Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CCS incentives”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Large-scale spatially explicit analysis of carbon capture at cellulosic biorefineries

The large-scale production of cellulosic biofuels would involve spatially distributed systems including biomass fields, logistics networks and biorefineries. Better understanding of the interactions between landscape-related decisions and the design of biorefineries with carbon capture and storage (CCS) in a supply chain context is needed to enable efficient systems. Here we analyse the cost and greenhouse gas mitigation potential for cellulosic biofuel supply chains in the US Midwest using realistic spatially explicit land availability and crop productivity data and consider fuel conversion technologies with detailed CCS design for their associated CO 2 streams. Optimization methods identify trade-offs and design strategies leading to systems with attractive environmental and economic performance. Strategic and operational decisions depend on underlying spatial features and are sensitive to biofuel demand and CCS incentives. US CCS incentives neglect to motivate greenhouse gas mitigation from all supply chain emission sources, which leverage spatial interactions between CCS, electricity prices and the biomass landscape.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2022

First Wave of Incentive-Driven CCS Projects in North Dakota

Conference poster presented at American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) Conference, Houston, Texas, March 28–30, 2022. While the central interior of North America offers a tremendous storage resource, optimization will be key to meaningfully reducing the more than 2.6 billion tons of CO 2 emitted annually from large point sources in the United States. These initial projects tend to have the most favorable economics and are often able to take advantage of the best geology, with little to no competition for resource. This initial wave of projects is informing investment in and creating the opportunity for innovation that will enable the next wave of incentive-based CCS projects. Such innovation is critical for reducing costs, enhancing the design and operability of the next wave of CCS projects, and realizing more of the 250 billion tons of storage resource in North Dakota.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2018

Policy, Regulatory, Legal, and Permitting Case Study Subtask 3.2 – Topical Report

This report summarizes the policy, regulatory, legal, and permitting requirements to-date for the siting of a CO 2 injection and storage project in the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin pre-feasibility study area. Where applicable, the East Sub-Basin case study focuses on a proposed carbon capture and storage (CCS) site location in West Terre Haute, Indiana. Indiana has established the legal mechanisms to obtain rights to the subsurface mineral estate with the expectation to apply to reservoir pore space for CO 2 storage in an analogous manner to storage of natural gas, which is a common practice in Indiana. There is, however, no precedent in Indiana to take liability for stored CO 2 . There are currently no Indiana State incentives for CCS, but at the Federal level, tax credits for carbon capture and storage under 26. U.S. Code § 45Q constitute the greatest incentive targeted at CCS projects. The amendment to these credits put forth in the Bipartisan Budget Act (the FUTURE Act) of 2018 substantially increases the per-ton incentive for CCS—from $22.66 per ton in tax year 2017 up to $50 per ton in tax year 2027, for CO 2 not used as an injectant (i.e. saline storage). Additional economic opportunities may exist for the provision of CO 2 for potential EOR in the Illinois Basin. Policies that may support the development of CO 2 pipelines and/or CCS projects in Indiana include: 1) Title 41 of the FAST Act (2015), which created a new governance structure, procedures, and funding authorities in order to improve and expedite Federal review and authorization of covered infrastructure projects, including pipelines, and 2) the Eminent Domain for Transportation of Carbon Dioxide by Pipeline (IC 14-39, Indiana State, 2011), which declares pipeline transportation of CO 2 exclusively to a carbon management application, including sequestration, enhanced oil recovery, and deep saline injection as a benefit to the welfare of Indiana and the people. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program Class VI rule and permit requirements address all components pertaining to CO 2 injection and monitoring for long-term storage, and outline the minimum technical criteria to protect underground sources of drinking water at, and surrounding, injection well sites. The Class VI requirements also address financial responsibility for corrective action, post-injection site care, and site closure. In addition, UIC Program public notice requirements include that the EPA issue notice of the draft permit preparation to key stakeholders, and open a public comment period of not less than 30 days. A public hearing about the permit would also be held, if specifically requested by the public. A potential Class VI CO 2 injection well permit for the East Sub-Basin case study site would be obtained through the US EPA Region 5, because the State of Indiana does not have UIC Class VI primacy. Although no CO 2 injection wells have been permitted in Indiana, the US EPA Region 5 (which covers Illinois and Indiana) and the East Sub-Basin CarbonSAFE team (via the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium [MGSC]) have Class VI permitting experience from several projects located in Illinois. Based on our experience, applying for a Class VI permit can be an intensive and iterative process requiring clear communication and numerous interactions with EPA staff. In addition to gathering and preparing the data/models and documentation necessary for a permit application’s initial submittal, the subsequent public comments, EPA response and review, and answering of any follow-up questions/requests by the EPA could significantly increase the timeframe of draft permit issuance. The US EPA offers guidance documents regarding the specific Class VI permit requirements, and shows a general permitting timeline example from the FutureGen Alliance 2.0 covering one-and-a-half years from permit submittal to issuance. However, the overall permitting process to-date has a high degree of variability, and in MGSC’s project experience we observed a more extended timeline to receive Class VI permits for each of two CO 2 injection wells.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2026

