Impact of Uncertainties on the Design and Cost of CCS From a Waste-to-Energy Plant

Uncertainties are an inherent and important element of novel systems with limited large-scale industrial experience and must be taken into account in order to enable the design of cost-efficient energy systems. This paper investigates the optimal design of carbon capture and storage from a waste-to-energy plant under uncertainties. With the aim of providing a better understanding of the impact of uncertainties on the design and cost of CCS chains, as well as the capture technology selection, the case of a hypothetical 40 MW waste-to-energy plant located in Norway is considered. The impact of key technical and cost uncertainties on the cost of different CO2 capture and CCS chain options are investigated using an in-house techno-economic CCS assessment tool combined with an uncertainty quantification framework. When the different capture options are compared on a deterministic basis, the advanced amine yields the best performances (CO2 avoidance cost of 153 €/tCO2, avoided), followed by the membrane process based on partial capture (200 €/tCO2, avoided) and MEA-based capture (217 €/tCO2, avoided). However, in contrast with the advanced amine, the partial capture considered in the membrane process does not enable net negative CO2 emissions. Once technical and cost uncertainties are taken into account, the advanced amine-based capture remains the best option, however the MEA-based capture outperform the membrane process. Finally, the stochastic optimization showed that the uncertainties considered do not impact the optimal capture capacity in this case. The full CCS chain perspective is then included through two chain options: a nearby offshore saline aquifer or an offshore CO2 EOR storage located further away. The EOR-based chain leads to the best performances (187 vs. 202 €/tCO2, avoided) both on a deterministic basis and when different uncertainty scenarios are considered. However, as a shared transport and storage infrastructure is considered, uncertainty regarding the amount of CO2 coming from nearby industries leads to a different optimal design of the chain (pipeline diameter and ship capacity). Finally, uncertainties on the EOR response to CO2 injection can significantly reduce the potential of the CO2 EOR-based chain and lead to cases in which the saline aquifer-based chain would be optimal.

[1]  Andrea Ramírez,et al.  Improved cost models for optimizing CO2 pipeline configuration for point-to-point pipelines and simple networks , 2014 .

[2]  Daniel Sutter,et al.  Comparison of Technologies for CO2 Capture from Cement Production—Part 2: Cost Analysis , 2019, Energies.

[3]  Erik Skontorp Hognes,et al.  Integrated Techno-economic and Environmental Assessment of an Amine-based Capture , 2013 .

[4]  Debangsu Bhattacharyya,et al.  Uncertainty quantification of property models: Methodology and its application to CO2‐loaded aqueous MEA solutions , 2015 .

[5]  P. Webley,et al.  Opportunities for application of BECCS in the Australian power sector , 2018 .

[6]  C. Wilmer,et al.  High-throughput computational prediction of the cost of carbon capture using mixed matrix membranes , 2019, Energy & Environmental Science.

[7]  Simon Roussanaly,et al.  Techno Economic Evaluation of Amine based CO2 Capture: Impact of CO2 Concentration and Steam Supply , 2012 .

[8]  Haiqing Lin,et al.  Power plant post-combustion carbon dioxide capture: An opportunity for membranes , 2010 .

[9]  Rahul Anantharaman,et al.  A techno-economic case study of CO2 capture, transport and storage chain from a cement plant in Norway , 2017 .

[10]  Dianne E. Wiley,et al.  Comparison of Solvent Development Options for Capture of CO2 from Flue Gases , 2018 .

[11]  Solomon F. Brown,et al.  Carbon capture and storage (CCS): the way forward , 2018 .

[12]  Alv-Arne Grimstad,et al.  The Economic Value of CO2 for EOR Applications , 2014 .

[13]  Haibo Zhai,et al.  Techno-economic assessment of polymer membrane systems for postcombustion carbon capture at coal-fired power plants. , 2013, Environmental science & technology.

[14]  A. Abe‐Ouchi,et al.  Glacial CO2 decrease and deep-water deoxygenation by iron fertilization from glaciogenic dust , 2019, Climate of the Past.

[15]  Andrew Thornton,et al.  Economic Value , 2021, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

[16]  Olav Bolland,et al.  Incorporation of uncertainty analysis in modeling of integrated reforming combined cycle , 2010 .

[17]  Rahul Anantharaman,et al.  A new approach to the identification of high-potential materials for cost-efficient membrane-based post-combustion CO2 capture , 2018 .

[18]  Erik Skontorp Hognes,et al.  Benchmarking of CO2 transport technologies: Part I—Onshore pipeline and shipping between two onshore areas , 2013 .

[19]  Dawid P. Hanak,et al.  Comparison of probabilistic performance of calcium looping and chemical solvent scrubbing retrofits for CO2 capture from coal-fired power plant , 2016 .

[20]  T. K. Vrana,et al.  Offshore power generation with carbon capture and storage to decarbonise mainland electricity and offshore oil and gas installations: A techno-economic analysis , 2019, Applied Energy.

[21]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  A proposed methodology for CO2 capture and storage cost estimates , 2013 .

[22]  Rahul Anantharaman,et al.  A Tool for Integrated Multi-criteria Assessment of the CCS Value Chain , 2014 .

[23]  S. Roussanalya,et al.  Cost-optimal CO 2 capture ratio for membrane-based capture from different CO 2 sources , 2017 .

[25]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  A TECHNICAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF AMINE-BASED CO2 CAPTURE TECHNOLOGY FOR POWER PLANT GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL , 2002 .

[26]  Haibo Zhai,et al.  Advanced Membranes and Learning Scale Required for Cost-Effective Post-combustion Carbon Capture , 2019, iScience.

[27]  Chao Fu,et al.  Techno-economic Analysis of MEA CO2 Capture from a Cement Kiln – Impact of Steam Supply Scenario , 2017 .

[28]  E. J. Anthony,et al.  Carbon capture and storage update , 2014 .

[29]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  Understanding the pitfalls of CCS cost estimates , 2012 .

[30]  Edward S Rubin,et al.  A technical, economic, and environmental assessment of amine-based CO2 capture technology for power plant greenhouse gas control. , 2002, Environmental science & technology.

[31]  Erik Skontorp Hognes,et al.  Benchmarking of CO2 transport technologies: Part II – Offshore pipeline and shipping to an offshore site , 2014 .

[32]  Haibo Zhai,et al.  Membrane properties required for post-combustion CO2 capture at coal-fired power plants , 2016 .

[33]  Thomas A. Adams,et al.  Comparison of CO2 Capture Approaches for Fossil-Based Power Generation: Review and Meta-Study , 2017 .

[34]  Eemeli Tsupari,et al.  Comparing the greenhouse gas emissions from three alternative waste combustion concepts. , 2012, Waste management.

[35]  Rahul Anantharaman,et al.  Cost-optimal CO2 capture ratio for membrane-based capture from different CO2 sources , 2017 .

[36]  A. B. Rao,et al.  A technical, economic, and environmental assessment of amine-based CO2 capture technology for power plant greenhouse gas control. , 2002 .