甲烷对超临界CO2/水/岩石体系润湿特性影响的分子动力学模拟研究

二氧化碳捕集及封存(CCS)技术以其减少碳排放量的高效性,成为各国解决碳排放问题的首要选择。通过分子动力学模拟方法,探究了地质封存环境下,在不同岩石结构表面,二氧化碳中混入甲烷对润湿性的影响规律。结果表明:在温度为318.00K、压力为20 MPa的环境下,二氧化碳中混入摩尔分数为20%的甲烷,对水在结构分别为Q~3和(Q~3+Q~4)岩石表面的接触角均无显著影响。     

Techno-economic appraisal of fossil-fuelled power generation systems with carbon dioxide capture and storage

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities coupled to power plants provide a climate change mitigation strategy that potentially permits the continued use of fossil fuels whilst reducing the carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. This process involves three basic stages: capture and compression of CO₂ from power stations, transport of CO₂, and storage away from the atmosphere for hundreds to thousands of years. Potential routes for the capture, transport and storage of CO₂ from United Kingdom (UK) power plants are examined. Six indicative options are evaluated, based on ‘Pulverised Coal’, ‘Natural Gas Combined Cycle’, and ‘Integrated (coal) Gasification Combined Cycle’ power stations. Chemical and physical CO₂ absorption capture techniques are employed with realistic transport possibilities to ‘Enhanced Oil Recovery’ sites or depleted gas fields in the North Sea. The selected options are quantitatively assessed against well-established economic and energy-related criteria. Results show that CO₂ capture can reduce emissions by over 90%. However, this will reduce the efficiency of the power plants concerned, incurring energy penalties between 14 and 30% compared to reference plants without capture. Costs of capture, transport and storage are concatenated to show that the whole CCS chain ‘cost of electricity’ (COE) rises by 27-142% depending on the option adopted. This is a significant cost increase, although calculations show that the average ‘cost of CO₂ captured’ is £15/tCO₂ in 2005 prices [the current base year for official UK producer price indices]. If potential governmental carbon penalties were introduced at this level, then the COE would equate to the same as the reference plant, and make CCS a viable option to help mitigate large-scale climate change.     

‘Capture ready’ regulation of fossil fuel power plants – Betting the UK’s carbon emissions on promises of future technology

Climate change legislation requires emissions reductions, but the market shows interest in investing in new fossil fuelled power plants. The question is whether capture ready policy can reconcile these interests. The term ‘capture ready’ has been used a few years by the UK Government when granting licences for fossil fuelled power plants, but only recently has the meaning of the term been defined. The policy has been promoted as a step towards CCS and as an insurance against carbon lock-in. This paper draws on literature on technology lock-in and on regulation of technology undergoing development. Further, versions of the capture readiness concept proposed to date are compared. Capture readiness requirements beyond the minimum criterion of space on the site for capture operations are explored. This includes integration of capture and power plant, downstream operations, overall system integration and regulation of future retrofitting. Capture readiness comes with serious uncertainties and is no guarantee that new-built fossil plants will be abatable or abated in the future. As a regulatory strategy, it has been over-promised in the UK.     

Ten times more difficult: Quantifying the carbon capture and storage challenge

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is receiving much attention and is being promoted as an important low-carbon technology. This paper communicates key insights and conclusions from a larger study that conducted review work, policy analysis, and interviews with actors in the global CCS community (Varnäs et al., 2012). No judgment is made of the desirability of choosing CCS as a low carbon technology option, but if this technology is indeed pursued, four challenges are found to be 10 times greater than often recognized. These are; (i) a tenfold up-scaling in size (MW) from pilot plants to that of commercial demonstration, (ii) a tenfold increase in number of large scale demonstration plants actually being constructed, (iii) a tenfold increase in available annual funding over the coming 40 years and, (iv) a tenfold increase in the price put on carbon dioxide emissions. It is clear that the current development path will not fulfil expectations of CCS being commercially available at the end of this decade, nor will CCS be widely applied in time for significant contributions to needed CO₂ emission reductions. CCS will only be developed if policymakers continue to favour coal based power generation while simultaneously developing stringent climate policy.     