Illinois Storage Corridor - CarbonSAFE Phase III: Policy, Regulatory, Legal and Permitting Characteristics; Subtask 5.5

The Illinois Storage Corridor (ISC) project aims to advance the commercial development and implementation of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies within a region in Illinois of suitable geology for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage in deep saline aquifers. The project partners have annual emissions greater than 6.5 million tonnes per year; storage hubs are being explored at two sites—one near the One Earth Energy facility in east-central Illinois, and one near the Prairie State Generating Company campus in southwest Illinois. To implement the technology, legal, policy, and economic considerations must be explored. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) administers the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program and is responsible for issuing Class VI permits to construct and operate CO 2 injection wells, i.e., a UIC Class VI well permit is required to inject CO 2 into the subsurface for geologic sequestration. The largest consideration of the Class VI well requirements is to protect underground sources of drinking water (USDWs). Additionally discussed are considerations for Class VI permits relating to public engagement. Besides permitting, property rights to storage sites, subsurface pore spaces, and areas for pipeline transportation must be secured. Pore space rights is still a novel concept being explored and not yet addressed by the Illinois legislature. It is believed that surface property rights are required for the subsurface pore space below, so long as there is not a separated mineral estate in the subsurface. Illinois legislature has addressed securing rights-of-way for CO 2 transportation, allowing for easements and the exercise of eminent domain to secure such rights. Economically, the incentives for CCS are ever-expanding. Recently, the federal government broadened the availability and increased the dollar-amounts for the § 45Q tax credits for geological storage of carbon oxides. Congress has also authorized the Advanced Industrial Facilities Development Program which allocates billions of dollars in funds to installing technology at industrial facilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. On the state level, Illinois has had its own incentives for CCS projects since 2009 and expanded its emission-related goals again in 2021. The law enacted in 2021 specifically creates a commission to explore implementing CCS at Prairie State Generating Company, a partner on the Illinois Storage Corridor project.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Offshore Oil and Gas Infrastructure Reuse for CCS: Opportunities and Challenges in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico

