The Economic Merits of Flexible Carbon Capture and Sequestration as a Compliance Strategy with the Clean Power Plan.

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) may be a key technology for achieving large CO2 emission reductions. Relative to "normal" CCS, "flexible" CCS retrofits include solvent storage that allows the generator to temporarily reduce the CCS parasitic load and increase the generator's net efficiency, capacity, and ramp rate. Due to this flexibility, flexible CCS generators provide system benefits that normal CCS generators do not, which could make flexible CCS an economic CO2 emission reduction strategy. Here, we estimate the system-level cost effectiveness of reducing CO2 emissions with flexible CCS compared to redispatching (i.e., substituting gas- for coal-fired electricity generation), wind, and normal CCS under the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and a hypothetical more stringent CO2 emission reduction target ("stronger CPP"). Using a unit commitment and economic dispatch model, we find flexible CCS achieves more cost-effective emission reductions than normal CCS under both reduction targets, indicating that policies that promote CCS should encourage flexible CCS. However, flexible CCS is less cost effective than wind under both reduction targets and less and more cost effective than redispatching under the CPP and stronger CPP, respectively. Thus, CCS will likely be a minor CPP compliance strategy but may play a larger role under a stronger emission reduction target.

[1]  R. B.,et al.  The United Nations , 1947, Nature.

[2]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  Identifying Cost-Effective CO2 Control Levels for Amine-Based CO2 Capture Systems , 2006 .

[3]  M. O'Malley,et al.  Wind generation, power system operation, and emissions reduction , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[4]  J. Trainham,et al.  Limiting the Magnitude of Future Climate Change , 2010 .

[5]  Kara Clark,et al.  Western Wind and Solar Integration Study , 2011 .

[6]  R. Schmalensee,et al.  The So2 Allowance Trading System: the Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment , 2012 .

[7]  B. Kirby,et al.  Operating Reserve Reductions from a Proposed Energy Imbalance Market with Wind and Solar Generation in the Western Interconnection , 2012 .

[8]  M. Webber,et al.  Optimizing post-combustion CO2 capture in response to volatile electricity prices , 2012 .

[9]  Dalia Patiño-Echeverri,et al.  Reducing the energy penalty costs of postcombustion CCS systems with amine-storage. , 2012, Environmental science & technology.

[10]  P. Jaramillo,et al.  Production cost and air emissions impacts of coal cycling in power systems with large-scale wind penetration , 2013 .

[11]  Edward S. Rubin,et al.  Cycling coal and natural gas-fired power plants with CCS , 2013 .

[12]  Gary T. Rochelle,et al.  Optimal CO2 Capture Operation in an Advanced Electric Grid , 2013 .

[13]  Paulina Jaramillo,et al.  Profitability of CCS with flue gas bypass and solvent storage , 2014 .

[14]  Adam Cornelius.  ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF FLEXIBLE RAMP CAPABILITY PRODUCTS IN THE MIDCONTINENT ISO , 2014 .

[15]  Machteld van den Broek,et al.  Benefits of coal-fired power generation with flexible CCS in a future northwest European power system with large scale wind power , 2014 .

[16]  W. Moorhead.  Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 60 Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources : Electric Utility Generating Units , 2014 .

[17]  Haibo Zhai,et al.  Opportunities for Decarbonizing Existing U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants via CO2 Capture, Utilization and Storage. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[18]  Paulina Jaramillo,et al.  State Cooperation Under the EPA's Proposed Clean Power Plan , 2015 .

[19]  Jesse D. Jenkins,et al.  A critical review of global decarbonization scenarios: what do they tell us about feasibility? , 2015 .

[20]  E. Rubin,et al.  The cost of CO2 capture and storage , 2015 .

[21]  James R. McFarland,et al.  Can Paris pledges avert severe climate change? , 2015, Science.

[22]  David Palchak,et al.  Eastern Renewable Generation Integration Study: Flexibility and High Penetrations of Wind and Solar; NREL (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) , 2015 .

[23]  Paul Denholm,et al.  Grid Integration and the Carrying Capacity of the U.S. Grid to Incorporate Variable Renewable Energy , 2015 .

[24]  Mort Webster,et al.  Technology adoption under time-differentiated market-based instruments for pollution control , 2016 .

[25]  J. Kasahara,et al.  The cost of CO 2 capture and storage , 2016 .

[26]  Gabriela Hug,et al.  Implications of environmental regulation and coal plant retirements in systems with large scale penetration of wind power , 2016 .

[27]  Paulina Jaramillo,et al.  Trade-offs in cost and emission reductions between flexible and normal carbon capture and sequestration under carbon dioxide emission constraints , 2017 .

[28]  Dalia Patino-Echeverri,et al.  Assessing environmental, economic, and reliability impacts of flexible ramp products in MISO's electricity market , 2018 .