Anthropogenic CO2 As A Feedstock For Cyanobacteria-Based .

2y ago
1.09 MB
12 Pages
Last View : 18d ago
Last Download : 10m ago
Upload by : Julia Hutchens

Anthropogenic CO2 as a Feedstock for Cyanobacteria-Based BiofuelsPradeep Sharma, Ryan P. Lively, Benjamin A. McCool and Ronald R. Chance

Cyanobacteria-based (“Advanced”) Biofuels Biofuels in general Risks of climate change has made theglobal energy market very carbonconstrainedBiofuels have the potential to be nearlycarbon-neutral Advanced biofuels Energy Independence & Security Act (EISA)requires annual US production of 36 billiongallons of renewable fuels by 2022 1,2 Corn-based ethanol may peak out around 15billion gal/yr Advanced biofuels technologies, such asAlgenol’s Direct to Ethanol , have thepotential to fill the gap Algenol intends to compete on priceregardless of mandates and a reduced ubl140/html/PLAW-110publ140.htmEPA Renewable Fuel Standards, 3-19557.pdf2H2OCO2

Algenol’s Direct To Ethanol 2 CO2 3 H2O Over-expression of genes for intracellularfermentation pathway enzymes in thecyanobacteriaC2H5OH 3 O2 Enhanced cyanobacteria consume CO2 Saltwater Sunlightin low cost photobioreactors, tophotosynthetically produce high amounts ofethanol and biomassDirect To Ethanol technology Biomass is converted into various oils andethanol is purified to fuel grade purity Main capital cost drivers VIPERTM film photobioreactors Downstream purification Main operating cost drivers CO2 Energy use (downstream operations)Direct To Ethanol Commercial Vision3

CO2 Sourcing – Important Considerations Potential ‘Anthropogenic’ Sources Power plantsNatural gas processing plantsFertilizer plantsHydrogen plants (Steam Methane Reformers)Fermentation plantsCement plants Requirements for CO2 source Size‒ A 15 mgal EtOH/yr Algenol facility will need over 100,000 tonne CO2/yr Location‒ Important for transporting CO2 to bio-refinery and product to market Cost of CO2 capture‒ Depends on the quality of feed gas – including CO2 concentration‒ Desired – more CO2 and less unwanted (toxic) impurities4

Power Plants – the Biggest CO2 Source “The burning of coal, natural gas and oil for electricity and heat is the largestsingle source of global greenhouse gas emissions”United States Environmental Protection Agency1 The largest coal fired power plant (3.5 GW) in the nation generates enoughCO2 to support over 1 Bgal EtOH/yr (via Direct to Ethanol)2 US total power from coal in 2006 was227.1 GW, can support over90 Bgal EtOH/yr (photobioreactors laidover half the state of Maine). Corn EtOHwould need half of Alaska! Coal and natural gas contribute 67% tothe electricity generated in US1USEPA,Fuel Mix for U.S. ElectricityGeneration, EIA, year 2011 acilityDetail/?q &st GA&fc 13015&fid 1001505&sf 11001000&lowE 0&highE 23000000&g15

Carbon Capture from Power Plants Coal plants in general are more polluting than natural gas SOx emission – 2591 lb/109 BTU (coal), 1 lb/109 BTU (natural gas)CO2 emission1 – 940 kg/MWe (coal), 367 kg/MWe (natural gas) Rise of low-cost non-traditional natural gas Power plants have been/will be switching to natural gas for botheconomic and environmental reasons Three main types of capture technologies exist Post-combustionPre-combustionOxy-fuel combustion For existing coal and natural gas fired plants, post-combustioncapture is readily applicable due to the relative ease of retrofits1Rubin,E. S. et al., International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technol., Vol. 1, 20046

Effect of CO2 Price on Direct to Ethanol A CO2 capture cost of 50/tonne1 will result in total operating expenses of 1.40/galof ethanol. Algenol is currently targeting an operating cost of 1.20/gal, though our overall goalis below 1.00/gal. Achieving a CO2 delivery cost of 35/tonne enables Algenol to reach 1.20/gal inoperating expenses with 0.27/gal as the CO2 cost. CO2 from steam methane reformers can be delivered at approximately 35- 45 pertonne. Fermentation and Ammonia plants can be even cheaper. Techno-economic analyses on CO2 capture stations reported in the literature includethe cost of CO2 compression and transportation for CCS purposes ( 7- 10/tonne).Algenol does not need that if co-located. Based on these considerations, in the analysis to follow, we assume 35/tonne forCO2 delivered to the system boundary at modest pressure.H. and Rubin, E.S., “Comparative Performance and Cost Assessments of Coal- and Natural-Gas-Fired Power Plants undera CO2 Emission Performance Standard Regulation”, Energy & Fuels, In press, doi: 10.1021/ef302018v (2013).1 Zhai,7

Natural Gas Power Plant - Algenol Integration A simple carbon footprint analysis is performed on a coupled power/ethanolproduction facility Analysis considers the parasitic load of typical liquid amine capture systemson natural gas power stations CO2 assumed to be consumed within the Algenol Direct to Ethanol biorefinery The full life cycle analysis on this element of the system, with CO 2 supplied atthe system boundary, has been reported previously1 The produced ethanol is burned as a liquid fuel Fossil fuel is displaced by ethanol useD., et al., . “Life cycle energy and greenhouse gas emissions for an ethanol production process based on blue-greenalgae”, Environmental science & technology, 44(22), pp. 8670-8677, (2010)1Luo,8

