It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
This letter compares several bounding cases for understanding the economic viability of capturing large quantities of anthropogenic CO2 from coal-fired power generators within the Electric Reliability Council of Texas electric grid and using it for pure CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in the onshore coastal region of Texas along the Gulf of Mexico. All captured CO2 in excess of that needed for EOR is sequestered in saline formations at the same geographic locations as the oil reservoirs but at a different depth. We analyze the extraction of oil from the same set of ten reservoirs within 20- and five-year time frames to describe how the scale of the carbon dioxide capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) network changes to meet the rate of CO2 demand for oil recovery. Our analysis shows that there is a negative system-wide net present value (NPV) for all modeled scenarios. The system comes close to breakeven economics when capturing CO2 from three coal-fired power plants to produce oil via CO2-EOR over 20 years and assuming no CO2 emissions penalty. The NPV drops when we consider a larger network to produce oil more quickly (21 coal-fired generators with CO2 capture to produce 80% of the oil within five years). Upon applying a CO2 emissions penalty of 60$2009/tCO2 to fossil fuel emissions to ensure that coal-fired power plants with CO2 capture remain in baseload operation, the system economics drop significantly. We show near profitability for the cash flow of the EOR operations only; however, this situation requires relatively cheap electricity prices during operation.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy, The University of Texas at Austin, 2275 Speedway, Stop C9000, Austin, TX 78712, USA
2 Center for Energy Economics, Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin, 1801 Allen Parkway, Houston, TX 77019, USA
3 Mechanical Engineering Department, The University of Texas at Austin, 204 EDean Keeton Street, Stop C2200, Austin, TX 78712, USA
4 Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin, 10100 Burnet Road, Building 130, Austin, TX 78758, USA