Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) helps reduce the amount of carbon dioxide (CO₂) reaching the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas that traps heat and can cause the planet to warm, resulting in climate change. Many countries and industries want to reduce carbon emissions to slow climate change.

One way to reduce the amount of CO₂ reaching the atmosphere is using CCS, which captures CO₂ from sources like power plants or industrial facilities and moves it to safe storage sites deep underground. This process can keep large amounts of CO₂ out of the atmosphere for a long time — sometimes even forever.

CCS can take many forms. Below, we’ll explain these forms, the technology behind CCS, its cost effectiveness, environmental risks, and much more. This information will help you better understand just how beneficial CCS can be while also understanding some of its drawbacks.

What Are the Main Technologies Used for Carbon Capture, and How Do They Work?

The three main options for capturing CO₂ from power generation and industrial processes are post-combustion, pre-combustion, and oxyfuel combustion:

• Post-combustion capture: In this approach, factories or power plants burn fuel, like coal or natural gas, in a normal air environment. The exhaust gas has CO₂, which gets separated using chemical solvents, filters, or membranes. The captured CO₂ then gets compressed and sent to storage sites.
• Pre-combustion capture: This CCS process changes the fuel source before it is fully burned. It is turned into a gas mix of hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Then, the carbon gets turned into CO₂ and separated from the hydrogen. This CO₂ is then captured, leaving a hydrogen-rich synthetic gas (syngas) for use in low-carbon energy. This process can be significantly less expensive than the post-combustion capture, thanks to its higher CO₂ concentrations, smaller equipment, and lower capital costs.
• Oxy-combustion capture: In oxy-combustion CO₂ capture, the fuel is burned in an oxygen-rich environment comprising pure oxygen, recycled CO₂, and water. This creates a flue gas mostly made of CO₂ and water vapor, which is ready for transport. The downside to this process is that some of the condensed water may get contaminated with CO₂ and need further treatment.

All these methods aim to collect large amounts of CO₂ at the source. After capture, the CO₂ is compressed and carried, often through pipelines, to places suitable for geologic storage.

It can then be injected into saline formations, depleted gas reservoirs, or even coal beds to keep it locked away. Some sites also use CO₂ to help push more oil from older wells while keeping the CO₂ stored below ground. This overall carbon management system helps cut down on emissions.

How Cost-Effective Is CCS Compared to Other Carbon Reduction Strategies Like Renewables and Energy Efficiency?

CCS can be cost-effective in certain situations, but the price tag depends on many factors.

For example, renewables like wind energy and solar power have seen significant cost reductions lately. Energy efficiency, such as upgrading buildings or machines to use less energy, is often cheaper and more straightforward than mass CCS. In some cases, building a wind or solar farm may be more affordable than outfitting a natural gas processing plant with CCS.

Still, some industries, like steel or cement, have trouble reducing carbon emissions by switching to clean electricity. Their processes release CO₂ as part of a chemical reaction, not just from burning fuel. CCS may be one of the best ways to cut greenhouse gas output for these industrial processes. The International Energy Agency (IEA) says CCS can work well in such areas.

Costs also change depending on how far the CO₂ must travel and how easy it is to find storage sites. If a factory or power plant is already close to suitable geological formations, then building a pipeline and injecting CO₂ may be cheaper. Places like Norway have invested in CCS for years, using undersea reservoirs to hold the gas. Over time, as more CCS projects reach commercial-scale, experts think expenses might decrease, making CCS more competitive with other mitigation methods.

What Are the Biggest Challenges In Scaling Up CCS Deployment Globally?

Scaling up CCS to become large-scale faces many challenges. One major obstacle is financing. Building capture units, pipelines, and storage technologies can cost billions. Making matters worse, private investors may see CCS as a risky investment without government support.

Another challenge is public acceptance. Communities near onshore storage sites may worry about leakage or other dangers. They might not trust that CO₂ injected deep underground will stay there forever. Also, some people see CCS as a way for big polluters to keep using fossil fuels instead of switching to green energy options. This leads to debates about whether money should fund CCS or pay for more renewables and bioenergy solutions.

Regulations can also slow progress. Rules for monitoring or storing CO₂ might differ between countries. Some places do not have clear laws about using underground space. Even if a storage project goes ahead, it must pass strict safety tests. Earthquake risks or other geological issues can cause further delays. All these factors are potential reasons why CCS has not taken off as fast as some experts once hoped.