Stakeholder perceptions of CO2 capture and storage in Europe: Results from a survey

During 2006, a survey was conducted of European energy stakeholders (industry, government, environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs), researchers and academicians and parliamentarians). A total of 512 responses was received from 28 countries as follows: industry (28%), research (34%), government (13%), NGOs (5%) and parliamentarians (4%). Three-quarters of the sample thought that widespread use of CO₂ capture and storage (CCS) was ‘definitely’ or ‘probably necessary’ to achieve deep reductions in CO₂ emissions between now and 2050 in their own country. Only one in eight considered that CCS was ‘probably’ or ‘definitely not necessary’. For a range of 12 identified risks, 20–40% thought that they would be ‘moderate’ or ‘very serious’, whilst 60–80% thought that there would be no risks or that the risks would be ‘minimal’. A particular risk identified by nearly half the sample is the additional use of fossil fuels due to the ‘energy penalty’ incurred by CCS. Further concerns are that development of CCS would detract from investment in renewable energy technologies. Half of the respondents thought that incentives for CCS should be set either at the same level as those for renewables or at a higher level. Environmental NGOs were consistently less enthusiastic about CCS than the energy industry.     

Catalyzing strategic transformation to a low-carbon economy: A CCS roadmap for China

China now faces the three hard truths of thirsting for more oil, relying heavily on coal, and ranking first in global carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. Given these truths, two key questions must be addressed to develop a low-carbon economy: how to use coal in a carbon-constrained future? How to increase domestic oil supply to enhance energy security? Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) may be a technological solution that can deal with today's energy and environmental needs while enabling China to move closer to a low-carbon energy future. This paper has been developed to propose a possible CCS roadmap for China. To develop the roadmap, we first explore major carbon capture opportunities in China and then identify critical CCS-enabling technologies, as well as analyze their current status and future prospects. We find that coal gasification or polygeneration in combination with CCS could be a nearly unbeatable combination for China's low-carbon future. Even without CCS, gasification offers many benefits: once coal is gasified into syngas, it can be used for many different purposes including for alternative fuels production, thereby increasing the domestic oil supply and the flexibility of the energy system.     

Carbon prices and CCS investment: A comparative study between the European Union and China

Carbon Capture and Storage is considered as a key option for climate change mitigation; policy makers and investors need to know when CCS becomes economically attractive. Integrating CCS in a power plant adds significant costs which can be offset by a sufficient CO₂ price. However, most markets have failed: currently, the weak carbon price threatens CCS deployment in the European Union (EU). In China, a carbon regulation is appearing and CCS encounters a rising interest. This study investigates two questions: how much is the extra-cost of a CCS plant in the EU in comparison with China? Second, what is the CO₂ price beyond which CCS plants become more profitable than reference plants in the EU and in China? To address these issues, I conducted a literature review on public studies about CCS costs. To objectively assess the profitability of CCS plants, I constructed a net present value model to calculate the Levelised Cost of Electricity and the breakeven CO₂ price. CCS plants become the most profitable plant type beyond 115 €/tCO₂ in the EU vs. 45 €/tCO₂ in China (offshore transport and storage costs). I advise on the optimal plant type choice depending on the CO₂ price in both countries.     

国外CCS政策法规体系的形成及对我国的启示

碳捕集和封存（Carbon Capture and Storage, CCS）是一种新的二氧化碳减排技术,是中国未来实现温室气体深度减排的重要战略选择。但作为一项新兴的减排技术,中国的CCS政策法规体系建设尚处于起步阶段。本文系统整理分析了欧盟、英国、美国、澳大利亚等国家和地区CCS领域的法规、政策和标准,在总结发达国家CCS立法以及政策、标准建立方面成功经验的基础上,针对CCS不同环节提出了对我国相应的政策法规建议,以期为我国CCS相关政策、法规的建立提供参考。     