The United States Gulf of Mexico has historically been a significant oil and gas producing region and continues to produce hydrocarbons today. As such, significant investments have been made to install oil and gas infrastructure such as pipelines, platforms, and wells. As these assets reach the end of their useful life or production associated with the assets is curtailed, the assets become a liability for both the owner/operators and the U.S. and state governments responsible for regulating the assets. There are costs and risks associated with safely decommissioning the assets, and in some cases, the assets may be abandoned (e.g., the owner is no longer a going concern). In parallel, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has developed in the United States and interest and incentives for CCS projects have accelerated in recent years, with many public announcements of CCS projects in development in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico region. The region is particularly well-suited to CCS due to the high density of industry on the coastline (i.e., CO 2 sources) and favorable geology in the near-offshore region. CCS also requires the use of many of the same assets required for oil and gas production (pipelines, platforms, wells) and the oil and gas industry has direct experience with CO 2 transport and injection (i.e., EOR). Therefore, the combination of existing infrastructure in close proximity to potential CCS project sites appears to provide a potential “win-win” solution for re-use of existing oil and gas assets. This paper presents a high-level evaluation of oil and gas infrastructure in the Gulf of Mexico with the goals of identifying the scale of the opportunity (e.g., how much existing infrastructure is realistically re-usable), identifying gaps in knowledge/policy/information required to evaluate existing infrastructure for re-use, and proposing key actions that could be pursued to further the assessment of existing infrastructure re-use for CCS.

Infrastructure, reuse, re-purpose, oil and gas, pi↗
DOE OSTI2018

Data Gap Assessment Subtask 4.1 Topical Report

Data sets were compiled and assessed for the Cambro-Ordovician Storage Complex across the CarbonSAFE Illinois East Sub-Basin study area to assess the data needs to support drilling a stratigraphic borehole at the East Sub-Basin case study site located at the Wabash Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plant north of Terre Haute, Indiana. Available data for the Mt. Simon Sandstone, within a 50 mile range in the East Sub-Basin study area, was assembled and cataloged. A summary of regional data documenting seal penetrations in the Cambrian Eau Claire and Ordovician Maquoketa was compiled, but a lack of deep well control over the project area illustrates the need for test boring and data acquisition at the East Sub-Basin case study site.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2018

Summary of Carbon Storage Incentives and Potential Legislation: East Sub-Basin Project Task 3.1 Business and Financial Case Study

The CarbonSAFE Illinois – East Sub-Basin project is conducting a pre-feasibility assessment for commercial-scale CO2 geological storage complexes. The project aims to identify sites capable of storing more than 50 million tons of industrially-sourced CO2. To support the business development assessment of the economic viability of potential sites in the East Sub-Basin and explore conditions under which a carbon capture and storage (CCS) project therein might be revenue positive, this document provides a summary of carbon storage incentives and legislation of potential relevance to the project.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2025

CO 2 Transport Infrastructure Outlook in the United States

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) represents one of the most important methods to mitigate anthropogenic carbon emissions at a large scale, playing a key role in meeting climate change targets (Bui et al., 2018) and for net-zero CO 2 by 2050 scenarios in the United States (Browning et al., 2023). This technology involves capturing CO 2 emissions from industrial processes, transporting them via pipelines, trucks, rails, or ships, and ultimately storing them in underground geological sites, such as saline aquifers or depleted oil reservoirs. Thus, to encourage carbon reduction initiatives, the U.S. Congress enacted the Bipartisan Budget Act in 2018, reforming the 45Q tax credit to benefit operators storing CO 2 in geologic formations (Jones and Sherlock, 2021). Additionally, the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act further expanded these incentives, providing additional support for CCS initiatives (Hackett and Kuehn, 2023). Although numerous studies describe the importance of optimal CO 2 transportation to support the decision-making of CCS projects aligned with the objective of net-zero emissions by 2050 (Abramson and Christensen, 2021; Chen and Pawar, 2023; Greig and Pascale, 2021), further efforts are required to optimize the transport infrastructure for national-scale CCS deployment. Therefore, in this study, we examine three nationwide scenarios with the SimCCS 3.0 tool (Ma et al., 2022, 2023, 2024) along with a novel geospatial splitting approach developed by Velasco-Lozano et al. (Velasco- Lozano et al., 2024a, 2024b). We present optimized pipeline networks that meet the dynamic evolution of annual capture amounts, describing the required total pipeline lengths at each stage as a function of the pipeline diameters. Thus, the cases presented demonstrate the feasibility of CO 2 pipeline infrastructure for large-scale CCS projects.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2017

