scholarly journals The Value of BECCS in IAMs: a Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 107-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre C. Köberle
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Model Structure ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Discount Rates ◽  
Value Drivers ◽  
End Use

Abstract Purpose of Review Integrated assessment model (IAM) scenarios consistent with Paris Agreement targets involve large negative emission technologies (NETs), mostly bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Such reliance on BECCS implies IAMs assign it a high value. Past analyses on the value of BECCS in IAMs have not explicitly addressed the role of model structure and assumptions as value drivers. This paper examines the extent to which the value of BECCS in IAMs is enhanced by model structure constraints and assumptions. Recent Findings Predominant use of high discount rates (3.5–5%) means models opt for delayed-action strategies for emissions mitigation that lead to high levels of cumulative net-negative emissions, while lower discount rates lead to reduce reliance on NETs. Until recently in the literature, most models limited NET options to only BECCS and afforestation, but introduction of other CDR options can reduce BECCS deployment. Constraints on grid penetration of variable renewable energy (VRE) is a determining factor on the level of BECCS deployment across models, and more constrained grid penetration of VREs leads to more BECCS in electricity generation. Summary This paper concludes BECCS derives significant value not only from the existing structure of IAMs but also from what is not represented in models and by predominant use of high discount rates. Omissions include NETs other than BECCS and deforestation, low-carbon innovation in end-use technologies, grid resilience to intermittent sources, and energy use in agriculture production. As IAMs increasingly endogenize such constraints, the value of BECCS in resulting scenarios is likely to be dampened.

Green pivot: can Australia master the hydrogen trade?

2021 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 466
Author(s):  
Prakash Sharma ◽  
Benjamin Gallagher ◽  
Jonathan Sultoon
Keyword(s):  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Metallurgical Coal ◽  
Thermal Coal ◽  
The World ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
End Use

Australia is in a bind. It is at the heart of the pivot to clean energy: it contains some of the world’s best solar irradiance and vast potential for large-scale carbon capture and storage; it showed the world the path forward with its stationary storage flexibility at the much vaunted Hornsdale power reserve facility; and it moved quickly to capitalise on low-carbon hydrogen production. Yet it remains one of the largest sources for carbon-intensive energy exports in the world. The extractive industries are still delivering thermal coal for power generation and metallurgical coal for carbon-intensive steel making in Asian markets. Even liquefied natural gas’s green credentials are being questioned. Are these two pathways compatible? The treasury and economy certainly benefit. But there is a huge opportunity to redress the source of those funds and jobs, while fulfilling the aspirations to reach net zero emissions by 2050. In our estimates, the low-carbon hydrogen economy could grow to become so substantial that 15% of all energy may be ultimately ‘carried’ by hydrogen by 2050. It is certainly needed to keep the world from breaching 2°C. Can Australia master the hydrogen trade? It is believed that it has a very good chance. Blessed with first-mover investment advantage, and tremendous solar and wind resourcing, Australia is already on a pathway to become a producer of green hydrogen below US$2/kg by 2030. How might it then construct a supply chain to compete in the international market with established trading partners and end users ready to renew old acquaintances? Its route is assessed to mastery of the hydrogen trade, analyse critical competitors for end use and compare costs with other exporters of hydrogen.

scholarly journals The role of advanced end-use technologies in long-term climate change mitigation: the interlinkage between primary bioenergy and energy end-use

2020 ◽  
Vol 163 (3) ◽  
pp. 1659-1673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junichi Tsutsui ◽  
Hiromi Yamamoto ◽  
Shogo Sakamoto ◽  
Masahiro Sugiyama
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Carbon Budgets ◽  
Environmental Implications ◽  
Multiple Series ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
End Use