中国中长期碳减排战略目标初探(Ⅱ)——中国煤炭消费过程的碳排放及减排措施

中国能源领域排放的二氧化碳主要来自煤炭,因此煤炭消费过程中的碳减排措施尤为重要。煤炭的主要用户是发电部门,基于应对气候变化的需要,煤电行业的低碳途径不得不考虑采用CCS技术。不论是新建燃煤电厂,还是今后在传统电厂改建过程中增设CCS设施已是大势所趋,预计多数仍将采用MEA法脱除烟气中二氧化碳这一成熟技术。由于MEA法技术经济指标不够先进,估计10~20年内必将出现更先进的脱二氧化碳工艺技术。传统的燃煤锅炉增加CCS的经济效益已经逊于IGCC-CCS,预计2020年后IGCC电厂将成为新建煤电厂的首选方案。20年后采用临氢气化炉与燃料电池FC发电相结合、把高温的热能和甲烷的化学能直接转化为电力的IGFC高效燃煤电厂或将成功应用,IGFC综合能量转化效率比IGCC相对高出1/2~3/4,发展前景不可低估。钢铁、水泥和化工等高耗煤工业部门可通过节能和采用CCS技术降低碳排放,其余用煤的工业部门和分散用户则应考虑节能或用天然气等低碳燃料替代,间接起到减排效果。预计2050年燃煤发电和高耗煤工业总计将排放二氧化碳4.6Gt,如果二氧化碳捕集量是2.9Gt,则净排放量为1.7Gt。加上其他难以捕集二氧化碳的工业、部门及民用煤排放二氧化碳1.0Gt,合计二氧化碳净排放量为2.7Gt(情景A)。如果采用更先进的技术和严格的节能减排措施,可减少煤炭消耗0.31Gt标煤,减少二氧化碳排放0.5Gt,使煤源二氧化碳净排放量减少到2.2Gt(情景B)。无论哪种情景,实施CCS的任务都十分艰巨。     

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of global biochar mitigation potential

This paper uses Marginal Abatement Cost Curves (MACCs) to illustrate the cost-effectiveness of mitigation potential offered by biochar projects compared to other mitigation measures. Biochar projects encompass a range of technologies, from wooden kilns to large processing plants. These projects differ in their abatement potential and implicit cost per tonne of carbon mitigated. Biochar stove and kiln projects in developing nations are more cost-effective than pyrolysis plant scenarios in developed countries, and thus could abate more fossil fuel carbon emissions (up to 1.03 Gt by 2030 in Asia). Even the most expensive biochar projects rival the cost-effectiveness of other carbon negative technologies such as Carbon Capture and Storage. Economic feasibility of all biochar projects depends on a range of factors including the price of carbon and significant ancillary benefits in terms of agricultural productivity.     

Can ‘negative net CO2 emissions’ from decarbonised biogas-to-electricity contribute to solving Poland’s carbon capture and sequestration dilemmas?

The article analyses to what extent ‘negative net CO₂ emissions’ from decarbonised biogas-to-electricity can contribute to solving Poland’s carbon capture and sequestration dilemmas. From the criteria-based evaluation of low-carbon power technologies it is found, that biogas-to-electricity is among technologies having increasing production potential in Poland. Therefore, in future biogas will be able to contribute to solving Poland’s CCS dilemmas, because it offers carbon-neutral electricity. Moreover, by applying CCS into biogas-to-electricity the ‘negative net CO₂ emissions’ can be achieved. The article examines three biogas-to-electricity technologies involving CO₂ capture, i.e. biogas-to-biomethane, biogas-to-CHP and biogas-to-electricity via the ORFC cycle. It is emphasised that the ORFC cycle offers low-cost CO₂ separation from a CO₂-H₂ mixture, low O₂-intensity, and the opportunities for advanced mass and energy integration of involved processes. Besides, energy conversion calculations show that the ORFC cycle can offer comparable cycle efficiency with air- and oxy-combustion combined cycles. In regard to the design of biogas-based energy systems it is recommended to include (i) distributed production of biogas in order to avoid costs of long-distance transportation of high-moisture content biomass and (ii) centralised large-scale decarbonised biogas-to-electricity power plants since costs of pipeline transportation of gases are low but large-scale plants could benefit from increased energy and CCS efficiencies.     

Study of a roadmap for carbon capture and storage development in Guangdong Province,China

Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions are increasing rapidly in Guangdong, an economically developed Chinese province. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an important approach to lower carbon concentration in this area. This study provides guidance and recommendations for CCS development and demonstration by analysing the necessity of CCS in Guangdong. Furthermore, this study identifies the major opportunities and technical demands related to CCS development in this province based on a sectoral analysis of emission inventory and the forecasting and identification of the potential CO ₂ storage capacity. A CCS development roadmap is then developed for Guangdong based on the analysis results, and the milestone goals of this roadmap from the present until 2030 are presented in accordance with the development of technology in and the current status of Guangdong. In addition, the roadmap suggests CCS support policies.     

