DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparison of Direct Air Capture Technology to Point Source CO2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comparison of Direct Air Capture Technology to Point Source CO2 DEGREE PROJECT IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2020 Comparison of direct air capture technology to point source CO2 capture in Iceland ANNA INGVARSDÓTTIR KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCES IN CHEMISTRY, BIOTECHNOLOGY AND HEALTH Abstract It is well known that climate change due to global warming is one of the greatest crises facing the Earth. It is a huge challenge for mankind to reduce CO2 emissions, the major cause of global warming. Mitigation measures are not enough. Technologies to remove the CO2 from the atmosphere are considered necessary, so the temperature rise does not exceed 1.5°C as stated in the Paris Agreement. Direct air capture (DAC) is a new technology that can remove carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere. Currently, this method is expensive, up to 1000 USD per ton CO2 removed. This high cost is mostly due to the relatively low concentration of CO2 in the ambient air, leading to a large unit to capture the gas and therefore high capital investment. The technology is very energy-intensive, either electrical or thermal, and to make direct air capture more efficient the plant needs to be powered with energy that has no or very low CO2 emissions. The energy in Iceland is low cost and its production has a very low carbon footprint. This thesis aims to find out if the direct air capture method will be more feasible than a point source CO2 capture in Iceland due to good access to low-cost and clean energy. The learning curve for direct air capture was studied along with scenarios for its technological development. Two different direct air capture technologies were analyzed, one that is powered by a large amount of electricity and one powered mostly by thermal energy. Three different point source cases in Iceland were studied for comparison. For the best-case scenario, where the learning rate is high and technological improvements are significant, the levelized cost of direct air capture is lower than levelized cost of point source capture. The cost of energy affects the levelized cost of direct air capture today but with technical development, the energy needed is expected to go down, and therefore the effect of energy cost will be lower. However, it is still important, concerning contribution to reducing global warming, that the energy powering the direct air capture plant has a low carbon footprint, which can be assured in Iceland. On the contrary, if the learning rate of the direct air capture technology is low and no technical improvements occur in solvents or sorbents the direct air capture technology is and will be more expensive than point source capture considering both located in Iceland. The high learning rate and development in technology are dependent on the pressure to reach the goals of the Paris Agreement. It is therefore vital for direct air capture that the demand for carbon removal measures is enhanced due to pressure to reach the Paris Agreement goals. Furthermore, direct air capture has more potential to affect climate change than point source capture as direct air capture can be a carbon-negative technology if coupled with the permanent storage of CO2. The point source capture can only be a carbon-neutral technology if coupled with the permanent storage of CO2. i Sammanfattning Det är välkänt att klimatförändringar på grund av global uppvärmning är en av de största kriserna som hotar jorden. Det är en enorm utmaning för mänskligheten att minska koldioxidutsläppen, den främsta orsaken till global uppvärmning. Enkelt genomförbara åtgärder är inte tillräckliga och teknik för att ta bort koldioxid från atmosfären anses nödvändig för att temperaturökningen inte ska överstiga de 1,5 °C som anges i Parisavtalet. Direkt infångning av koldioxid från luft (vanligen kallad direkt luftinfångning, (Eng. Direct air capture - DAC)) är en ny teknik som kan ta bort koldioxid direkt från atmosfären. För närvarande är denna metod dyr; upp till 1000 USD per ton avlägsnad koldioxid. Denna höga kostnad beror främst på den relativt låga koldioxidkoncentrationen i luften, vilket leder till att en stor anläggning behövs för att fånga upp gasen och därmed stora investeringar. Tekniken är mycket energiintensiv, antingen elektrisk eller termisk, och för att göra en direkt infångning effektivare, måste anläggningen drivas med energi som inte har några eller mycket låga koldioxidutsläpp. Energin på Island är billig och dess produktion innebär ett mycket lågt koldioxidavtryck. Syftet med arbetet i denna avhandling är att utforska om metoden för direkt infångning av koldioxid från luft kommer att vara en mer genomförbar metod än koldioxidinfångning från punktkällor (eng. point source - PS) på Island på grund av god tillgång till billig och ren energi. Lärandekurvan för direkt luftfångning studerades tillsammans med scenarier för metodens tekniska utveckling. Tre olika fall med punktkällor på Island studerades för jämförelse. Två olika direkta luftinfångningstekniker analyserades också, en som drivs av en stor mängd elektricitet och en som drivs mestadels av termisk energi. Det resulterade i att i bästa fall, där inlärningshastigheten är hög och tekniska förbättringar är signifikanta, så skulle produktionskostnaden för direkt luftinfångning (levelized cost of energy, LCOC) vara lägre än motsvarande för infångning från en punktkälla. Energikostnaden påverkar LCOC för DAC