CARBON CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION

Contents
1.

Introduction:........................................................................................................................ 1

2.

Capture............................................................................................................................... 2

3.

Transport............................................................................................................................. 3

4.

Storage............................................................................................................................... 3
i.

Geological storage........................................................................................................... 3

ii.

Ocean storage.............................................................................................................. 4

iii. Mineral storage............................................................................................................. 4

5.

Leakage.............................................................................................................................. 4

6.

Sequestration and Utilization............................................................................................... 4

7.

Discussion and Environmental Effects................................................................................ 5

8.

Bibliography........................................................................................................................ 6
Number of Table
Table-01:Emissions to air from plants with CCS (kg/(MWh)).............................................. 6

1.

Introduction:

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) (or carbon capture and storage), is the
process of capturing waste carbon dioxide(CO2) from large point sources, such
as fossil fuel power plants, transporting it for utilization or to a storage site, and
depositing it where it will not enter the atmosphere, normally an
underground geological formation. The aim is to prevent the release of large
quantities of CO2into the atmosphere (from fossil fuel use in power generation and
other industries). It is a potential means of mitigating the contribution of fossil
fuel emissions to global warming[1] and ocean acidification.[2] Although CO2 has
been injected into geological formations for several decades for various purposes,
including enhanced oil recovery, the long term storage of CO2 is a relatively new
concept. The first commercial example was Weyburn in 2000.[3] 'CCS' can also be
used to describe the scrubbing of CO2 from ambient air as a geoengineering technique

An integrated pilot-scale CCS power plant was to begin operating in September

2008 in the eastern German power plant Schwarze Pumpe run by utility Vattenfall,
in the hope of answering questions about technological feasibility and economic
efficiency. CCS applied to a modern conventional power plant could reduce
CO2 emissions to the atmosphere by approximately 8090% compared to a plant
without CCS.[4] The IPCC estimates that the economic potential of CCS could be
between 10% and 55% of the total carbon mitigation effort until year 2100.[4]
Page 1 of 6

Capturing and compressing CO2 may increase the fuel needs of a coal-fired CCS
plant by 2540%.[4] These and other system costs are estimated to increase the
cost of the energy produced by 2191% for purpose built plants.[4] Applying the
technology to existing plants would be more expensive especially if they are far
from a sequestration site. Recent industry reports suggest that with successful
research, development and deployment (RD&D), sequestered coal-based electricity
generation in 2025 may cost less than un-sequestered coal-based electricity
generation today.[5]
Storage of the CO2 is envisaged either in deep geological formations, or in the form
of mineral carbonates. Deep ocean storage is no longer considered feasible
because it greatly increases the problem of ocean acidification.[6] Geological
formations are currently considered the most promising sequestration sites.
The National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) reported that North America has
enough storage capacity for more than 900 years worth of carbon dioxide at
current production rates.[7] A general problem is that long term predictions about
submarine or underground storage security are very difficult and uncertain, and
there is still the risk that CO2 might leak into the atmosphere.
2. Capture
Capturing CO2 is probably most effective at point sources, such as large fossil fuel
or biomass energy facilities, industries with major CO2 emissions, natural gas
processing, synthetic fuel plants and fossil fuel-based hydrogen production plants.
Broadly, three different types of technologies for scrubbing exist: post-combustion,
pre-combustion, and oxyfuel combustion:
In post combustion capture, the CO2 is removed after combustion of the fossil
fuel this is the scheme that would be applied to fossil-fuel burning power plants.
Here, carbon dioxide is captured from flue gases at power stations or other large
point sources. The technology is well understood and is currently used in other
industrial applications, although not at the same scale as might be required in a
commercial scale power station.
The technology for pre-combustion is widely applied in fertilizer, chemical,
gaseous fuel (H2, CH4), and power production.[8] In these cases, the fossil fuel is
partially oxidized, for instance in a gasifier. The resulting syngas (CO and H2)
is shifted into CO2 and H2. The resulting CO2 can be captured from a relatively
pure exhaust stream. The H2 can now be used as fuel; the carbon dioxide is
removed before combustion takes place. There are several advantages and
disadvantages when compared to conventional post combustion carbon dioxide
capture.[9]The CO2 is removed after combustion of fossil fuels, but before the flue
gas is expanded to atmospheric pressure. This scheme is applied to new fossil fuel
burning power plants, or to existing plants where re-powering is an option. The
capture before expansion, i.e. from pressurized gas, is standard in almost all
industrial CO2 capture processes, at the same scale as will be required for utility
power plants.[10]
In oxy-fuel combustion the fuel is burned in oxygen instead of air. To limit the
resulting flame temperatures to levels common during conventional combustion,
cooled flue gas is recirculated and injected into the combustion chamber. The flue
Page 2 of 6

