SECRETARY CHU BACKS CCS IN JOURNAL COMMENTARY

Lindsay Kalter
GHG Monitor
08/24/12

Carbon capture and storage technology will need to play a key role in the reduction of carbon emissions over the coming decades if electricity generation from fossil fuel continues at its current pace, according to a recent commentary piece authored by Secretary of Energy Steven Chu and former acting Under Secretary of Energy Arun Majumdar. “Achieving higher primary energy use through cost-effective improvements in thermo-dynamic efficiency, co-generation of power and heat, and use of waste heat can reduce carbon emissions,” the two write in the article, “Opportunities and Challenges for a Sustainable Energy Future,” published in the journal Nature last week. The two also underscore the need to install CCS technology on industrial sources. “Maximizing efficiency is not sufficient. Carbon capture and storage from coal and natural-gas power plants and other major emitters, such as cement and steel plants, will be necessary,” the two argue. The piece breaks little new ground, instead largely serving as a summary of recent assessments of CCS technology at DOE and internationally.

Chu and Majumdar acknowledge that the costs associated with CCS will remain a prohibitive force in large-scale deployment if certain measures are not taken. The authors assert that one of the primary financial barriers is the high cost of capture technologies, and that further research on sorbent-based separation needs to be conducted. One prospect could lie in the use of enzymes like carbonic anhydrase, the pair suggested, adding that the technology could aid in more efficient capture and release of CO2. “Researchers are making progress in genetically altering the properties of carbonic anhydrase, so that it can be used to improve the kinetics of low-enthalpy sorbents under the harsh conditions of the exhaust of a coal-fired power plant,” the two write. The other monetary strain for CCS is the parasitic load of CO2 capture and compression that adds to project operating costs, according to Chu and Majumdar. The costs associated with retrofitting a pulverized coal plant for 90 percent capture amount to nearly as much as the original plant, the report says. A significant portion of the plant’s energy—about 20–40 percent—would go toward the separation and transmission of the CO2. 

Price on carbon needed for deployment

The authors propose research and development efforts for carbon capture, utilization and storage like enhanced oil recovery and enhanced geothermal energy to offset costs, echoing similar sentiments expressed in a recent report from the International Energy Agency. Chu and Majumdar also discuss the use of computer-generated simulations to test CCS technologies, rather than more costly demonstration projects.

However, the report states that a carbon pricing scheme is ultimately needed to spur sufficient investment from the private sector. “Although the deployment of any innovation will depend on its benefits relative to established technologies, inertia as well as real and perceived financial risks always favor the status quo,” Chu and Majumdar argue. “To accelerate the use of economically viable clean-energy solutions, government policies are needed to stimulate invention, innovation, and align the market forces.”