{"id":546472,"date":"2010-04-28T13:09:29","date_gmt":"2010-04-28T17:09:29","guid":{"rendered":"11593 at http:\/\/www.wri.org"},"modified":"2010-04-28T13:09:29","modified_gmt":"2010-04-28T17:09:29","slug":"carbon-capture-and-sequestration-ccs-and-underground-capacity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/546472","title":{"rendered":"Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) and Underground Capacity"},"content":{"rendered":"

How much land area does CCS<\/abbr> require? It depends on the site.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Earlier this week, the Guardian highlighted research<\/a> that questioned the feasibility of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS<\/abbr>), the process of trapping carbon dioxide from power plants and storing it underground. Researchers from the University of Houston have claimed that we would need the underground capacity the size of a small state in order to store the CO2 from just one power plant. Geologists and engineers quickly refuted<\/a> this claim, pointing to the success of ongoing pilot projects.<\/p>\n

This latest dispute about CCS<\/abbr> raises the question: how do<\/em> we know if there is room to store CO2 underground?<\/p>\n

U.S. Estimates of CO2 Storage Capacity<\/h3>\n

CCS<\/abbr> depends on storing CO2 in deep geological formations underground. But of course, geology varies greatly by region, and some areas are more suitable than others. For example<\/a> (PDF)<\/span>, Texas and Louisiana have the highest potential, while states like Maine, Vermont, and Wisconsin have no storage potential at all.<\/p>\n

The US Department of Energy publishes a national atlas of storage capacity by state. The calculations assume<\/a> (PDF)<\/span> that even in areas that look promising for CO2 storage, only 1-4% of available geologic capacity will actually be used for CCS<\/abbr>. Even with this limitation, the DOE still estimates overall potential for storage in the US to be at 3,600 to 12,900 billion metric tons of CO2. To put that in perspective, the United States\u2019 current annual emissions are about 3,200 million metric tons per year. That is why, despite the challenges, CCS<\/abbr> is such a potentially important opportunity in the fight against climate change.<\/p>\n

CCS<\/abbr> and Land Area<\/h3>\n

When evaluating how much land would be needed to store carbon dioxide, it is important to remember that not all land is created equal in terms of CCS<\/abbr> potential. This makes generalizing about CCS<\/abbr> an imprecise art. For example, the study cited by the Guardian suggests that a single 500 MW power plant capturing and storing CO2 for 30 years would require 686 mi2 of underground land area, quite a large number. However, the researchers base their calculations on the assumption that the underground geologic reservoir would be only 200 ft thick. If you apply the same methodology to sites with much thicker reservoirs, those power plants would require considerably less land area. That\u2019s why true capacity can only be estimated with site-specific geological information.<\/p>\n

Moving Forward with Carbon Capture and Sequestration<\/h3>\n

CCS<\/abbr> for power plants is, to be sure, a complicated process. In the United States there is currently one coal fired power plant that is capturing CO2, injecting it and storing it underground today (the Mountaineer Project<\/a> in New Haven, West Virginia). Others are in the planning stages, and there are many legitimate issues that each CCS<\/abbr> project will need to address in order to be successful. That\u2019s why the World Resources Institute convened over 90 leaders from national laboratories, research institutes, environmental organizations and energy companies to create guidelines for safe, effective carbon dioxide storage<\/a> in the United States. These guidelines answer many of the concerns that CCS<\/abbr> skeptics have about issues such as seismic events, potential leaks, and correctly evaluating underground capacity.<\/p>\n

The important point to remember in discussions about CCS<\/abbr> is that every geologic reservoir, and thus every CCS<\/abbr> site, is unique. The only way to answer remaining uncertainties about CCS<\/abbr>, and bring the cost down over time, is through demonstrations and commercial deployments \u2013 in other words, real life, site-specific scenarios \u2013 as soon as possible.<\/p>\n

Additional Information<\/h3>\n

Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Tsang, C.F., 2009. Large-scale impact of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers: a
\nsensitivity study on the pressure response in stratified systems. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 3(2), 181\u2013194.<\/p>\n

Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., 2009. Basin-Scale Hydrogeologic Impacts of CO2 Storage: Capacity and
\nRegulatory Implications, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, published online on 8\/8\/2009,
\nDOI: 10.1016\/j.ijggc.2009.07.002.<\/p>\n

Dooley, J., Davidson, C., 2010. A Brief Technical Critique of Ehlig-
\nEconomides and Economides 2010: \u201cSequestering Carbon Dioxide in a Closed
\nUnderground Volume.\u201d United States Department of Energy. Available here.<\/a><\/p>\n

Nicot, J.P., 2008. Evaluation of large-scale carbon storage on fresh-water section of aquifers: A Texas study.
\nInt. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2(4), 582\u2013593.<\/p>\n

Yamamoto, H., Zhang, K., Karasaki, K., Marui, A., Uehara, H., Nishikawa, N., 2009. Numerical investigation
\nconcerning the impact of CO2 geologic storage on regional groundwater flow. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas
\nControl, 3(5), 586-599.<\/p>\n

Zero Emissions Platform, The Realities of Storing Carbon Dioxide<\/a><\/p>\n

Zhou, Q., Birkholzer, J.T., Tsang, C.F., Rutqvist, J., 2008. A method for quick assessment of CO2 storage
\ncapacity in closed and semi-closed saline formations. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2(4), 626\u2013639.<\/p>\n

\n<\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

How much land area does CCS require? It depends on the site. Earlier this week, the Guardian highlighted research that questioned the feasibility of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), the process of trapping carbon dioxide from power plants and storing it underground. Researchers from the University of Houston have claimed that we would need the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6917,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15,7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-546472","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-energy","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/546472","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6917"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=546472"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/546472\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=546472"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=546472"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=546472"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}