuels
• Valcent
• XL Renewables
• >75 known companies
• Majority are <2 years old
• Industry groups forming
44© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Source: Solix
45© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Unanswered Questions
• Open Pond or Photobioreactor?• Total Energy Balance?• Total Carbon Balance?• Realistic sizing, production and land use?• Best way to manifold, distribute and utilize
flue gas?• Integration with flue gas and water
systems?• Failure modes?• Strain selection?• Business models?• Others?
46© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Examining All Benefits
47© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Relative Sizing and Biofixation Potential
Big Brown Station1150 MWe (2x 575 MWe)8,926,254 tonnes CO2/yr24,455 tonnes CO2/day21.2 tonnes CO2 / MWe-day (average)
690m (0.43 miles)
480m
(0.3
0 m
iles)
Area =
Area = 33 hectares= 81.8 acres= 0.13 miles2
Assumptions:
• ~35 g biomass/m2-day (annual average)
• biomass is ~50% C by wt.
• 3.67 C:CO2 molar wt. ratio
• 80% land utilization
Biofixation of:
• 6,200 tonnes CO2/year
• 17 tonnes CO2/day
• ~0.1% total CO2produced
48© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture by Biofixation:Utility Demonstrations Underway
Open Pond Demonstration at FirstEnergy’s Plant Berger
49© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Outline
• Introduction to EPRI• CO2 Capture Approaches
– Absorption– Adsorption– Membrane– Mineralization– Biofixation
• Status of CO2 Capture Development
50© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
What We’ve Learned Thus Far…
• No breakthrough technologies discovered• Near-term solvents are 1/3 better than MEA• Once-through processes are challenging• Some generalizations can be made for each
class of capture technology• Additional processes emerging frequently in
literature/press• Cooling water use increases significantly with
capture and becoming more important• Need to better understand true pre-treatment
limits for transportation
51© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Carbon Capture Technology Development Trends: Drive Down Energy Demand and Process Costs
• Designer solvents/sorbents, low Δh
• Catalyze solvents/sorbents reactions
• Lower regenerator loadings
• Optimized thermal integration– Minimize disruption to steam cycle– Explore uses of solar thermal
• Membranes for flue gas with low ΔP
• Assure environmental acceptability of solvent processes
• Minimize upstream clean-up requirements
52© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
State of Capture Development
Absorbent Adsorbent Membrane
Commercial Usage in CPI*
High Moderate Low/Niche
Operational Confidence
High High, but complex Low to moderate
Energy Penalty No Compression
<18% to 25% ~14% to 20% ~12%-15%
Source of Energy Penalty
Solvent Regen thermal
Sorbent Regen thermal/vac
Vacuum on permeate
Trends New chemistry, thermal integrat.
New chemistry, process config
New membrane, process config
*Chemical Process Industries
53© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Carbon Capture Technology Development Trends
• Disconnect between chemistry, process, plant– Breakthroughs require collaboration between all 3
54© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Technology Readiness Level (TRL)*
• Use to categorize and describe technologies under development
• Predict and better understand:• Relative risk• Time to market or a key
development stage• Cost to reach market or a key
development stage
• Caution – $s and time to move one step increase non-linearly with Level
Source: NASA
55© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Capture Technologies – Histogram of Relative Maturity
• Majority of processes are absorption based• Most processes are still in the laboratory
56© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Timescale for Capture Process Development
2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
TRL 1
TRL 2
TRL 3
TRL 4
TRL 5
TRL 6
TRL 7
TRL 8
TRL 9
Concept to Commercialization10-12 years on aggressive,
well-funded schedule
57© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Unarticulated Limits on Some CO2Capture Concepts
• Second Law Violators– CO2 fuels needs energy source – more than get back– Sometimes do not account for overall total CO2 footprint
• Real Estate Moguls– Biological processes use solar energy for CO2 conversion, but need
45 miles2 for 500 MW plant– Solar energy likely better used to make electricity directly instead of
converting CO2 in non-biological processes
• Massive Material Mismatch (once-through capture)– Limited global supply of chemicals to capture CO2 or make saleable
products– Limited use of CO2 directly
• Gold mine ≠ CO2 solution– Successful economic propositions may not make dent in power CO2
58© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions?
Brice [email protected]
650-855-1050
59© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Key Technology Challenges
• Standardized communications
• Advanced, mobile metering
• Interoperability
• Distributed computing
• Large scale energy storage
• Grid management technologies
• Wide‐area monitoring
• Shortened construction times
• Integrated spent fuel management strategy
• Higher efficiency advanced coal plants
• High‐efficiency, cost‐effective CO2 capture
• Commercial, large‐scale CO2 storage