Investment risks under uncertain climate change policy

This paper describes results from a model of decision-making under uncertainty using a real options methodology, developed by the International Energy Agency (IEA). The model represents investment decisions in power generation from the perspective of a private company. The investments are subject to uncertain future climate policy, which is treated as an external risk factor over which the company has no control. The aims of this paper are to (i) quantify these regulatory risks in order to improve understanding of how policy uncertainty may affect investment behaviour by private companies and (ii) illustrate the effectiveness of the real options approach as a policy analysis tool. The study analysed firms’ investment options of coal- and gas-fired power plants and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. Policy uncertainty is represented as an exogenous event that creates uncertainty in the carbon price. Our findings indicate that climate policy uncertainty creates a risk premium for power generation investments. In the case of gas- and coal-fired power generation, the risk premium would lead to an increase in electricity prices of 5–10% in order to stimulate investment. In the case of CCS, the risk premium would increase the carbon price required to stimulate investment by 16–37% compared to a situation of perfect certainty. The option to retrofit CCS acts as a hedge against high future carbon prices, and could accelerate investment in coal plant. This paper concludes that to minimise investment risks in low carbon technologies, policy-makers should aim to provide some long-term regulatory certainty.     

Pricing Contracts Under Uncertainty in a Carbon Capture and Storage Framework

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) has been demonstrated as a viable option for reducing carbon emissions to the atmosphere. We consider a situation where a tax on emissions is imposed on carbon dioxide (CO₂) producers to encourage their participation in CCS. Operators of CO₂ transportation pipelines and storage sites enter into individual contracts with emissions producers to store CO₂. We study the problem of selecting the optimal price and volume of these contracts under both cost and emissions uncertainty to optimize the storage operator's expected profit.     

Decision on optimal building energy efficiency standard in China—The case for Tianjin

This paper investigates the optimal choice of building energy efficiency (BEE) standard in the context of centralised urban district heating system in northern China. By employing a techno-economic analysis approach, we demonstrate that the current BEE standard implemented in the Chinese cities should be tightened further in order to achieve a socially optimal level. Without considering the externality costs associated with carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, current BEE standards need to be upgraded to the equivalent level of French RT2005 standard coupled with a properly designed district coal-fired Combined Heat and Power (CHP). In contrast, the equivalent efficiency standard of Swedish building code is preferably to be implemented in the case of explicit carbon emission restriction as long as the marginal cost of carbon emission (carbon price) is sufficiently high. The fuel-switching policy (from coal to natural gas) in the urban district heating system would result in significant increase in overall costs if the BEE upgrade is not taken into account simultaneously. It is also found that BEE improvements in northern Chinese cities are more cost-effective than investing in low-carbon technologies such as wind power or Carbon Capture and storage in the EU and US with regard to CO₂ emissions mitigation.     

Strategy for promoting low-carbon technology transfer to developing countries: The case of CCS

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is the critical enabling technology that would reduce CO₂ emissions significantly while also allowing fossil fuels to meet the world’s pressing energy needs. The International Energy Agency analysis shows that although the developed world must lead the CCS effort in the next decade, there is an urgent need to spread CCS to the developing world. Given technologies for reducing GHG emissions originate mainly in developed countries, technology transfer, as an important feature emphasized by both the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol, therefore has a key role to play in bridging a gap between developed and developing countries. The main objective of this paper is to explore potential policies and schemes promoting the transfer of CCS technologies to developing countries. First, it reviews the global CCS status, analyzes the significant gap of CCS in developed and developing countries, and investigates stakeholder perceptions of diffusing CCS to China, which is a major developing country and a significant potential candidate for large-scale CCS deployment; then the authors make an attempt to understand technology transfer including its benefits, barriers, and definition. The UNFCCC explicitly commits the developed (Annex I) countries to provide financial and technical support to developing countries under favorable terms. The authors argue that the ultimate goal of technology transfer should not only be limited to apply CCS in developing countries, but also to enhance their endogenous capabilities, which will enable future innovation and ensure long-term adoption of low-carbon technologies. As a result, the authors propose a four-pronged approach to the transfer of CCS technologies, which involves physical transfer of explicit technologies, a financial mechanism, endogenous capacity building, and a monitoring mechanism. Concrete enhanced actions to promote CCS technology transfer are also proposed. The four-pronged approach and related enhanced actions proposed in this paper are also applicable to other low-carbon technology transfer.     