idag men med teknisk utveckling förväntas energibehovet minska och därför kommer energikostnadens påverkan att bli lägre. Det är dock fortfarande viktigt, med tanke på bidraget till att minska globala uppvärmningen, att energin som driver DAC-anläggningen har ett lågt koldioxidavtryck, vilket kan garanteras på Island. Tvärtom, om inlärningshastigheten för DAC-tekniken är låg och inga tekniska förbättringar sker i lösningsmedel eller sorbenter, är och kommer DAC-tekniken att bli dyrare än infångning från punktkällor om båda anläggningarna finns på Island. En hög inlärningshastighet och teknikutveckling är beroende av trycket att nå målen i Parisavtalet. Det är därför mycket viktigt för DAC att efterfrågan på koldioxidinfångning ökar. Dessutom har DAC mer potential att påverka klimatförändringarna eftersom DAC kan vara en kolnegativ teknik om den kombineras med permanent lagring av koldioxid. PS-avskiljningen kan endast vara en kolneutral teknik och detta om den kombineras med permanent lagring av koldioxid. ii Acknowledgments I would like to thank Landsvirkjun for giving me the opportunity and all the resources and help I needed to conduct my thesis at the company. I would especially like to thank my supervisors, Dr. Daði Þorsteinn Sveinbjörnsson and Sigurður H. Markússon, for their support throughout the project work. Furthermore, I would like to thank all the employees at Landsvirkjun, especially in R&D department, for warmly welcoming me during my time there. Additionally, I want to thank prof. Christiaan Petrus Richter for his assistance in the beginning and the end of the project. Finally, I would like to thank my academic supervisor at KTH, Dr. Per Alvfors for his guidance while supervising this thesis project. iii Abbreviations BECCS Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage CAPEX Capital expenditure CCS Carbon capture and storage CDR Carbon dioxide removal CO2eq Carbon dioxide equivalence DAC Direct air capture ESA Electric swing adsorption ETS EU’s emission trading system EUR Euros FLh Full load hour GPP Geothermal power plant HT High-temperature IPCC Intergovernmental panel on climate change LC Learning curve LCA Life cycle assessment LCOC Levelized cost of capture LT Low-temperature MSA Moisture swing adsorption OPEX Operational expenditure PS Point source PSA Pressure swing adsorption PV Solar photovoltaics TSA Temperature swing adsorption UNFCCC United nations framework convention on climate change USD United States dollars VSA Vacuum swing adsorption WACC Weighted average cost of capital iv Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... i Sammanfattning ............................................................................................................................................ ii Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................ iii Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Icelandic conditions .............................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Problem description and research question ................................................................................... 3 1.3 Delimitations ................................................................................................................................. 4 2 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 4 3 Literature review ..................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Capture and Reuse of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) for a Plastics Circular Economy: a Review
    processes Review Capture and Reuse of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) for a Plastics Circular Economy: A Review Laura Pires da Mata Costa 1 ,Débora Micheline Vaz de Miranda 1, Ana Carolina Couto de Oliveira 2, Luiz Falcon 3, Marina Stella Silva Pimenta 3, Ivan Guilherme Bessa 3,Sílvio Juarez Wouters 3,Márcio Henrique S. Andrade 3 and José Carlos Pinto 1,* 1 Programa de Engenharia Química/COPPE, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Cidade Universitária, CP 68502, Rio de Janeiro 21941-972, Brazil; [email protected] (L.P.d.M.C.); [email protected] (D.M.V.d.M.) 2 Escola de Química, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Cidade Universitária, CP 68525, Rio de Janeiro 21941-598, Brazil; [email protected] 3 Braskem S.A., Rua Marumbi, 1400, Campos Elíseos, Duque de Caxias 25221-000, Brazil; [email protected] (L.F.); [email protected] (M.S.S.P.); [email protected] (I.G.B.); [email protected] (S.J.W.); [email protected] (M.H.S.A.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +55-21-3938-8709 Abstract: Plastic production has been increasing at enormous rates. Particularly, the socioenvi- ronmental problems resulting from the linear economy model have been widely discussed, espe- cially regarding plastic pieces intended for single use and disposed improperly in the environment. Nonetheless, greenhouse gas emissions caused by inappropriate disposal or recycling and by the Citation: Pires da Mata Costa, L.; many production stages have not been discussed thoroughly. Regarding the manufacturing pro- Micheline Vaz de Miranda, D.; Couto cesses, carbon dioxide is produced mainly through heating of process streams and intrinsic chemical de Oliveira, A.C.; Falcon, L.; Stella transformations, explaining why first-generation petrochemical industries are among the top five Silva Pimenta, M.; Guilherme Bessa, most greenhouse gas (GHG)-polluting businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Chevron Corporation Additional Supplemental Letter Regarding Stockholder Proposal of Stewart Taggart Securities Exchange Act of 1934—Rule 14A-8
