Tag: BECCS

Raksajati et al. (2024): Comparing options of BECCS in Indonesia using energy system modelling

Anggit Raksajati, Zefania P. Sutrisno, Attaya A. Meiritza IN: AIP Conference Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0194372

This study aims to provide key insights for preliminary assessment of BECCS options by varying the biomass type, power generation capacity, and firing mode. The 6 cases studied are bagasse, palm kernel shell, rice straw, empty fruit bunch, refuse derived fuel (firing, co-firing). Simple levelized cost of electricity (sLCOE) is evaluated, with findings that the dominant factors for sLCOE reduction are capacity and flue gas CO2 composition.

LINK

Guo et al. (2024): Sorption enhanced steam reforming of biomass-based feedstocks: Towards sustainable hydrogen evolution

Shifang Guo, Yanzi Zhang, Lina Liu IN: Chemical Engineering Journal, 485, 149760, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2024.149760

Biomass, as a renewable energy source with zero carbon emissions, has the potential to replace traditional fossil fuels for hydrogen production, addressing environmental issues associated with burning fossil fuels. Among the various biomass fuel production techniques, steam reforming of biomass-based feedstocks efficiently produces hydrogen-containing gas. Nonetheless, this process does suffer from low gas calorific value and elevated CO2 content. Consequently, a combination of sorption-enhanced and steam reforming technologies becomes crucial to maximize the use of biomass feedstocks for the production of hydrogen while minimizing greenhouse gas emissions. This paper provides an overview of recent research advancements in the sorption-enhanced steam reforming of biomass-derived feedstocks.

LINK

He et al. (2024): Biomass yield potential on U.S. marginal land and its contribution to reach net-zero emission

Yufeng He, Deepak Jaiswal, Stephen P. Long, Xin-Zhong Liang, Megan L. Matthews IN: GCB-Bioenergy, https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.13128

BECCS requires using limited land resources efficiently while ensuring minimal adverse impacts on the delicate food-energy-water nexus. Perennial C4 biomass crops are productive on marginal land under low-input conditions avoiding conflict with food and feed crops. The eastern half of the contiguous U.S. contains a large amount of marginal land, which is not economically viable for food production and liable to wind and water erosion under annual cultivation. However, this land is suitable for geological CO2 storage and perennial crop growth. Given the climate variation across the region, three perennials are major contenders for planting. The yield potential and stability of Miscanthus, switchgrass, and energycane across the region were compared to select which would perform best under the recent (2000–2014) and future (2036–2050) climates. 

LINK

PhD-Thesis: Promises and Pitfalls of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage: Actors’ Perspectives, Challenges, and Mitigation Deterrence in Sweden

Emily Rodriguez, Linköping University, DOI: 10.3384/9789180754873

The aim of this thesis is to examine challenges for the implementation of BECCS in Sweden to contribute to sustainability transitions, and to analyze the prospect for deploying BECCS through the lens of mitigation deterrence. This lens is a way to study risks of foregone emissions, overshoots, and rebound effects when relying on a future carbon removal method such as BECCS. This thesis studies how BECCS is socially constructed by key actors in Sweden by analyzing perspectives held by companies, civil servants, political parties, and other key actors, through interviews and focus groups. This study also analyzes how plans to include BECCS impact net-zero strategies in Stockholm, the first city to have a pilot and demonstration facility for BECCS in Europe.

LINK

Mirzaei et al. (2023): Screening Study of Potassium Carbonate Solvents for Bio-energy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS)

Nima Mirzaei, Aishwarya Babu, Efthymios Kantarelis, Matthaeus U. Baebler IN: Chemical Engineering Transactions, 105, https://doi.org/10.3303/CET23105027

The present work aims at investigating absorption of CO2 into promoted and unpromoted aqueous K2CO3. For this the authors performed a series of lab experiments in a thermostated batch stirred tank gas-liquid reactor containing the solvent. The absorption of CO2 was monitored by the decrease in the reactor pressure. To compare the different solvent blends, the experimental conditions, i.e., injection pressure, reactor temperature, stirring speed, and solvent volume were kept constant. For the interpretation of the experiments a simple absorption model is formulated based on which an apparent absorption rate is derived.

LINK

Wang et al. (2023): Can bioenergy with carbon capture and storage deliver negative emissions? A critical review of life cycle assessment

Junyao Wang, Yawen Zheng, Song He, Jiahui Yan, Xuelan Zeng, Shuangjun Li, Zhipeng Tian, Libin Lei, Yin Chen, Shuai Deng IN: Journal of Cleaner Production, 434, 139839, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139839

There is still insufficient understanding of the overall life cycle environmental performance of different BECCS configurations. Despite the fact that BECCS entails many technological combinations, the technology is still regarded as a single “black box” technology in most climate scenarios. This study presents a critical review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on a wide range of BECCS options: biomass direct-fired power generation, biomass gasification power generation, bio-hydrogen production, biomass application in industry sectors and other biomass conversion processes, such as pyrolysis and fermentation.

LINK

Report: Accounting Considerations for Capturing the GHG Consequences of BECCS

Christopher S. Galik, Justin S. Baker, Ann Bartuska, Robert C. Abt, June 2023

This paper highlights the relevant management, market, and policy attributes that influence the observed GHG balance of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) systems. Drawing from both the scientific literature and examples of both public and private governance approaches to account for the greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits of BECCS in practice, the paper concludes with a review of unanswered scientific and policy questions for further deliberation and analysis.

LNIK

Lefvert & Grönkvist (2023): Lost in the scenarios of negative emissions: The role of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)

Adrian Lefvert, Stefan Grönkvist IN: Energy Policy, 113882, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113882

With this policy perspective article the authors question the ongoing discussion about the use of biomass for BECCS with basis in three points: (1) under the enhanced transparency framework under the Paris agreement, all parties to the agreement will use the same guidelines to estimate emissions by sources and removals by sinks, in which the emissions and removals in connection to cultivation of biomass are accounted for in the land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector, (2) adding carbon capture to existing processes may lead to a shift in products from that process rather than an increase in biomass use, and (3) BECCS requires substantial financial incentives.

LINK