Limits...
An optimal centralized carbon dioxide repository for Florida, USA.

Poiencot B, Brown C - Int J Environ Res Public Health (2011)

Bottom Line: For over a decade, the United States Department of Energy, and engineers, geologists, and scientists from all over the world have investigated the potential for reducing atmospheric carbon emissions through carbon sequestration.Further analysis of the subsurface geology in these general locations will provide insight into the suitability of the subsurface conditions and the available capacity for carbon sequestration at selected possible repository sites.The identification of the most favorable site(s) is also presented.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Engineering, University of North Florida, Building 50, 1 UNF Drive, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA. Brandon.poiencot@unf.edu

ABSTRACT
For over a decade, the United States Department of Energy, and engineers, geologists, and scientists from all over the world have investigated the potential for reducing atmospheric carbon emissions through carbon sequestration. Numerous reports exist analyzing the potential for sequestering carbon dioxide at various sites around the globe, but none have identified the potential for a statewide system in Florida, USA. In 2005, 83% of Florida's electrical energy was produced by natural gas, coal, or oil (e.g., fossil fuels), from power plants spread across the state. In addition, only limited research has been completed on evaluating optimal pipeline transportation networks to centralized carbon dioxide repositories. This paper describes the feasibility and preliminary locations for an optimal centralized Florida-wide carbon sequestration repository. Linear programming optimization modeling is used to plan and route an idealized pipeline network to existing Florida power plants. Further analysis of the subsurface geology in these general locations will provide insight into the suitability of the subsurface conditions and the available capacity for carbon sequestration at selected possible repository sites. The identification of the most favorable site(s) is also presented.

Show MeSH
CO2 Pipeline transportation costs per tonne for 250 kilometer pipeline versus mass flow rate in Mt CO2 per year (After IPCC (2005, Chapter 4, Figure 4.5)).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3118873&req=5

f2-ijerph-08-00955: CO2 Pipeline transportation costs per tonne for 250 kilometer pipeline versus mass flow rate in Mt CO2 per year (After IPCC (2005, Chapter 4, Figure 4.5)).

Mentions: The IPCC presents pipeline transport costs over land and underwater versus CO2 mass flow rate [6]. This figure is reproduced herein for discussion purposes as Figure 2. As shown on the figure the cost relationship is highly nonlinear and the cost envelop is not constant. At a mass flow rate of 5 Mt per year, the cost envelope ranges from a lower bound of $2.10 for land construction and an upper bound of $4.50 for underwater construction. In addition, the costs for underwater pipeline are considerably more expensive per kilometer than land construction. In comparing the lower bound for land construction with the lower bound cost for underwater construction, underwater construction is 50 to 75% more expensive. Bakken & Von Streng Velken present a cost model for a CCS project in Norway that is completely planned to be underwater [22]. In comparing these unit costs to the MIT model or McCoy model costs above, the unit cost is more than 2.5 times greater than equivalent land pipeline construction. In order to develop a new cost model for Florida, the percentages of land and underwater pipeline need to be calculated and a cost differential applied. This cost factor was assumed to be 1.75 and is discussed further below.


An optimal centralized carbon dioxide repository for Florida, USA.

Poiencot B, Brown C - Int J Environ Res Public Health (2011)

CO2 Pipeline transportation costs per tonne for 250 kilometer pipeline versus mass flow rate in Mt CO2 per year (After IPCC (2005, Chapter 4, Figure 4.5)).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3118873&req=5

f2-ijerph-08-00955: CO2 Pipeline transportation costs per tonne for 250 kilometer pipeline versus mass flow rate in Mt CO2 per year (After IPCC (2005, Chapter 4, Figure 4.5)).
Mentions: The IPCC presents pipeline transport costs over land and underwater versus CO2 mass flow rate [6]. This figure is reproduced herein for discussion purposes as Figure 2. As shown on the figure the cost relationship is highly nonlinear and the cost envelop is not constant. At a mass flow rate of 5 Mt per year, the cost envelope ranges from a lower bound of $2.10 for land construction and an upper bound of $4.50 for underwater construction. In addition, the costs for underwater pipeline are considerably more expensive per kilometer than land construction. In comparing the lower bound for land construction with the lower bound cost for underwater construction, underwater construction is 50 to 75% more expensive. Bakken & Von Streng Velken present a cost model for a CCS project in Norway that is completely planned to be underwater [22]. In comparing these unit costs to the MIT model or McCoy model costs above, the unit cost is more than 2.5 times greater than equivalent land pipeline construction. In order to develop a new cost model for Florida, the percentages of land and underwater pipeline need to be calculated and a cost differential applied. This cost factor was assumed to be 1.75 and is discussed further below.

Bottom Line: For over a decade, the United States Department of Energy, and engineers, geologists, and scientists from all over the world have investigated the potential for reducing atmospheric carbon emissions through carbon sequestration.Further analysis of the subsurface geology in these general locations will provide insight into the suitability of the subsurface conditions and the available capacity for carbon sequestration at selected possible repository sites.The identification of the most favorable site(s) is also presented.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Engineering, University of North Florida, Building 50, 1 UNF Drive, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA. Brandon.poiencot@unf.edu

ABSTRACT
For over a decade, the United States Department of Energy, and engineers, geologists, and scientists from all over the world have investigated the potential for reducing atmospheric carbon emissions through carbon sequestration. Numerous reports exist analyzing the potential for sequestering carbon dioxide at various sites around the globe, but none have identified the potential for a statewide system in Florida, USA. In 2005, 83% of Florida's electrical energy was produced by natural gas, coal, or oil (e.g., fossil fuels), from power plants spread across the state. In addition, only limited research has been completed on evaluating optimal pipeline transportation networks to centralized carbon dioxide repositories. This paper describes the feasibility and preliminary locations for an optimal centralized Florida-wide carbon sequestration repository. Linear programming optimization modeling is used to plan and route an idealized pipeline network to existing Florida power plants. Further analysis of the subsurface geology in these general locations will provide insight into the suitability of the subsurface conditions and the available capacity for carbon sequestration at selected possible repository sites. The identification of the most favorable site(s) is also presented.

Show MeSH