    March 3, 2021 FROM: Stewart Taggart TO: SEC Subject: Chevron Shareholder Resolution Dear SEC “The future is bullish for Please accept my response below to Chevron’s March 1 Additional Liquefied Natural Gas. Supplemental Letter Regarding Stockholder Proposal of Stewart Taggart It’s an exciting time to be a Securities Exchange Act of 1934—Rule 14a-8 part of this industry.” Mike Worth, CEO, Chevron ----------- “The February 22 Response, much like the Proponent’s letter on February 3, 2020, discusses matters that are not relevant based on the express text of the Proposal (such as claiming that the Proposal requires a discussion of “what $40/tonne carbon does to the economics of [the Company’s] LNG business, the subject of the resolution”).” ----------- The $40/tonne carbon value is relevant because the RESOLVED portion of the resolution specifically mentions ‘carbon taxes,’ of which $40 /tonne (using the Social Cost of Carbon)1 is a reasonable default surrogate number. Should Chevron believe the Social Cost of Carbon to be spurious, erroneous “LNG ranks among the most emission-intensive or biased high, Chevron can argue that to the SEC and allow the SEC to resource themes across arbitrate its validity. the oil and gas sector. Significant emissions This proponent’s view is Chevron’s ‘support’ for carbon pricing coupled are released through the combustion of gas to drive with its refusal to specify a number itself renders the widely-published and 2 the liquefaction process accepted US Social Cost of Carbon a trustworthy proxy. and any CO2 removed
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Air Capture Of
    Tuesday 21 April 2020 10:00 EDT | 16:00 CET | 22:00 CST AGENDA 1 2 3 Welcome & Introductory Presentation Question and Answer Remarks Session • Dr. Julio Friedmann • Jarad Daniels Senior Research Scholar Director, Office of Strategic Center on Global Energy Policy, Planning, Analysis, and Columbia University Engagement U.S. Department of Energy • Lori Guetre Vice President of Business Development Carbon Engineering • Christoph Beuttler CDR Manager Climeworks • Dr. Peter Eisenberger Chief Technology Officer Global Thermostat • Mark Ackiewicz Director, Division of CCUS R&D U.S. Department of Energy Jarad Daniels Director, Office of Strategic Planning, Analysis, and Engagement U.S. Department of Energy Jarad Daniels leads the Office of Strategic Planning, Analysis, and Engagement within the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy, including domestic programs and international engagements conducted in close collaboration with industry, academia, and multi-lateral organizations. Mr. Daniels has twenty-five years of experience with the DOE, managing advanced technology programs and working in several national laboratories throughout the United States. His expertise includes domestic and global energy and environmental technologies, policies, and programs. Mr. Daniels holds a Master of Science degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of California at Berkeley. Panelist Dr. Julio Friedmann Senior Research Scholar Center on Global Energy Policy, Columbia University Dr. Julio Friedmann is a Senior Research Scholar at the Center for Global Clean Energy Policy at Columbia University, where he leads a new initiative in carbon management. He is also CEO of Carbon Wrangler, LLC. Recently, he served as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of Fossil Energy at the Department of Energy, where he held responsibility for DOE’s R&D program in advanced fossil energy systems, carbon capture, and storage (CCS), CO2 utilization, and clean coal deployment.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Capture/Blue Hydrogen: the Early 2021 Policy and Project Outlook
    Carbon Capture/Blue Hydrogen: The early 2021 policy and project outlook February 18, 2021 Center for Houston’s Future Rob James Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP Houston and San Francisco Policy player profiles • Global CCS Institute Global Status of CCS 2020 Report • Carbon Capture Coalition Federal Policy Blueprint (May 2019) • Third Way – Carbon Capture Mapping the Progress and Potential of Carbon Capture, Use, and Storage (June 2020) • Clean Air Task Force – Decarbonized Fossil Energy • Hydrogen Council • Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Energy Association • Atlantic Council – Energy & Environment In case you missed It—CCUS/H2 in 2020 Omnibus • Energy Policy Act of 2020 o Authorizes $6.2 billion for Carbon Capture, Use, & Storage (CCUS) over the next 5 years • Directs the DOE to conduct RDD&CA activities for carbon capture technologies • Authorizes support for pilot projects, including first-of-a-kind through third-of-a kind commercial- scale demonstration program to show substantial improvements in the efficiency, effectiveness, and environmental performance for power, industrial, and other applications. ($2.6 billion) • Directs DOE to establish an RD&D program for carbon storage, a large-scale carbon sequestration demonstration program, and an integrated storage program ($800 million) • Establishes DOE RD&D program for carbon utilization. This section authorizes research to identify and evaluate novel uses for carbon, and includes a program to demonstrate applications of carbon utilization for a variety of sectors. Includes a national Carbon Utilization Research Center o Blue Hydrogen • Requires DOE to conduct a study on the benefits of blue hydrogen technology and how that technology can further enhance the deployment and adoption of carbon capture and storage o Funds are authorized, but must still be appropriated.