How Does CCS Compare to Direct Air Capture (DAC) In Terms of Efficiency And Feasibility?

Direct air capture (DAC) is a newer idea for pulling CO₂ out of the air anywhere on Earth, not just where it is made. Machines capture CO₂ at low concentrations because the air has only about 0.04% CO₂. While this process often requires a lot of energy and creates CO₂ emissions, DAC can offer negative emissions if the captured carbon dioxide is sent to permanent storage. DAC can also be set up virtually anywhere and doesn’t need to be directly tied to an emissions-producing plant.

Conversely, CCS focuses on capturing CO₂ right where it is produced, such as power plants or industrial processes. Because the CO₂ there is more concentrated, capturing it can be simpler and less energy-intensive. Hence, CCS can be more cost-effective and feasibility may be higher in certain sites, especially where pipelines and storage sites are nearby.

Many experts see CCS and DAC as different but complementary as both can help lower greenhouse gas levels but in differing ways.

Soon, CCS may get used mostly for big industrial facilities, and DAC might step in later for extra carbon dioxide removal when we need it to reach net-zero emissions targets.

What Industries Benefit Most From CCS, and Where Is It Most Necessary?

Industries producing high carbon emissions when they make goods need CCS the most, including the cement, steel, and chemical industries. These industrial processes release CO₂ from fuel burning and chemical reactions, so switching to low-carbon electricity will not fix their emissions problems. CCS helps these factories continue operating while cutting their greenhouse gas output.

Power generation also benefits significantly from CCS, especially in areas where natural gas or coal is the main power source due to a lack of wind or sunshine for renewables. CCS can capture CO₂ from power plants, store it in secure formations, and reduce the overall impact of fossil fuels.

What Role Does CCS Play In Achieving Net-Zero Emissions Goals?

Many nations aim for net-zero emissions to fight climate change. In a net-zero scenario, any CO₂ that is released is balanced by CO₂ that is removed. CCS helps reduce carbon dioxide output from areas that do not have accessible low-carbon options. This includes specific industrial processes and power plants that cannot quickly switch to renewables or full bioenergy.

Also, CCS can create negative emissions if paired with bioenergy — a process known as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). BECCS burns biomass like wood or crop waste for power, and a CCS system captures the resulting CO₂. The net effect can pull carbon out of the air over the whole cycle because the crops and wood absorbed carbon from the air during their lifecycle, and then the CCS captures the released carbon when they are burned for fuel.

CCS also backs up grids that have lots of solar or wind. When the sun is not shining or the wind is not blowing, a CCS-equipped plant can run on fossil fuels and keep carbon emissions low. This can be key for energy security while nations transition to greener power.

What Are the Latest Breakthroughs or Innovations In CCS Technology?

Research in carbon capture technology is moving fast. Scientists are trying to lower energy needs and improve feasibility. Some labs have developed new solvents and membranes that can separate CO₂ more cheaply. Others study solid materials, like metal-organic frameworks or special oxide compounds, which can trap CO₂ under certain conditions and then release it for storage.

Another potential innovation is combining CCS with direct air capture (DAC) in the same place. These hybrid systems could capture CO₂ from the industrial sources they’re attached to and the air, potentially creating negative carbon emissions.

Carbon storage is another area CCS needs innovation. Some storage project tests look at storing CO₂ under the ocean floor to increase storage capacity for coastal areas — especially those with volcanic terrains.

Meanwhile, advanced sensor innovation can help better monitor potential leakage in near real time. This can improve regulator and public confidence, making CCS adoption more acceptable.

Do Your Part in Reducing Carbon Emissions With Renewable Energy

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a valuable tool for reducing CO₂ emissions by capturing and storing it in secure geological formations underground. However, this technology is still playing second fiddle to other greenhouse gas emissions-reducing solutions, such as renewable energy. With the right innovation and greater public acceptance, CCS can work hand in hand with renewable energy to drive down carbon emissions and slow global climate change.

Until then, you can do your part by conserving energy and relying more heavily on renewable energy. Just Energy can help with our online retail energy provider (REP) comparison tool, which allows you to compare rates and find REPs offering more green energy options to reduce your carbon footprint.

Brought to you by justenergy.com

All images licensed from Adobe Stock.

The post Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Technologies, Costs, and Global Impact appeared first on Just Energy.

• Source: https://justenergy.com/blog/carbon-capture-and-storage/