gas consists of mainly carbon dioxide and water vapour, the latter of which is
condensed through cooling. The result is an almost pure carbon dioxide stream that
can be transported to the sequestration site and stored. Power plant processes
based on oxyfuel combustion are sometimes referred to as "zero emission" cycles,
because the CO2 stored is not a fraction removed from the flue gas stream (as in
the cases of pre- and post-combustion capture) but the flue gas stream itself. A
certain fraction of the CO2generated during combustion will inevitably end up in
the condensed water. To warrant the label "zero emission" the water would thus
have to be treated or disposed of appropriately. The technique is promising, but the
initial air separation step demands a lot of energy.
An alternate method under development is chemical looping combustion (CLC).
Chemical looping uses a metal oxide as a solid oxygen carrier. Metal oxide particles
react with a solid, liquid or gaseous fuel in a fluidized bed combustor, producing
solid metal particles and a mixture of carbon dioxide and water vapor. The water
vapor is condensed, leaving pure carbon dioxide, which can then be sequestered.
The solid metal particles are circulated to another fluidized bed where they react
with air, producing heat and regenerating metal oxide particles that are
recirculated to the fluidized bed combustor. A variant of chemical looping is calcium
looping, which uses the alternating carbonation and then calcination of a calcium
oxide based carrier as a means of capturing CO2.[11]
3. Transport
After capture, the CO2 would have to be transported to suitable storage sites. This
is done by pipeline, which is generally the cheapest form of transport. In 2008,
there were approximately 5,800 km of CO2 pipelines in the United States, used to
transport CO2 to oil production fields where it is then injected into older fields to
extract oil.
4. Storage
Various forms have been conceived for permanent storage of CO2. These forms
include gaseous storage in various deep geological formations (including saline
formations and exhausted gas fields), and solid storage by reaction of CO2 with
metal oxides to produce stable carbonates.

i.

Geological storage

Also known as geo-sequestration, this method involves injecting carbon dioxide,

generally in supercritical form, directly into underground geological formations. Oil
fields, gas fields, saline formations, unmineable coal seams, and saline-filled basalt
formations have been suggested as storage sites. Various physical (e.g., highly
impermeable caprock) and geochemical trapping mechanisms would prevent the
CO2 from escaping to the surface.[12]
CO2 is sometimes injected into declining oil fields to increase oil recovery.
Approximately 30 to 50 million metric tonnes of CO2 are injected annually in the
United States into declining oil fields. This option is attractive because the geology
of hydrocarbon reservoirs is generally well understood and storage costs may be
partly offset by the sale of additional oil that is recovered.[14] Disadvantages of old
oil fields are their geographic distribution and their limited capacity, as well as the

Page 3 of 6

fact that subsequent burning of the additional oil recovered will offset much or all
of the reduction in CO2 emissions.[13]
Unmineable coal seams can be used to store CO2 because the CO2 molecules
attach to the surface of coal. The technical feasibility, however, depends on the
permeability of the coal bed. In the process of absorption the coal releases
previously absorbed methane, and the methane can be recovered ( enhanced coal bed
methane recovery). The sale of the methane can be used to offset a portion of the
cost of the CO2 storage. Burning the resultant methane, however, would negate
some of the benefit of sequestering the original CO2.
Saline formations contain highly mineralized brines, and have so far been
considered of no benefit to humans. Saline aquifers have been used for storage of
chemical waste in a few cases. The main advantage of saline aquifers is their large
potential storage volume and their common occurrence. The major disadvantage of
saline aquifers is that relatively little is known about them, especially compared to
oil fields. To keep the cost of storage acceptable, the geophysical exploration may
be limited, resulting in larger uncertainty about the aquifer structure. Unlike
storage in oil fields or coal beds, no side product will offset the storage cost.
Leakage of CO2 back into the atmosphere may be a problem in saline aquifer
storage. Current research shows, however, that trapping mechanisms such as
structural trapping, residual trapping, solubility trapping and mineral trapping could
immobilize the CO2 underground and reduce the risk of leakage.[12]

ii.