    [Show full text]
  • CCS: Applications and Opportunities for the Oil and Gas Industry
    Brief CCS: Applications and Opportunities for the Oil and Gas Industry Guloren Turan, General Manager, Advocacy and Communications May 2020 Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Applications of CCS in the oil and gas industry ............................................................................. 2 3. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Page | 1 1. Introduction Production and consumption of oil and gas currently account for over half of global greenhouse gas emissions associated with energy use1 and so it is imperative that the oil and gas industry reduces its emissions to meet the net-zero ambition. At the same time, the industry has also been the source and catalyst of the leading innovations in clean energy, which includes carbon capture and storage (CCS). Indeed, as oil and gas companies are evolving their business models in the context of the energy transition, CCS has started to feature more prominently in their strategies and investments. CCS is versatile technology that can support the oil and gas industry’s low-carbon transition in several ways. Firstly, CCS is a key enabler of emission reductions in the industries’ operations, whether for compliance reasons, to meet self-imposed performance targets or to benefit from CO2 markets. Secondly, spurred by investor and ESG community sentiment, the industry is looking to reduce the carbon footprint of its products when used in industry, since about 90% of emissions associated with oil and gas come from the ultimate combustion of hydrocarbons – their scope 3 emissions. Finally, CCS can be a driver of new business lines, such as clean power generation and clean hydrogen production. From the perspective of the Paris Agreement, however, the deployment of CCS globally remains off track.
    [Show full text]
  • Economics of Direct Air Capture of Carbon Dioxide
    2020 Economics of Direct Air Capture of Carbon Dioxide AUTHORS: VERONICA CORTES & CARYN LASKA MEM – ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT & MBA CANDIDATES MP ADVISOR: PROFESSOR TIMOTHY JOHNSON APRIL 2020 Executive Summary This Masters Project was designed to review Direct Air Capture (DAC) technology’s current positioning in the market and to pinpoint necessary augmentations to economics and policy that must take place in order to improve that positioning. The underlying problem DAC was designed to solve was climate change, which by economists' standards is considered an externality and not a challenge that directly impacts society’s buying/selling behaviors. We recommend, with this paper, various ways the equation could hypothetically change for which the DAC solution becomes relevant. While the underpinning of our thesis is that improving environmental outcomes by capturing more carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions is advantageous for our planet’s future, the critical reason for defining market conditions that demand DAC technologies is that concerns of climate change simply aren’t enough to encourage the advancement of the space. Our approach to researching this question is to conduct literature reviews, interviews, and to analyze data sets to determine best fit solutions for stimulating demand for DAC technologies in the market. The first two sections in the overview of this report provide an overview into the technology’s mechanics and the system’s associated costs. The two main types of DAC technologies make up the majority of the DAC market players and are detailed in this section. We note that the cost for CO2 capture via DAC varies greatly due to the number of companies still piloting their projects as opposed to those companies that have proven their business in the market.
