IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tbswps/14.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Coal and Gas - From Cradle to Grave with Carbon Capture and Storage

Author

Listed:
  • Steinkraus, Arne

Abstract

Existing studies on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) only focus on costs and carbon dioxide (CO2 ) reduction that arise at the power plant and geological storage. These studies do not consider additional expenses and emissions at the input and output pathways. Consequently, we use a simulation model containing input data from different studies to estimate the cradle-to-grave costs of avoided carbon dioxide. We show that the true costs vary between 70 and 90 US-Dollars per ton of CO2 . Additional sensitivity analyses support the results because they are robust against different parameter adjustments. Because it is not evident whether CCS is an efficient mitigation option, it is compared to a variety of renewable energy sources. Thus, it is cheaper to avoid one ton of CO2 by means of wind energy, but costs arising from the use of solar energy are much higher.

Suggested Citation

  • Steinkraus, Arne, 2015. "Coal and Gas - From Cradle to Grave with Carbon Capture and Storage," Economics Department Working Paper Series 14, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Economics Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tbswps:14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/110904/1/WorkingPaper_14.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stern,Nicholas, 2007. "The Economics of Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521700801, September.
    2. Minh Ha-Duong & David Keith, 2003. "Carbon storage: the economic efficiency of storing CO2 in leaky reservoirs," Post-Print halshs-00003927, HAL.
    3. Gibbins, Jon & Chalmers, Hannah, 2008. "Carbon capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4317-4322, December.
    4. Pehnt, Martin, 2006. "Dynamic life cycle assessment (LCA) of renewable energy technologies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 55-71.
    5. Evans, Annette & Strezov, Vladimir & Evans, Tim J., 2009. "Assessment of sustainability indicators for renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 1082-1088, June.
    6. Rubin, Edward S. & Chen, Chao & Rao, Anand B., 2007. "Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4444-4454, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christian Leßmann & Arne Steinkraus, 2016. "Kurz zum Klima: »Carbon Capture and Storage« – was kostet die Emissionsvermeidung?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 69(05), pages 51-54, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2014. "South Korean energy scenarios show how nuclear power can reduce future energy and environmental costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 569-578.
    2. Karagiannis, Ioannis C. & Soldatos, Peter G., 2010. "Estimation of critical CO2 values when planning the power source in water desalination: The case of the small Aegean islands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 3891-3897, August.
    3. Lai, N.Y.G. & Yap, E.H. & Lee, C.W., 2011. "Viability of CCS: A broad-based assessment for Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3608-3616.
    4. Barelli, L. & Ottaviano, A., 2014. "Solid oxide fuel cell technology coupled with methane dry reforming: A viable option for high efficiency plant with reduced CO2 emissions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 118-129.
    5. Mostafa Shaaban & Jürgen Scheffran & Jürgen Böhner & Mohamed S. Elsobki, 2018. "Sustainability Assessment of Electricity Generation Technologies in Egypt Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    6. Hong, Sanghyun & Bradshaw, Corey J.A. & Brook, Barry W., 2014. "Nuclear power can reduce emissions and maintain a strong economy: Rating Australia’s optimal future electricity-generation mix by technologies and policies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 712-725.
    7. Sokka, L. & Sinkko, T. & Holma, A. & Manninen, K. & Pasanen, K. & Rantala, M. & Leskinen, P., 2016. "Environmental impacts of the national renewable energy targets – A case study from Finland," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1599-1610.
    8. Özge .Ic{s}legen & Stefan Reichelstein, 2011. "Carbon Capture by Fossil Fuel Power Plants: An Economic Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 21-39, January.
    9. Sagar Roy & Smruti Ragunath, 2018. "Emerging Membrane Technologies for Water and Energy Sustainability: Future Prospects, Constraints and Challenges," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-32, November.
    10. Turconi, Roberto & Boldrin, Alessio & Astrup, Thomas, 2013. "Life cycle assessment (LCA) of electricity generation technologies: Overview, comparability and limitations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 555-565.
    11. Jha, Sunil Kr. & Bilalovic, Jasmin & Jha, Anju & Patel, Nilesh & Zhang, Han, 2017. "Renewable energy: Present research and future scope of Artificial Intelligence," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 297-317.
    12. Shin, Jungwoo & Lee, Chul-Yong & Kim, Hongbum, 2016. "Technology and demand forecasting for carbon capture and storage technology in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 1-11.
    13. Singh, Bhawna & Strømman, Anders H. & Hertwich, Edgar G., 2012. "Scenarios for the environmental impact of fossil fuel power: Co-benefits and trade-offs of carbon capture and storage," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 762-770.
    14. Irina V. Efimenko & Vladimir F. Khoroshevsky, 2017. "Peaks, Slopes, Canyons and Plateaus: Identifying Technology Trends Throughout the Life Cycle," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-28, April.
    15. Koo, Jamin & Han, Kyusang & Yoon, En Sup, 2011. "Integration of CCS, emissions trading and volatilities of fuel prices into sustainable energy planning, and its robust optimization," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 665-672, January.
    16. Zhou, Wenji & Zhu, Bing & Fuss, Sabine & Szolgayová, Jana & Obersteiner, Michael & Fei, Weiyang, 2010. "Uncertainty modeling of CCS investment strategy in China's power sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(7), pages 2392-2400, July.
    17. Dries Haeseldonckx & William D’haeseleer, 2010. "Hydrogen from Renewables," Chapters, in: François Lévêque & Jean-Michel Glachant & Julián Barquín & Christian von Hirschhausen & Franziska Ho (ed.), Security of Energy Supply in Europe, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Maria Milousi & Athanasios Pappas & Andreas P. Vouros & Giouli Mihalakakou & Manolis Souliotis & Spiros Papaefthimiou, 2022. "Evaluating the Technical and Environmental Capabilities of Geothermal Systems through Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-30, August.
    19. Strantzali, Eleni & Aravossis, Konstantinos, 2016. "Decision making in renewable energy investments: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 885-898.
    20. Dominic Woolf & Johannes Lehmann & David R. Lee, 2016. "Optimal bioenergy power generation for climate change mitigation with or without carbon sequestration," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CCS; Cradle-to-Grave; climate change; coal; gas; efficiency analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:tbswps:14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwtbsde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.