Ocean storage

In the past, it was suggested that CO2 could be stored in the oceans, but such
practices have been made illegal under specific regulations, and ocean storage is
no longer considered feasible.[6]

iii.

Mineral storage

In this process, CO2 is exothermically reacted with available metal oxides, which in
turn produces stable carbonates. This process occurs naturally over many years
and is responsible for a great amount of surface limestone. The reaction rate can
be made faster, for example by reacting at higher temperatures and/or pressures,
or by pre-treatment of the minerals, although this method can require additional
energy. The IPCC estimates that a power plant equipped with CCS using mineral
storage will need 60180% more energy than a power plant without CCS.[4]
5. Leakage
A major concern with CCS is whether leakage of stored CO2 will compromise CCS
as a climate change mitigation option. For well-selected, designed and managed
geological storage sites, IPCC estimates that risks are comparable to those
associated with current hydrocarbon activity. Although some question this
assumption as arbitrary citing a lack of experience in such long term
storage. CO2 could be trapped for millions of years, and although some leakage
occurs upwards through the soil, well selected storage sites are likely to retain over
99% of the injected CO2 over 1000 years. Leakage through the injection pipe is a
greater risk.[15]

Page 4 of 6

6. Sequestration and Utilization

Carbon sequestration is the process of capture and long-term storage of
atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2)[16] and may refer specifically to:

7.

"The process of removing carbon from the atmosphere and depositing it in a

reservoir." When carried out deliberately, this may also be referred to
as carbon dioxide removal, which is a form of geo-engineering.

The process of carbon capture and storage, where carbon dioxide is removed
from flue gases, such as on power stations, before being stored in
underground reservoirs.

Natural biogeochemical
cycling of carbon between
reservoirs, such as by chemical weathering of rocks.

Carbon sequestration describes long-term storage of carbon dioxide or other

forms of carbon to either mitigate or defer global warming and avoid
dangerous climate change. It has been proposed as a way to slow the
atmospheric and marine accumulation of greenhouse gases, which are
released by burning fossil fuels.

Carbon dioxide is naturally captured from the atmosphere through biological,

chemical or physical processes. Some anthropogenic sequestration
techniques exploit these natural processes, while some use entirely artificial
processes.

Carbon dioxide may be captured as a pure by-product in processes related

to petroleum refining or from flue gases from power generation. CO
2 sequestration includes the storage part of carbon capture and storage,
which refers to large-scale, permanent artificial capture and sequestration of
industrially
produced CO
2 using subsurface saline aquifers, reservoirs, ocean water, aging oil fields,
or other carbon sinks.

the atmosphere and

Discussion and Environmental Effects

The theoretical merit of CCS systems is the reduction of CO2 emissions by up to

90%, depending on plant type. Generally, environmental effects from use of CCS
arise during power production, CO2 capture, transport, and storage.
Additional energy is required for CO2 capture, and this means that substantially
more fuel has to be used to produce the same amount of power, depending on the
plant type. For new super-critical pulverized coal (PC) plants using current
technology, the extra energy requirements range from 24 to 40%, while for natural
gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants the range is 1122% and for coal-based
gasification combined cycle (IGCC) systems it is 1425% [IPCC, 2005].
[17] Obviously, fuel use and environmental problems arising from mining and
extraction of coal or gas increase accordingly. Plants equipped with flue-gas
desulfurization (FGD) systems for sulfur dioxide control require proportionally
greater amounts of limestone, and systems equipped with selective catalytic

Page 5 of 6

reduction systems for nitrogen oxides produced

proportionally greater amounts of ammonia.