AbstractThe role of advanced end-use technologies has been investigated in multiple series of scenarios using an integrated assessment model BET-GLUE, which comprises an energy-economic module (BET) and a bioenergy-land-use module (GLUE). The scenarios consider different technology assumptions on the availability of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and end-use efficiencies featuring electrification under a wide range of carbon price trajectories, which start at 1–690 USD/tCO2 in 2030, increase at 4.5%/year, and level off in 2100. This scenario design allows close examination of energy, economic, and environmental implications of different levels of policy stringency and carbon budgets. While improving end-use efficiencies consistently decrease policy costs for a wide range of carbon budgets, the value of BECCS availability in terms of cost reduction is crucial only in a limited range toward lower budgets. Constraints on BECCS, including those indirectly imposed by the limited bioenergy supply, also tend to narrow the lower range of attainable budget levels, indicating technological and economic challenges, although they may have an impact on reducing the total budget including land-use emissions. Overall, the advanced end-use efficiency has a significant effect on the required level of policy stringency for a given climate goal, so that it can compensate for the biomass constraints.

scholarly journals The Role of Bioenergy and Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) in the Case of Delayed Climate Policy – Insights from Cost-Risk Analysis

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jana Mintenig ◽  
Mohammad M. Khabbazan ◽  
Hermann Held
Keyword(s):  
Risk Analysis ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Welfare Losses ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Cost Risk

Abstract. Cost-Risk Analysis (CRA), a hybrid of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) and Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), has been proposed as an alternative to CEA as a decision criterion for evaluating climate policy. It weighs mitigation costs against associated risks of violating a predefined temperature guardrail, thereby enabling an analysis of otherwise infeasible temperature targets. Under CEA, delaying climate policy causes infeasibility of temperature targets which was resolved by the assessment under CRA. Indeed, CRA enables a quantitative evaluation of any delay scenario, thereby yielding information of the severeness of postponing climate policy. Alternatively, negative emission technologies have been included in CEA to enlarge the leeway in decision making and postpone infeasibility. This study closes the loop by evaluating the impact of the technology option BECCS (Bioenergy and Carbon Capture and Storage) in light of delayed climate policy under CRA. The work is conducted using the Integrated Assessment Model MIND (Model of Investment and Technological Development). This interplay creates the following insights: An inclusion of BECCS avoids corner solutions that were previously identified for delay scenarios, yielding a larger window of opportunity for action to mitigate climate change. Moreover, it postpones mitigation efforts into the future and removes the pressure to shut down fossil fuel use immediately. Thereby, mitigation-induced welfare losses are reduced substantially. BECSS, when evaluated under CRA, has confirmed well-known results from CEA. However, in contrast to results derived from CEA, mitigation-induced welfare losses decline with delay, while climate risk-induced welfare losses increase with delay by approximately the same magnitude. Hence within CRA, BECCS reduces the welfare effect of delayed climate policy by an order of magnitude. This underlines the crucial role of BECCS for the case of delay, even if one changes the decision-analytic framework from CEA to CRA and thereby softened the temperature target.

scholarly journals Life Cycle Assessment of Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage with Low-Carbon Energy Sources

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Terlouw ◽  
Karin Treyer ◽  
christian bauer ◽  
Marco Mazzotti
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Solid Sorbent ◽  
Low Carbon Energy ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Limited Scope

Prospective energy scenarios usually rely on Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies to achieve the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. CDR technologies aim at removing CO2 from the atmosphere in a permanent way. However, the implementation of CDR technologies typically comes along with unintended environmental side-effects such as land transformation or water consumption. These need to be quantified before large-scale implementation of any CDR option by means of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) is considered to be among the CDR technologies closest to large-scale implementation, since first pilot and demonstration units have been installed and interactions with the environment are less complex than for biomass related CDR options. However, only very few LCA studies - with limited scope - have been conducted so far to determine the overall life-cycle environmental performance of DACCS. We provide a comprehensive LCA of different low temperature DACCS configurations - pertaining to solid sorbent-based technology - including a global and prospective analysis.

scholarly journals Pathways for Low-Carbon Transition of the Steel Industry—A Swedish Case Study

Energies ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 3840
Author(s):  
Alla Toktarova ◽  
Ida Karlsson ◽  
Johan Rootzén ◽  
Lisa Göransson ◽  
Mikael Odenberger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blast Furnace ◽  
Co2 Emissions ◽  
Steel Industry ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Direct Reduction ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Steel Production ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Production Plant ◽  
Low Carbon