The production of hydrogen fuel from renewable sources and its role in grid operations

Understanding the scale and nature of hydrogen's potential role in the development of low carbon energy systems requires an examination of the operation of the whole energy system, including heat, power, industrial and transport sectors, on an hour-by-hour basis. The Future Energy Scenario Assessment (FESA) software model used for this study is unique in providing a holistic, high resolution, functional analysis, which incorporates variations in supply resulting from weather-dependent renewable energy generators. The outputs of this model, arising from any given user-definable scenario, are year round supply and demand profiles that can be used to assess the market size and operational regime of energy technologies. FESA was used in this case to assess what - if anything - might be the role for hydrogen in a low carbon economy future for the UK.In this study, three UK energy supply pathways were considered, all of which reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050, and substantially reduce reliance on oil and gas while maintaining a stable electricity grid and meeting the energy needs of a modern economy. All use more nuclear power and renewable energy of all kinds than today's system. The first of these scenarios relies on substantial amounts of ‘clean coal’ in combination with intermittent renewable energy sources by year the 2050. The second uses twice as much intermittent renewable energy as the first and virtually no coal. The third uses 2.5 times as much nuclear power as the first and virtually no coal.All scenarios clearly indicate that the use of hydrogen in the transport sector is important in reducing distributed carbon emissions that cannot easily be mitigated by Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). In the first scenario, this hydrogen derives mainly from steam reformation of fossil fuels (principally coal), whereas in the second and third scenarios, hydrogen is made mainly by electrolysis using variable surpluses of low-carbon electricity. Hydrogen thereby fulfils a double facetted role of Demand Side Management (DSM) for the electricity grid and the provision of a ‘clean’ fuel, predominantly for the transport sector. When each of the scenarios was examined without the use of hydrogen as a transport fuel, substantially larger amounts of primary energy were required in the form of imported coal.The FESA model also indicates that the challenge of grid balancing is not a valid reason for limiting the amount of intermittent renewable energy generated. Engineering limitations, economic viability, local environmental considerations and conflicting uses of land and sea may limit the amount of renewable energy available, but there is no practical limit to the conversion of this energy into whatever is required, be it electricity, heat, motive power or chemical feedstocks.     

Carbon capture and storage potential in coal-fired plant in Malaysia—A review

Secure, reliable and affordable energy supplies are necessary for sustainable economic growth, but increases in associated carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, and the associated risk of climate change are a cause of major concern. Experts have projected that the CO₂ emissions related to the energy sector will increase 130% by 2050 in the absence of new policies or supply constraints as a result of increased fossil fuel usage. To address this issue will require an energy technology revolution involving greater energy efficiency, increased renewable energies and nuclear power, and the near-decarbonisation of fossil fuel-based power generation. Nonetheless, fossil fuel usage is expected to continue to dominate global energy supply. The only technology available to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from large-scale fossil fuel usage is carbon capture and storage (CCS), an essential part of the portfolio of technologies that is needed to achieve deep global emission reductions. However, CCS technology faces numerous issues and challenges before it can be successfully deployed. With Malaysia has recently pledged a 40% carbon reduction by 2020 in the Copenhagen 2009 Climate Summit, CCS technology is seen as a viable option in order to achieve its target. Thus, this paper studies the potential and feasibility of coal-fired power plant with CCS technology in Malaysia which includes the choices of coal plants and types of capture technologies possible for implementation.     

广东省低碳发展的能源消耗与CO2排放分析

作为中国经济大省、人口大省和能源消费大省,广东省先行启动国家低碳省试点工作,率先开展碳交易市场建设试点。能源消费特征和CO2排放情况是低碳发展的基础,从广东省经济发展入手,分析了广东省终端能源消费及构成、单位GDP能耗和单位工业增加值能耗等能源消费特征,估算了广东省2005年至2010年的CO2排放量,并预测了广东省“十二五”期间的能源消费和CO2排放量,为节能减碳和国家低碳试点工作提供基础数据和决策依据。     

Status of thermal power generation in India—Perspectives on capacity,generation and carbon dioxide emissions

India’s reliance on fossil-fuel based electricity generation has aggravated the problem of high carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions from combustion of fossil fuels, primarily coal, in the country’s energy sector. The objective of this paper is to analyze thermal power generation in India for a four-year period and determine the net generation from thermal power stations and the total and specific CO₂ emissions. The installed generating capacity, net generation and CO₂ emissions figures for the plants have been compared and large generators, large emitters, fuel types and also plant vintage have been identified. Specific emissions and dates of commissioning of plants have been taken into account for assessing whether specific plants need to be modernized. The focus is to find out areas and stations which are contributing more to the total emissions from all thermal power generating stations in the country and identify the overall trends that are emerging.