[Note: This is first post on a complex, technological ambitious - and controversial - effort called Carbon Capture & Sequestration. Errors are my own. My purpose is not to spread more misinformation.]
This was asked at the April 22 Panel meeting. Unfortunatly, I missed the answer. California has little coal, so using CCS for coal-fired power plants has limited applicability in California. [However, much California electricity is produced by 'dirty' out-of-state coal-fired plants.] California does have significant geological formations, esp. in the Central Valley, which might be useful for Sequestration. And California does have SB 1368 will requires new coal-fired plants be as clean as natural gas fired plants (500 g CO2 released, for each MW-hour of energy produced.)
At its May 19, 2010 business meeting (blog post), the California Energy Commission (CEC) approved continued funding for WESTCARB, a Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) project managed by CEC and one of several regional, DOE-funded projects to evaluate CCS.
Commissioner Byron said that Calfornia should be a leader in this technology, as it is in energy-efficiency.
CCS means capturing carbon (actually CO2) from power plant or industrial plant processes and injecting the carbon dioxide underground for indefinite storage in aquifers, old mines or oil fields. (here or here ). The injection of CO2 is well known, and frequently used in oil industry to extract a bit more oil from aging wells. (Enhnaced Oil Recovery - EOR). The Sequestration is part of the unknown: Will CO2 stay underground and not leak; who is responsible? But another challenging part is the large scale separation of CO2 from the gaseous stew when fossil fuel (with its sulfur and impurities) are combusted, as in coal or natural gas plants, industrial processes, etc.
At this meeting CEC approved a $4MM contract for WESTCARB to build upon Phase II (a small test injection is scheduled for later this year) and begin Phase III, a larger test facility. Note, the amount of CO2 to be tested (1MM tons) is still small compared to the billions of tons of CO2 produced annually by US industry.
WESTCARB includes 7 states & British Columbia (international, but no China), and over 80 partners. From WESTCARB's promotional materals: "Sequestration allows ... continuing use of today's fossil fuel reserves, thereby 'buying time' ...."
Phase I (2004 -2005)
"....Phase I CCS research evaluated regional opportunities and potential barriers to implementation of the technology."
Phase II (a 5 year effort)
"....to perform three geological sequestration field validation pilots at which CO2 injection will take place—two in California’s Central Valley and one in northern Arizona. Phase II research also includes detailed site-characterization pilots—one on coal-bed methane and saline formations near a coal-fired power plant in Centralia, Washington, and the other on saline formations and oil fields near Bakersfield, California."
Phase III (a 10 year effort) will be inject CO2 from a commercial power plant or oil refinery as a field test.
California has a CCS Review Panel to the advise the CEC, CPUC, ARB and other agencies about specific CCS policies and the significant legal/regulatory framework. It had its first public meeing on April 22, 2010; the next one is this week: June 2, 2010. I don't want to miss "Association of Irritated Residents" presentation, listed on the agenda.
At the April meeting, the Panel was clear that CCS is no "magic bullet." But the discussion soon turned to regulatory and legal issues (who has underground CO2 storage rights?) , i.e. an implicit assumption that the technology, much not yet created, will be will invented, reliable and done in time.
The panel was very concerned about public acceptance of CCS and avoid things like "not in my backyard."
[I think science should drive policy, not lawyers, so I don't get a vote. I've been meaning to spend more time with this presentation because it is an assessment of state-of-the-art and how much further we need to go. In English, author seems to be saying CCS isn't ready for prime time yet, but he does outline possible paths. ]
A California Example
Aside from WESTCARB trials, a company called Hydrogen Energy is proposing an ambitious project to combust a discharged residue of oil refineries (oil coke) to produce electricity, H2 and very pure CO2. This CO2 will then be transported and injected into old oil wells to try to recover additional crude oil. It is clean, ambitious and expensive. Pure CO2 is valuable to the oil industry. Note, ARRA funding is at stake, too, in this siting - adding to the pressure on regulators like CEC.
But Why Caifornia?
CCS - has opponents
However, as all seem to acknowledge, CCS is hardly a proven technology. Here is recent NYTimes article cautioning on use of more public money for CO2. This particular letter: caught my attention, although the author appears to be pro-nuclear and doesn't mention energy-efficiency. I, too, am concerned about use of public money for industry.
To the Editor:
Robert Bryce’s opposition to financing carbon sequestration development is right on point. Tax dollars should be devoted exclusively to financing research and development on clean energy. If “clean coal,” including sequestration, is a sound approach, the mining and fossil fuel industries should be able to finance their own research and development after more than a century of support from us taxpayers.
Renewables as far as possible and closed-cycle nuclear need our help until they are on a pay-as-you-go basis. We need a new leader of the Department of Energy whose head is not turned from scientific and economic fact by political expediency. We have Congress for that.
Avrom Handleman
Indianapolis, May 14, 2010
California CCS Review Panel - June 2, 2010 Meeting
Hydrogen Energy Siting
WESTCARB
WESTCARB - Phase II
http://www.energy.ca.gov/research/environmental/project_summaries/PS_WESTCARB_Geologic_PhaseII.PDF (2007)
'It allows society to reduce the carbon intensity of the economy while continuing use of economical fossil fuels, thereby “buying time” to develop and construct affordable non-CO2-emitting energy systems.'
WESTCARB - Phase III
NYTimes Letters
TUESDAY, October 27th
Avrom HandlemanA RATIONAL ENERGY PROGRAMAvrom Handleman, inventor, peace activist, entrepreneur, consultant, MIT grad., and former President of the JTDC, will present "A Rational Energy Program" at the October meeting. Ave will propose his "long-range program to get energy while putting Americans to work".
NYTimes Op-Ed
MIT's Sequestration Page
No comments:
Post a Comment