    [Show full text]
  • Putting Costs of Direct Air Capture in Context
    PUTTING COSTS OF DIRECT AIR CAPTURE IN CONTEXT Yuki Ishimoto1*, Masahiro Sugiyama2*, Etsushi Kato1, Ryo Moriyama1, 1 1 Kazuhiro Tsuzuki and Atsushi Kurosawa 1 The Institute of Applied Energy 2 Policy Alternatives Research Institute, The University of Tokyo * Corresponding Author; [email protected]; [email protected] FCEA Working Paper Series: 002 SSRN: 2982422 June, 2017 Putting Costs of Direct Air Capture in Context 1 Table of Contents Abstract 2 Introduction 3 Description of DAC Technologies 5 Cost Estimates by DAC companies 7 Cost Estimates by Technology Developers 8 Other studies 10 Comparing Different Cost Estimates 11 Niche Market for DAC 12 Prospects for DAC in the Near Term 13 Acknowledgement 14 References 15 Table 1. Summary of DAC Technology Companies 18 Putting Costs of Direct Air Capture in Context 1 Abstract This working paper provides an overview of various estimates and claims on direct air capture (DAC) of carbon dioxide, and places them in a broader context of global climate policy. Unlike other techniques of climate engineering, DAC has received significant attention from startups since its main issue is deemed to be the direct implementation cost (not side effects or social concerns), which could be significantly reduced with successful innovation. Publicly available sources demonstrate that there is a huge range of cost estimates with three orders-of-magnitude differences, with the upper end on the order of 1000 USD/t-CO2. Cost values reported by private companies tend to be lower than academic estimates, though there is no a priori reason to believe that either is inherently biased.
    [Show full text]
  • Occidental Petroleum Corporation
    Occidental Petroleum Corporation Angela Zivkovich HSE Advisor This confidential information presentation (the "Overview") has been prepared by or on behalf of Occidental Petroleum Corporation (the "Company") solely for informational purposes. This Overview is being furnished to the recipient in connection with assessing interest in a potential transaction involving the Company or one or more of its subsidiaries or their respective assets or businesses (the "Potential Transaction"). None of the Company, its affiliates or any of their respective employees, directors, officers, contractors, advisors, members, successors, representatives or agents makes any representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this Overview, and shall have no liability for this Overview or for any representations (expressed or implied) contained in, or for any omissions from, this Overview or any other written or oral communications transmitted to the recipient in the course of its evaluation of the Potential Transaction. This Overview does not purport to contain all of the information that may be required or desirable to evaluate all of the factors that might be relevant to a potential investor, and any recipient hereof should conduct its own due diligence investigation and analysis in order to make an independent determination of the suitability and consequences of any action, including submission of a bid, in connection with the Potential Transaction. The Company reserves the right to amend, update or replace all or part of the information in this Overview at any time, but the Company shall not be under any obligation to provide any recipient of this Overview with any amended, updated or replacement information or to correct any inaccuracies herein which may become apparent.
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Air Capture of CO2 with Chemicals
    Direct Air Capture of CO 2 with Chemicals April 15, 2011 Direct Air Capture of CO 2 with Chemicals A Technology Assessment for the APS Panel on Public Affairs April 15, 2011 FORMATTED & PRINTED COPY IN PRODUCTION 1 Direct Air Capture of CO 2 with Chemicals April 15, 2011 About APS & POPA The American Physical Society was founded in 1899, with a mission of advancing and diffusing the knowledge of physics. APS is now the nation’s leading organization of research physicists with more than 48,000 members in academia, national laboratories, and industry. This report was prepared for the APS Panel on Public Affairs (POPA). POPA routinely produces reports on timely topics so as to inform the debate with the perspectives of physicists and other scientists working in the relevant issue areas, including energy and the environment. Most reports prepared for POPA are policy studies, often making policy recommendations and suggesting priorities for research support. This report, by contrast, is a technology assessment and contains no policy or funding recommendations. Report Committee Robert Socolow Michael Desmond Roger Aines Jason Blackstock Olav Bolland Tina Kaarsberg Nathan Lewis Marco Mazzotti Allen Pfeffer Karma Sawyer Jeffrey Siirola Berend Smit Jennifer Wilcox 2 Direct Air Capture of CO 2 with Chemicals April 15, 2011 Executive Summary This report explores direct air capture (DAC) of carbon dioxide (CO 2) from the atmosphere with chemicals. DAC involves a system in which ambient air flows over a chemical sorbent that selectively removes the CO 2. The CO 2 is then released as a concentrated stream for disposal or reuse, while the sorbent is regenerated and the CO 2-depleted air is returned to the atmosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Negative Emissions Technologies and Direct Air Capture
