A new analysis shows that air capture could cost less than $100 a ton.
While avoiding the worst dangers of climate change will likely require sucking carbon dioxide out of the sky, prominent scientists have long dismissed such technologies as far too expensive.
But a detailed new analysis published today in the journal Joule finds that direct air capture may be practical after all. The study concludes it would cost between $94 and $232 per ton of captured carbon dioxide, if existing technologies were implemented on a commercial scale. One earlier estimate, published in Proceedings of the National Academies,put that figure at more than $1,000 (though the calculations were made on what’s known as an avoided-cost basis, which would add about 10 percent to the new study’s figures).
Crucially, the lowest-cost design, optimized to produce and sell alternative fuels made from the captured carbon dioxide, could already be profitable with existing public policies in certain markets (see “The carbon-capture era may finally be starting”). The higher cost estimates are for plants that would deliver compressed carbon dioxide for permanent underground storage.
Making direct air capture as cheap as possible is critical because a growing body of work finds it’s going to be nearly impossible to prevent global temperatures from rising more than 1.5 ?C without rolling out some form of the technology on a huge scale. By some estimates, the world will emit enough greenhouse gases to lock in that level of warming within a few years. At that point, one of the only ways to reverse the effects is to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, where it otherwise persists for thousands of years.
David Keith, a Harvard physics professor and lead author of the paper, says the findings should shift the perception of direct air capture from “vaporware” to “something that can be built with current industrial technologies now.”
Keith is also the founder of Carbon Engineering, a Calgary-based startup that has spent the last nine years designing, refining, and testing a direct air capture pilot plant in Squamish, British Columbia. (See “Go inside an industrial plant that sucks carbon dioxide straight out of the air.”) The study, partially funded by the US Department of Energy, simulates a scaled-up version, based on the facility’s actual performance and cost data.
“I hope it’s a real change in the community’s view of the technology,” Keith says.
In 2011, a pair of influential papers all but sounded the death knell for direct air capture, concluding that the approach would cost nearly an order of magnitude more than capturing the greenhouse gas from power-plant stacks.
“It’d be such a great solution—if it were real,” MIT Energy Initiative senior researcher Howard Herzog, who coauthored the study that found costs could top $1,000 a ton, said at the time.
In an interview this week, Herzog complimented the detailed analysis in the new study, but said he remains skeptical of some of its financial assumptions. He expects that Carbon Engineering will face higher costs and challenges than it anticipates as the company moves to build larger plants.
“Until you really can confirm the costs and performance at scale, you’ve always got to take those costs with a grain of salt,” he says. “I still think a final number could be several times as much.”
The cost differences from the earlier studies arise mainly from different design choices. Those include the use of horizontally rather than vertically stacked structures, lower energy demands due to improved heat integration in the process, and the power sources selected to run the plant.
Carbon Engineering plans to combine the carbon captured at its plants with hydrogen to produce carbon-neutral synthetic fuels, a process the pilot facility has already been performing. Such fuels are more expensive than standard gasoline and diesel, so the size and stability of the market for them will depend largely on whether subsidies are in place.
Carbon Engineering has secured $30 million to date. It’s currently seeking additional funds to build a larger facility that will begin selling fuels, though still on a relatively small scale.
But those carbon-neutral fuels won’t directly help to reduce carbon in the atmosphere (unless they’re used in systems that capture carbon as well). To make real gains in removing greenhouse gases, the world may eventually need to permanently store massive amounts of captured carbon dioxide, rather than releasing it again when synthetic fuels burn. Doing that on a large scale would almost surely require significant cost reductions, a high price on carbon, or other public policy support.
Keith says producing synthetic fuels offers a sustainable business model that could help companies scale up and reduce the costs of the technology, easing the path to that eventual goal.
But Herzog, who has also studied the challenges of converting carbon dioxide into fuel, remains skeptical that the numbers will work even for that initial business model.
“It’s very tough, and even tougher if the CO2 is from your most expensive source, which is the air,” he says.
Learn more: Maybe we can afford to suck CO2 out of the sky after all
The Latest on: Air capture
[google_news title=”” keyword=”air capture” num_posts=”10″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]
via Google News
The Latest on: Air capture
- World’s largest carbon capture plant begins operations in Icelandon May 9, 2024 at 3:57 am
On Wednesday, the world's largest facility designed to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere started operations in Iceland. Dubbed "Mammoth," this ...
- Global capacity to directly suck CO2 from air has just quadrupledon May 9, 2024 at 3:55 am
A new plant in Iceland operated by the firm Climeworks can remove up to 36,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide from the air per year, more than quadrupling existing global capabilities ...
- Iceland gets world's biggest carbon capture plant. Will it rid the world of pollution?on May 9, 2024 at 2:52 am
The Mammoth plant in Iceland, the brainchild of Swiss tech climate company Climeworks, will be able to capture 36,000 metric tonnes of CO2 per year through a process known as direct air capture (DAC).
- Iceland Debuts "Mammoth", Largest Plant To Suck Planet-Heating Pollution From Airon May 9, 2024 at 12:38 am
The world's largest facility for extracting carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere is up and running in Iceland.
- 'Mammoth': Climeworks flicks switch on 'world's largest' direct air capture planton May 9, 2024 at 12:29 am
The company's second commercial facility, dubbed 'Mammoth', is around 10 times bigger than its predecessor plant, Orca, and represents a significant milestone in the company's push to deliver megaton ...
- World’s largest direct air capture plant switched onon May 8, 2024 at 11:35 pm
Climeworks has launched Mammoth, the biggest direct air capture and storage plant globally, in Iceland, aiming to trap around 36,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide each year ...
- Climeworks opens world's largest plant to extract CO2 from air in Icelandon May 8, 2024 at 3:33 pm
Climeworks has opened the world’s largest operational direct air capture (DAC) plant to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, with its Mammoth plant in Iceland almost ten times larger than the ...
- World’s largest direct air capture plant launches in Icelandon May 8, 2024 at 2:26 pm
Swiss carbon capture firm Climeworks has switched on its newest direct air capture and storage (DAC+S) plant in Iceland. Ten times bigger than its predecessor, the Mammoth plant will have an initial ...
- High hopes for carbon capture, underground storageon May 8, 2024 at 11:55 am
Capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere to store underground "sounds too good to be true", a climate expert told AFP, yet the technology to increase its capacity tenfold is already being ...
via Bing News