during

combustion require

IPCC has provided estimates of air emissions from various CCS plant designs (see
table below). While CO2 is drastically reduced though never completely captured,
emissions of air pollutants increase significantly, generally due to the energy
penalty of capture. Hence, the use of CCS entails a reduction in air quality. Type
and amount of air pollutants still depends on technology. CO2 is captured with
alkaline solvents catching the acidic CO2 at low temperatures in the absorber and
releasing CO2 at higher temperatures in a desorber. Chilled Ammonia CCS Plants
have inevitable ammonia emissions to air. "Functionalized Ammonia" emit less
ammonia, but amines may form secondary amines and these will emit volatile
nitrosamines[18] by a side reaction with nitrogen-dioxide, which is present in any
flue gas even after DeNOx. Nevertheless, there are advanced amines in testing
with little to no vapor pressure to avoid these amine- and consecutive nitrosamine
emissions. Nevertheless, all the capture plants amines have in common, that
practically 100% of remaining sulfur dioxide from the plant is washed out of the
flue gas, the same applies to dust/ash.

Table-01:Emissions to air from plants with CCS (kg/(MWh))

Natural gas combined cycle

Pulverized
coal

Integrated gasification combined

cycle

CO2

43 (-89%)

107 (87%)

97 (88%)

NOX

0.11 (+22%)

0.77 (+31%)

0.1 (+11%)

SOX

0.001(99.7%)

0.33 (+17.9%)

Ammonia

0.002 (before: 0)

0.23 (+2200%)

Based on Table 3.5 in [IPCC, 2005]. Between brackets the increase or decrease compared to a
similar plant without CCS

Page 6 of 6

8. Bibliography
1. "IPCC Special Report Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Summary for
Policymakers". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved 2011-1005.
2. "Introduction to Carbon Capture and Storage - Carbon storage and ocean
acidification

activity".

Commonwealth

Scientific

and

Industrial

Research

Organisation (CSIRO) and the Global CCS Institute. Retrieved 2013-07-03.

3. Burying the problem., Canadian Geographic Magazine
4. [IPCC, 2005] IPCC special report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage.
Prepared by working group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Metz, B., O. Davidson, H. C. de Coninck, M. Loos, and L.A. Meyer (eds.).
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA,
442 pp. Available in full atwww.ipcc.ch (PDF - 22.8MB)
5. Coal Utilization Research Council (CURC) Technology Roadmap, 2005
6. Scientific Facts on CO2 Capture and Storage, 2012
7. NETL 2007 Carbon Sequestration Atlas, 2007
8. "Gasification Body" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-04-02.
9. integrated gasification combined cycle for carbon capture storage Claverton
Energy Group conference 24th October Bath.
10.

Bryngelsson,

Mrten;

Westermark,

Mats

(2005)."Feasibility

study

of

CO2 removal from pressurized flue gas in a fully fired combined cycle: the
Sargas project". Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Efficiency,
Cost, Optimization, Simulation and Environmental Impact of Energy Systems.
pp. 70310.
11.

"The Global Status of CCS: 2011 - Capture". The Global CCS Institute.

Retrieved 2012-03-26.
12.

"Good plant design and operation for onshore carbon capture installations

and onshore pipelines - Carbon dioxide storage". Energy Institute. Retrieved

2012-04-10.
13.

"Carbon

Capture

and

Geological

Storage

Ec.europa.eu. Retrieved 2013-10-06.

Page 7 of 6

European

Commission".

14.

"Good plant design and operation for onshore carbon capture installations

and onshore pipelines - Carbon dioxide storage". Energy Institute. Retrieved

2012-04-10.
15.
16.

Natuurwetenschap & Techniek; April 2009; CCS leakage risks

Roger Sedjo and Brent Sohngen (2012). "Carbon Sequestration in Forests

and Soils". Annual Review of Resource Economics (Annual Reviews) 4: 127

144.doi:10.1146/annurev-resource-083110-115941.
17.

"IPCC Special Report: Carbon Capture and Storage Technical Summary. IPCC.

p. 27" (PDF). Retrieved 2013-10-06.

18.

http://www.ekopolitan.com/news/ccs-norway-amines-nitrosamines-and-

nitramines-released-carbon-capture-proce

Page 8 of 6