Quantifying CO 2 storage efficiency factors in hydrocarbon reservoirs. A detailed look at CO 2 Enhanced Oil Recovery

Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) enhanced oil recovery (EOR) will likely be the primary means of geologic CO 2 storage during the early stages of commercial-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) because of the inherent economic incentives as well as the abundant experience and demonstrated success in the United States, where CO 2 EOR has been employed since 1974. The work presented here estimates CO 2 storage efficiency factors in CO 2 EOR operations using a unique industry database of CO 2 EOR sites and 12 different reservoir simulation models. The simulation models encompass fluvial clastic and shallow shelf carbonate depositional environments for reservoir depths of 1219 and 2438 m (4000 and 8000 feet) and 7.6-, 20-, and 64-m (25-, 66-, and 209-foot)-thick pay zones. A novel statistical modeling technique incorporating the Michaelis–Menten function is used to generate empirical percentile estimates of CO 2 storage efficiency factors. West Texas San Andres dolomite water alternating gas (WAG) CO 2 flood performance data were used to derive P10, P50, and P90 CO 2 storage efficiency factors of 0.76, 1.28, and 1.74 Mscf/STB (stock tank barrel) of original oil in place. Median CO 2 storage efficiency factors from continuous CO 2 injection following conventional waterflood varied from 15% to 61% and 8% to 40% for fluvial clastic and shallow shelf carbonate simulation models, respectively, while those from WAG injection varied from 14% to 42% and 8% to 31%, respectively. Variation in the CO 2 storage efficiency factors was largely attributable to reservoir depth (a surrogate for reservoir pressure and temperature) and lithology (clastic versus carbonate). The results of this work provide practical information that can be used to quantify CO 2 storage resource estimates in oil reservoirs during CO 2 EOR operations (as opposed to storage following depletion) and the uncertainty associated with those estimates.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Pathways to Carbon Neutrality 2050 in Malaysia and Kuala Lumpur

Malaysia has recently set an ambitious target of achieving carbon neutrality as early as 2050. To accomplish this, the country will need to strategically reduce its emissions across all sectors. In 2020, Malaysia emitted approximately 368 MtCO2e, with the largest sources of emissions including electricity (36% of total emissions), transportation (17%), and industry (15%)1. We find that the greatest reductions in emissions can therefore come from decarbonizing power generation and electrifying end-use sectors. Digitalization, smart technologies, and improved energy efficiency will significantly reduce economy-wide energy consumption. By leveraging efficient technologies, both Malaysia and Kuala Lumpur can address the challenges posed by rapid urbanization and climate change. Digitalization is a broad category that includes a variety of measures; for example, the wide adoption of high-efficiency appliances and lighting or improved building energy codes in the buildings sector. Similarly, technological improvements can advance industrial energy efficiency, and for transportation, smart technologies cover a shift from private to public transportation and the greater use of electric vehicles. While renewable energy (RE) will play a crucial role in decarbonization, achieving carbon neutrality in certain sectors will be difficult without emerging technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS) and innovative fuel sources such as hydrogen. In order for Malaysia to rely on CCS as a mitigation option, early investment and incentives to the private sector will be critical. This holds for the use of hydrogen as well: investing in the necessary technology, infrastructure, and human capital will allow Malaysia to position itself as an innovator in the region and leverage these advanced technologies as a key part of its climate strategy. Another possible carbon removal option other than CCS would be a land-use sink; however, given that Malaysia is still developing and may deforest in the near-term, this report does not focus on the mitigation potential of land-use change. With its innovative and bold climate plans, Kuala Lumpur is primed to be a leader in regional climate change efforts. Kuala Lumpur is also engaged in several international collaborations to ensure sustainable city development such as the C40 network and the ASEAN Smart Cities Partnership. As such, the city will play a critical role in contributing to Malaysia’s overall climate goals and as a policy trendsetter through ambitious, scalable plans. One key factor in these emissions reductions is that Kuala Lumpur has full control over its building guidelines, allowing for ambitious policies resulting in significant emissions reductions. However, in other sectors, Kuala Lumpur has less direct control over regulations; for example, power generation and integration of RE are largely in the hands of the Malaysian government. With limited and primarily light industry, Kuala Lumpur’s contributions to emissions reductions here are curbed. And, while Kuala Lumpur has control over local transportation policies like increasing access to and quality of public transportation, broad shifts in transportation will stem from national-level policies. As such, multi-level governance is an integral component of Malaysia’s climate strategy and coordination between local and national governments will be essential in reducing emissions and achieving other climate goals. This report addresses these and other key challenges and opportunities Malaysia faces on the road to carbon neutrality.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Computational Tools and Workflows for Quantitative Risk Assessment and Decision Support for Geologic Carbon Storage Sites: Progress and Insights from the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership

The 2005 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on CCS raised the profile of CO2 capture and storage (CCS) as an important technology for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. CCS is now recognized as a key component of most climate change mitigation scenarios. Since publication of that report the international research, development, and deployment (RD&D) community has advanced key technical aspects, clarified regulatory requirements, explored value chain and infrastructure solutions, and developed incentive paradigms to enable and promote large-scale deployment of CCS. These efforts have included research to better characterize geologic storage resources, to improve injection performance and storage efficiency, to assess and manage subsurface environmental risks, and to advance monitoring technologies to assure system conformance. These efforts have helped to build confidence in the viability of geologic carbon storage (GCS), but stakeholder concerns about long-term risks and liability associated with GCS remain a hurdle to broad acceptance and large-scale deployment of CCS. Since 2010, the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) – a research collaboration between five contributing national laboratories – has worked to establish and demonstrate methods and tools to quantify and manage the subsurface environmental risks associated with GCS, amidst uncertainty. This work supports the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management Carbon Transport and Storage Program’s goal of advancing safe and secure commercial-scale GCS deployment. To address the technical challenge of simulating the physical response of the GCS site to large-scale CO2 injection, NRAP has adopted an approach that relies on coupling computationally efficient reduced-order and/or data-driven proxy models of important system components (i.e., storage reservoir, sealing caprock, leakage pathways, intermediate formations, overlying groundwater aquifers, and the atmosphere) in integrated assessment framework. That integrated model of the physical system is complemented with fit-for purpose functionality to support site characterization and risk-related decisions. The recently released NRAP Phase II toolset includes the Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP-Open-IAM) for evaluation of trends in leakage risk and potential impact, tools to support monitoring design optimization (Designs for Risk Evaluation and Management – DREAM v3.0 and Passive Seismic Monitoring Tool - PSMT), and tools for state of stress evaluation (State-of-Stress Analysis Tool - SOSAT) and forecasting induced seismicity risk. The NRAP team has also released a pair of reports describing conceptual workflows to incorporate physics-based, quantitative risk assessment into many of the design, planning, operation, and closure decisions for GCS projects. An online catalogue highlights published studies where these tools and methods are demonstrated. In this presentation, the utility of these products to assess risks and address key stakeholder questions will be highlighted through examples, and related insights about the safety and security of geologic carbon storage in qualified storage sites will be discussed. The prospect of rapid, large-scale deployment of GCS technology to aggressively reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions requires careful consideration of interference between multiple commercial-scale storage projects within a basin. Going forward, NRAP is expanding and adapting site-scale risk quantification tools and methods to enable assessment of risks and inform management decisions for basin-scale deployment. Increasingly, this work will leverage next-generation approaches for surrogate modelling, fast prediction, and advanced visualization enabled by machine learning and artificial intelligence to promote virtual learning, scenario evaluation, and augment risk-based decision making.

quantitative risk assessment, geologic carbon stor↗
DOE OSTI2022

Economics of Carbon Capture and Sequestration

The paper will help state utility regulators understand the economics of CCS and their role in the process. It will introduce the concepts of offsets, tax incentives, and federal and state cooperation as a means of improving the economic benefits of CCS.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Optimal carbon capture and storage contracts using historical CO 2 emissions levels