The concept of techno-economic pathways is used to investigate the potential implementation of CO2 abatement measures over time towards zero-emission steelmaking in Sweden. The following mitigation measures are investigated and combined in three pathways: top gas recycling blast furnace (TGRBF); carbon capture and storage (CCS); substitution of pulverized coal injection (PCI) with biomass; hydrogen direct reduction of iron ore (H-DR); and electric arc furnace (EAF), where fossil fuels are replaced with biomass. The results show that CCS in combination with biomass substitution in the blast furnace and a replacement primary steel production plant with EAF with biomass (Pathway 1) yield CO2 emission reductions of 83% in 2045 compared to CO2 emissions with current steel process configurations. Electrification of the primary steel production in terms of H-DR/EAF process (Pathway 2), could result in almost fossil-free steel production, and Sweden could achieve a 10% reduction in total CO2 emissions. Finally, (Pathway 3) we show that increased production of hot briquetted iron pellets (HBI), could lead to decarbonization of the steel industry outside Sweden, assuming that the exported HBI will be converted via EAF and the receiving country has a decarbonized power sector.

scholarly journals Exploring Low-Carbon Futures: A Web Service Approach to Linking Diverse Climate-Energy-Economy Models

Energies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (15) ◽  
pp. 2880 ◽  
Author(s):  
Getachew F. Belete ◽  
Alexey Voinov ◽  
Iñaki Arto ◽  
Kishore Dhavala ◽  
Tatyana Bulavskaya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Web Service ◽  
Programming Languages ◽  
Computable General Equilibrium ◽  
Spatial Scales ◽  
Simulation Models ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation

The use of simulation models is essential when exploring transitions to low-carbon futures and climate change mitigation and adaptation policies. There are many models developed to understand socio-environmental processes and interactions, and analyze alternative scenarios, but hardly one single model can serve all the needs. There is much expectation in climate-energy research that constructing new purposeful models out of existing models used as building blocks can meet particular needs of research and policy analysis. Integration of existing models, however, implies sophisticated coordination of inputs and outputs across different scales, definitions, data and software. This paper presents an online integration platform which links various independent models to enhance their scope and functionality. We illustrate the functionality of this web platform using several simulation models developed as standalone tools for analyzing energy, climate and economy dynamics. The models differ in levels of complexity, assumptions, modeling paradigms and programming languages, and operate at different temporal and spatial scales, from individual to global. To illustrate the integration process and the internal details of our integration framework we link an Integrated Assessment Model (GCAM), a Computable General Equilibrium model (EXIOMOD), and an Agent Based Model (BENCH). This toolkit is generic for similar integrated modeling studies. It still requires extensive pre-integration assessment to identify the ‘appropriate’ models and links between them. After that, using the web service approach we can streamline module coupling, enabling interoperability between different systems and providing open access to information for a wider community of users.

scholarly journals Assessing Renewable Energy Sources for Electricity (RES-E) Potential using a CAPM-Analogous Multi-Stage Model

Energies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (19) ◽  
pp. 3599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martinez-Fernandez ◽  
deLlano-Paz ◽  
Calvo-Silvosa ◽  
Soares
Keyword(s):  
Power Generation ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
Carbon Capture ◽  
Renewable Energy Sources ◽  
Carbon Capture And Storage ◽  
Offshore Wind ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
The Cost

Carbon mitigation is a major aim of the power-generation regulation. Renewable energy sources for electricity are essential to design a future low-carbon mix. In this work, financial Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) is implemented to optimize the power-generation technologies portfolio. We include technological and environmental restrictions in the model. The optimization is carried out in two stages. Firstly, we minimize the cost and risk of the generation portfolio, and afterwards, we minimize its emission factor and risk. By combining these two results, we are able to draw an area which can be considered analogous to the Capital Market Line (CML) used by the Capital Asset Pricing model (CAPM). This area delimits the set of long-term power-generation portfolios that can be selected to achieve a progressive decarbonisation of the mix. This work confirms the relevant role of small hydro, offshore wind, and large hydro as preferential technologies in efficient portfolios. It is necessary to include all available renewable technologies in order to reduce the cost and the risk of the portfolio, benefiting from the diversification effect. Additionally, carbon capture and storage technologies must be available and deployed if fossil fuel technologies remain in the portfolio in a low-carbon approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document