Article

Life cycle investigation of CO2 recovery and sequestration.

Institute of Chemical and Engineering Sciences, 1 Pesek Road, Jurong Island, Singapore.
Environmental Science and Technology (Impact Factor: 5.48). 07/2006; 40(12):4016-24. DOI: 10.1021/es051882a
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Life Cycle Assessment of four CO2 recoverytechnologies, combined with nine CO2 sequestration systems, serves to expand the debate of CO2 mitigation methods beyond a single issue-prevention of global warming-to a wider range of environmental concerns: resource depletion, acidic and toxic gases, wastes, etc, so that the overall, and unexpected, environmental impacts may be revealed.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Hsien H. Khoo, Jul 11, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
306 Views
  • Source
    • "A 2010 base scenario is also included for comparison (García-Gusano et al., 2013). Similar LCA studies have already been undertaken for power plants with CCS technology, both for gas and coal (Brekke et al., 2012; Khoo and Tan, 2006a, 2006b; Koornneef et al., 2008; Korre et al., 2009, 2012; Odeh and Cockerill, 2008; Singh et al., 2011; Stanley and Dávila-Serrano, 2012; Strazza et al., 2012; Veltman et al., 2010), but there is a lack of environmental studies to explore CCS in cement production. Exceptionally, Volkart et al. (2013) detail the impacts of applying CCS on a cement plant in 2025 using ReCiPe midpoint method. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although cement production is a very energy-intensive industry which releases huge amounts of pollutants to the environment, there is a lack of environmental studies focused on applying CO2 capture technologies to mitigate global warming in this industry. Furthermore, other environmental and human health impacts are omitted or underestimated. This paper carries out a detailed Life Cycle Assessment of the Spanish cement production in order to analyse the effect of applying post-combustion CO2 capture technology using monoethanolamine as absorbent. Moreover, the work discusses the pros and cons of CO2 capture within the cement manufacture from an environmental point of view. On the basis of the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) 2011 midpoint method, results show improvements in global warming, ozone depletion and abiotic depletion potentials but acidification, photochemical ozone formation, eutrophication, human toxicities, ionising radiation, particulate matter, ecotoxicity, and land use potentials are increased by several times. Besides, the paper shows the decisive contribution of the cogeneration plant required to produce heat. It is necessary to carry out more research concerning how to face the energy penalty. Authors strongly recommend exploring natural gas or biomass CHP plants implementation as well as synergies between cement facilities and power plants.
    Journal of Cleaner Production 12/2013; 104. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.056 · 3.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Emissions of CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O were calculated and reported in CO 2 -equivalent (CO 2 -e) units using standard values of global warming potential (Ney and Schnoor, 2002). Environmental impacts other than GHG emissions were considered outside the scope of this study, and have been examined elsewhere for carbon capture technologies (i.e., Zapp et al., 2012; Khoo and Tan, 2006). Some aspects of technology feasibility, scalability, and "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study uses a process lifecycle inventory (LCI) to compare the lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operations using different sources for CO2 and to non-CO2 EOR methods. All EOR techniques were compared to the base case of natural-source CO2-EOR, which had net emissions of 0.52 +/- 0.03 metric tons of CO2-e per barrel of oil recovered (t/bbl) (85.1 +/- 4.9g CO2-e/MJ oil (g/MJ)), the same as the net emissions of 0.52 +/- 0.02 t/bbl (84.3 +/- 3.0 g/MJ) when using CO2 derived from a coal-fueled synthetic natural gas (SNG) plant. Net emissions were lowered to 0.36 +/- 0.03 t/bbl (58.5 +/- 5.2 g/MJ) for EOR using CO2 derived from a coal-fed Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plant. Net emissions were further reduced to 0.18 +/- 0.11 t/bbl (28.6 +/- 18.7 g/MJ) using switchgrass grown on marginal land in an IGCC plant. Similar to coal, net emissions were 0.34 +/- 0.03 t/bbl (55.3 +/- 5.5 g/MJ) for EOR using CO2 derived from a Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) plant, and 039 +/- 0.03 t/bbl (63.3 +/- 4.4 g/MJ) when using livestock manure biogas for NGCC. Net emissions of methane- and nitrogen-EOR were 10-15% greater than for natural-source CO2-EOR. For the allocations used in this study, all sources of CO2 derived from IGCC or NGCC plants resulted in between about 25% and 60% lower net CO2-e emissions per barrel of oil recovered compared to natural-source CO2-EOR, and were also approximately 25-60% lower than average domestic U.S. oil lifecycle emissions of 0.50 +/- 0.02 t/bbl (82.4 +/- 2.5 g/MJ). These results suggest that coal and biomass IGCC CO2-EOR, as well as natural gas and biogas NGCC CO2-EOR, may be alternatives for reducing GHG emissions associated with fossil fuel use during the slow transition from fossil fuels to other energy sources.
    International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 08/2013; 16:129-144. DOI:10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.03.006 · 3.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Furthermore , as the results were not disaggregated it is not possible to evalu - ate whether the trends reported by Troy and Wagner ( 2011 ) are also present . Khoo and Tan ( 2006a , b ) also examined polymeric gas separation membranes and cryogenics . Contrary to Czyperek et al . "
    International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 01/2013; 13:59-71. · 3.82 Impact Factor
Show more