In an effort to reduce carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions to the atmosphere, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has been developed to collect CO 2 from emissions generators and store it underground. Recent proposed legislation would limit the volume of emissions generated from power sources, effectively requiring some sources to participate in CCS. Both emissions sources and storage operators require incentives to enter into contracts to capture excess emissions at the source, and transport and store the CO 2 underground. As the level of emissions from power plants is stochastic and carryover into future time periods is expensive, we develop a newsvendor model to determine the optimal price and volume of these contracts to maximize the expected profit of the storage operator and encourage the participation of multiple emissions sources. Because the storage operator has a limit on the amount of CO 2 that can be injected each month, this limit affects the allocation of the optimal contract amounts between the emitters. Furthermore, the distribution of emissions and relative costs of transportation also influence the optimal policy. In addition to analytical solutions, we present data-driven methods for using correlated emissions data to determine the optimal price and volume of these contracts.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2018

Near-term deployment of carbon capture and sequestration from biorefineries in the United States

Significance Carbon dioxide removal through the permanent sequestration of biogenic CO 2 is a critical technique for climate change mitigation, but most bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies are technically immature or commercially unavailable. In contrast, examples of CCS of biogenic CO 2 resulting from fermentation emissions already exist at scale. Here, we evaluate low-cost, commercially ready sequestration opportunities for existing biorefineries in the United States. We find that existing and proposed financial incentives suggest a substantial near-term opportunity to catalyze the growth of CCS infrastructure, improve the impacts of conventional biofuels, support development of carbon-negative biofuels, and satisfy low-carbon fuel policies.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

MRCI Task 4: Evaluating Regional Infrastructure Technical Summary Report

The infrastructure required to enable carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) goes beyond the equipment and materials needed to capture, transport, and store carbon dioxide (CO2) but includes people and policy that make CCS feasible. The Infrastructure Assessment task of the Midwest Regional Carbon Initiative (MRCI) seeks to determine the infrastructure requirements for the MRCI study area through four activities: • Infrastructure Readiness: Strategizing the buildout of capture, transport, and storage infrastructure in the Midwest, Northeast, and Mid-Atlantic Offshore. • Site Readiness: Determining the CCS readiness of each state in the MRCI region in the categories of subsurface readiness; infrastructure readiness; regulations, permitting, and incentives; and social dynamics. • Jobs, Economics, and Social Characteristics: Quantifying the economic potential, job opportunities, and training opportunities for CCS as well as the social characteristics of the region with a focus on energy and environmental justice (EJ) issues. • Policy and Regulations: Providing an updated accounting of the CCS-relevant policy and regulations in the MRCI region.

CCUS,Carbon storage,Midwest,Midwest Regional Carbo↗
DOE OSTI2024

Retrofittable Advanced Combined Cycle Integration for Flexible Decarbonized Generation

This is the final scientific / technical report for Front End Engineering Design (FEED) study “Retrofittable Advanced Combined Cycle Integration for Flexible Decarbonized Generation” funded by the US Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM), Carbon Capture R&D Program under award DE-FE0032131. The prime recipient is General Electric Company working through its Gas Power division (GEGP) with subrecipients Southern Company and Linde Engineering plus subcontractor Kiewit. Southern Company’s Plant Barry, a 2x1 7F.04 CCGT, is the host site. GEGP led the overall integration of the carbon capture system (CCS) with the existing natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) facility. Linde provided the detailed process engineering and equipment costing for the carbon capture island. Kiewit focused on plant layout, constructability, and installation. With the FEED study finished, the engineering is approximately 50% complete towards the detailed design package needed to proceed to procure, install, build, commission, and operate the integrated NGCC+CCS facility. This FEED study focuses on retrofitting a 95% CO 2 capture system with attention on plant integration. The study was particularly challenging due to unique and substantial cost impacts related to global sourcing challenges associated with COVID. Additional incentives, regulatory support, and dispatch certainty are needed to move forward with implementing CCS at this or other sites in the US. This FEED study highlights the value of integrating NGCC+CCS and is a template for future CCS retrofit studies.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Subtask 1.3 – Integrated Carbon Capture and Storage for North Dakota Ethanol Production