    Copyright © 2018 Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, DC. Reprinted with permission from ELR®, http://www.eli.org, 1-800-433-5120. I. Introduction Legal Pathways Deep decarbonization will require a fundamental trans- formation of U.S. energy and manufacturing industries, to Negative but those sweeping changes alone will likely not suffice. Anthropogenic emissions since the start of the Industrial Emissions Revolution have already resulted in concentrations of car- bon dioxide (CO2) in the ambient atmosphere that will lead to disruptive average global surface temperature increases Technologies and before the end of this century. Simply put, even if current anthropogenic emissions drop to zero, the levels of CO2 already present in the atmosphere will have locked us into Direct Air rapid and intractable warming.1 Deep decarbonization of future emissions also will not sufficiently offset or respond to damaging physical transitions caused by ongoing cli- Capture of mate change that could cause substantial new greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, such as melting permafrost, reduced Greenhouse arctic albedo, and carbon releases from forest fires.2 To address CO 2 concentrations already stockpiled in the atmosphere, deep decarbonization will likely require addi- Gases tional steps beyond simply halting carbon emissions from ongoing economic activities. One potential option under active investigation is ambient CO2 removal through the by Tracy Hester deployment of negative emissions technologies (NETs), including the direct air capture (DAC) of atmospheric CO2 or other GHGs to sequester them in an inaccessible or inert Tracy Hester is a Lecturer at the University form or convert them into a commercial product or good.3 of Houston Law Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Capturing Leadership: Policies for the US To
    Capturing Leadership Policies for the US to Advance Direct Air Capture Technology May 2019 NEW YORK | CALIFORNIA | HONG KONG | PARIS Capturing Leadership Policies for the US to Advance Direct Air Capture Technology May 2019 By John Larsen, Whitney Herndon, Mikhail Grant and Peter Marsters, Rhodium Group, LLC Prepared for Carbon180 with financial support from The Linden Trust for Conservation and the ClimateWorks Foundation © 2019 Rhodium Group, LLC RHODIUM GROUP | CAPTURING LEADERSHIP 1 About This Report Carbon 180 commissioned Rhodium Group, to assess the role John Larsen is a Director at Rhodium Group and leads the of Direct Air Capture technology in the US response to climate firm’s US power sector and energy systems research. John change and identify near and medium-term policy actions to specializes in analysis of national and state clean energy policy advance the deployment of this technology in the next decade. and market trends. Previously, John worked for the US The Linden Trust for Conservation and ClimateWorks Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Policy and Systems Foundation provided financial support for this analysis. The Analysis where he served as an electric power policy advisor. research was performed independently, and the results presented in this report reflect the views of the authors and not Whitney Herndon is a Senior Analyst at Rhodium Group necessarily those of Carbon180, the Linden Trust or focused on US energy markets and policy. She employs a range ClimateWorks. of energy and economic models to analyze the impact of policy proposals on the US electricity sector, energy market, and macroeconomy. About Rhodium Group Rhodium Group is an independent research provider Mikhail Grant is a Research Analyst at Rhodium Group.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxy Moves Forward on Permian 'Direct Air Capture' Plant Oxy Moves
    Oxy moves forward on Permian 'direct air captu… Saved to Dropbox • May 27, 2019 at 7C30 AM Home Local Weather Politics Gray Matters BUSINESS // ENERGY Oxy moves forward on Permian 'direct air capture' plant Jordan Blum May 21, 2019 Updated: May 22, 2019 6:46 a.m. Comments An aerial shot of Carbon Engineering's pilot direct air capture plant north of Vancouver. Photo: Carbon Engineering Houston's Occidental Petroleum said Tuesday it is designing the first "direct air capture" plant in West Texas' booming Permian Basin to suck carbon dioxide out of the sky and inject it into the ground to aid in oil production. Oxy and Chevron earlier this year became the first major oil companies to put their money into so-called negative emissions technologies with the goal of developing "direct air capture" factories. They both invested in Carbon Engineering, a Canadian company that has developed a direct air capture pilot plant outside of Vancouver. Now Oxy is moving first with Carbon Engineering to begin the engineering and design work of what they're calling the world's largest direct air capture and sequestration facility to be located somewhere in West Texas. "Using atmospheric CO2 for oil recovery greatly reduces the net addition of CO2 to the atmosphere from oil production and fuel use, and opens a pathway to producing fully carbon-neutral or even net-negative fuels," said Richard Jackson, who oversees the company's venture capital arm, Oxy Low Carbon Ventures. Earlier this month, Oxy outbid Chevron by paying $38 billion to buy The Woodlands- based Anadarko Petroleum, including its prized acreage in the Permian.
    [Show full text]