The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), in partnership with Red Trail Energy, LLC (RTE), a North Dakota ethanol producer; the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC) Renewable Energy Program (REP); and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), conducted a feasibility and implementation study for a commercial carbon capture and storage (CCS) effort. This subtask provided technical support and developed recommended practices of how small-scale industrial CO2 emitters (<1,000,000 tonnes of CO2 emitted annually) may economically deploy CCS. The 64-million-gallon dry mill RTE ethanol facility, emitting an average 180,000 tonnes of CO2 annually, was the subject of the case study. The positive outcome of this research, which shows technical and economic potential for ethanol–CCS in North Dakota, has resulted in RTE acquiring an approved Permit to Drill on December 2, 2019, for a stratigraphic test well in early 2020, a necessary step toward a North Dakota CO2 Storage Facility Permit (SFP) for the RTE CCS effort. Outcomes include 1) validating the Broom Creek Formation as a regional target for CCS, 2) determining the full carbon life cycle of an industrial fuel production facility with CCS, 3) developing a field implementation plan (FIP) for small-scale CCS, and 4) determining the validity and pathway for using CCS to meet low-carbon fuel (LCF) standards. The technical team included the EERC, RTE, Trimeric Corporation, Schlumberger Carbon Services, and Computer Modelling Group (CMG). Findings from activities conducted November 2016 – May 2020 are summarized as follows. Several key steps have been accomplished toward validating the Broom Creek Formation as a CO2 injection and storage target at the RTE CCS site, including verification of the presence and structure of sandstone layers that may comprise the potential CO2 storage reservoir and the several thousand feet of overlying confining zone. Work included site characterization using existing data, interpretation of seismic data within the study area, and geologic modeling simulation of CO2 injection. Interpreted results estimate 3000 feet of confining zone between the Broom Creek Formation (storage target) and the lowermost underground source of drinking water (e.g., the Fox Hills Formation). The thickness of the Broom Creek injection target varies 230–420 ft within the survey area. Results were used to inform the location of a stratigraphic test well and associated characterization test program. No impediments were identified within the targeted CO2 storage complex that would prevent the project from moving forward. A stratigraphic test well is the next step to validate these results and to acquire remaining data necessary to develop a North Dakota CO2 SFP application. The EERC generated full carbon life cycle estimates for CCS integration with the RTE ethanol facility. Results indicated that an average 40% reduction in CO2 emissions is possible through CCS implementation. Approximately half of the carbon in the overall life cycle for a dry mill ethanol plant is generated through the fermentation process and emitted to the atmosphere; this is the CO2 stream targeted for CCS. The remaining carbon is attributed to corn feedstock farming (diesel, fertilizer), energy for fuel processing (natural gas, electricity), and transportation (diesel) of the fuel product. Life cycle carbon estimates are also affected by the anticipated energy consumption of a potential capture facility, which depend on the type of CO2 product generated. For example, a 30%–40% net CO2 emission reduction is estimated if a liquefied CO2 facility were incorporated compared to a 40%–50% net CO2 reduction if a supercritical “injection-grade” CO2 product is generated; i.e., more energy is required to further refine the CO2 stream, affecting the full carbon life cycle estimates. A CCS FIP was developed and initiated at the RTE CCS site, resulting in the development of several guidance documents: a CO2 Capture Process Design Package, a North Dakota CO2 geologic Storage Permits Template, and a Public Outreach Package for CCS in North Dakota. General FIP components include CO2 capture system, pipeline and well designs; monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA) plans; geologic characterization and testing programs; and permitting and outreach plans. Vendor bids were also acquired for the CO2 liquefaction facility. Near-surface characterization (groundwater and soil gas sampling) and geologic characterization (seismic survey) were initiated to inform development of a UIC Class VI-compliant MVA plan compliant with a North Dakota CO2 SFP. Designs (well and geologic testing) were completed for a stratigraphic test well compliant with a North Dakota CO2 SFP. In addition, the outreach plan was executed, including community open houses, meetings with city/county/state officials, and development of public materials. Although other entities continued to mature incentive programs in 2019–2020, California and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) currently provide the most advanced economic opportunities for CCS integrated with fuel production. The California Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) adopted a CCS Protocol in January 2019, allowing submittal of a design-based pathway (DBP) application for an approved temporary (not certified) carbon intensity value for a fully engineered facility. An ethanol–CCS DBP application to the California LCFS Program (officially approved February 28, 2020) was developed to show that the RTE CCS effort meets LCFS requirements. The approved DBP provides confidence to advance the project and supports potential investments. Other entities continue to mature incentive programs. The IRS issued guidance in February 2020 that addresses the definition of beginning of construction and revenue procedure on partnerships for the Enhancement of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Credit (a.k.a. Section 45Q) CCS tax credit program; the IRS anticipates issuing further guidance on issues such as secure geologic storage, utilization qualifications, and recapture of claimed credits. Maturing incentive programs coupled with workable permitting regulations provide confidence to advance CCS projects in North Dakota and support financial investment to proceed with designing, constructing, and implementing CCS projects at small-scale fuel production facilities. The largest hurdles for CCS implementation at small-scale industrial systems are often business/economic-related (i.e., not technical). Market uncertainty already exists for agriculture-based alternative fuels such as corn ethanol, for which production has increased by ~33%, and prices have correspondingly lowered since 2015. Passing the Section 45Q tax credit program improves economic feasibility for CCS but may require external investors for a small business to achieve maximum benefits. Public–private partnerships with NDIC and DOE have resulted in foundational technical and regulatory knowledge, growing stakeholder confidence, and a pathway to implementation that enables similar industrial CCS projects in the region to advance. This subtask was funded through the EERC–DOE Joint Program on Research and Development for Fossil Energy-Related Resources Cooperative Agreement No. DE-FE0024233. Nonfederal funding was provided by NDIC and RTE. The authors would also like to thank CMG, ESRI, IHS, Neuralog, and Schlumberger for allowing the use of their software packages in support of this work.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Cost and Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas Implications of Integrating Biogas Upgrading and Carbon Capture Technologies in Cellulosic Biorefineries

We discuss gaseous streams in biorefineries that have been undervalued and underutilized. In cellulosic biorefineries, coproduced biogas is assumed to be combusted alongside lignin to generate process heat and electricity. Biogas can instead be upgraded to compressed biomethane and used as a transportation fuel. Capturing CO 2 -rich streams generated in biorefineries can also contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation goals. We explore the economic and life-cycle GHG impacts of biogas upgrading and CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) at ionic liquid-based cellulosic ethanol biorefineries using biomass sorghum. Without policy incentives, biorefineries with biogas upgrading systems can achieve a comparable minimum ethanol selling price (MESP) and reduced GHG footprint ($1.38/liter gasoline equivalent (LGE) and 12.9 gCO 2e /MJ) relative to facilities that combust biogas onsite ($1.34/LGE and 24.3 gCO 2e /MJ). Incorporating renewable identification number (RIN) values advantages facilities that upgrade biogas relative to other options (MESP of $0.72/LGE). Incorporating CCS increases the MESP but dramatically decreases the GHG footprint (-21.3 gCO 2e /MJ for partial, -110.7 gCO 2e /MJ for full CCS). The addition of CCS also decreases the cost of carbon mitigation to as low as $52-$78/t CO 2 , depending on the assumed fuel selling price, and is the lowest-cost option if both RIN and California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard credits are incorporated.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