Capture vs. UtilizationAlgenol Plus NG Power Plant105.8 TCO2/h emissions for Algenol Case200 MWElectricity8.0 TCO2/hnot capturedNG PowerPlant(217.4 MW)79.7TCO2/h10.8 TCO2/hnon-combustionCO2Capture(1 atm)15.3 TCO2/hAlgenolEthanolProduction71.7 TCO2/hEthanolCombustionPower PlantParasitic Load- 8%NGNG(supply chain)280 MW-eq.Fuel EnergyLuo et al(LCA, 1% condensate, VCD case)Comparison to Sequestration (CCS)200 MW ElectricityCO2 Sequestration(Total: 226.4 MW)GasolineCombustionAdditional CompressionParasitic Load – 4%280 MW-eq. FuelEnergyComparison to Status Quo (No Capture)200 MW ElectricityGasolineCombustion280 MW-eq. FuelEnergy174.8 TCO2/h For No CO2 Capture Case111.0 TCO2/h For Sequestration Case Carbon Footprint: Direct To Ethanol advantaged vs. CCS and greatly advantaged vs. Status Quo Same conclusion for Coal-Fired Power Plant (total Parasitic Load for CCS of typically 30%)9

Algenol vs. Other Transportation Fuels It is important to see how Algenol’s ethanol shares the stage withother transportation fuels – GasolineDieselCorn ethanolGrid electricity (plug-in electric vehicle) Parameters for comparison – Cost of producing one unit of energyCarbon footprint in producing one unit of energy The production costs are computed by subtracting sales tax,distribution cost, and marketing cost from the retail price The carbon footprint is calculated via Argonne National Laboratory’sGREET model (except Algenol ethanol)10

Cost and Carbon Footprint on an Energy-to- Wheel Basis 116Direct To Ethanol stronglyadvantaged when carbon footprint isconsideredMJ to vehicle wheel, electricvehicles (EVs) are lowestcost (neglects infrastructureand CAPEX associated withelectrical fleet)12 /MJ (vehicle) When reduced to price per141086420400 Driving a vehicle withelectricity generated from apower plant (US averagegrid) produces a carbonfootprint much larger thanDirect to Ethanol g-CO2/MJ hanolAlgenolEthanolGridElectricitySharma, McCool, Chance, “CO2 as a feedstock for cyanobacteria-based biofuels: cost of recovery and wells-to-wheelsanalysis”, to appear in Chemical Engineering Progress1Lively,11

Conclusions and Path Ahead The CO2 capture and utilization analyses show that carbon capture from both naturalgas and coal fired power plants is economically feasible in providing the CO2feedstock for a biofuel production process. Our carbon footprint analysis indicates – Corn ethanol: Algenol’s ethanol is less expensive with a much lower carbon footprintwhen compared to corn ethanol. And, no food vs. fuel issue.Gasoline and Diesel: Algenol compares favorably in cost to petroleum derived gasolineand diesel, but with a much lower carbon footprint.Grid electricity (w/o CCS): Compared to electric vehicles, Algenol has a slightly highercost, but is greatly advantaged in carbon footprint when there is no CCS for electricitygeneration.Grid electricity (w/ CCS): The carbon footprint of the Direct-to–Ethanol comparesfavorably and the CO2 is re-utilized versus sequestered underground where it createsmany potential regulatory, safety and environmental issues that are still not wellunderstood.Algenol is actively developing its Direct to Ethanol technology at its integratedbiorefinery in Florida with a plan to produce 10,000 gal liquid fuels/acre-yr12

Pradeep Sharma, Ryan P. Lively, Benjamin A. McCool and Ronald R. Chance. 2 Cyanobacteria-based (“Advanced”) Biofuels Biofuels in general Risks of climate change has made the global energy market very carbon-constrained Biofuels have the potential to be nearly carbon-neutral Advanced biofuels Energy Independence & Security Act (EISA) requires annual US production of 36 .

Related Documents:

Kemppi 2500 ac/dc 1 Tig, alu, CO2 250 Kemppi MLS 3003 ac/dc 1 Tig, alu, rustfri 250 Kemppi KMS 400 1 CO2 500 Kemppi Pro evo 4200 3 CO2 400 1 with welding tractor Kemppi Kempomig 4000W 1 CO2 400 Kemppi MLS 3000 3 TIG, alu, CO2 250 Fronius Transtig 3000 1 TIG 300 Kemppi Weld 400 2 CO2 400 Kempact MIG 2530 1 CO2 250 Kemppi Mat 320 1 CO2 320 Kemppi .

Kemppi 2500 ac/dc 1 Tig, alu, CO2 250 Kemppi MLS 3003 ac/dc 1 Tig, alu, rustfri 250 Kemppi KMS 400 1 CO2 500 Kemppi Pro evo 4200 3 CO2 400 1 med svejsetraktor Kemppi Kempomig 4000W 1 CO2 400 Kemppi MLS 3000 3 TIG, alu, CO2 250 Fronius Transtig 3000 1 TIG 300 Kemppi Weld 400 2 CO2 400 Kempact MIG 2530 1 CO2 250 Kemppi Mat 320 1 CO2 320 Kemppi 1 .

Materials 2017, 10, 629 2 of 26 There are at least three routes of lowering the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere: (i) direct reduction of CO2 emission; (ii) CO2 capture and storage (CCS); and (iii) CO2 utilization [5-7]. Lowering the CO2 emission may seem quite unrealistic because of the present human lifestyle and emergent use of fossil fuel. The potential of CCS technology can be restrained .

5. Locate CO2 inject valve on the back of rear panel. Disconnect tubing from CO2 tank 1 port to inlet (port # 1) of CO2 inject valve and connect to port #3 of CO2 tank switch valve. 6. Attach tubing assembly as shown on figure 2. 7. Locate CO2 tank switch valve, attach (2) black electrical leads to main

The captured CO2 must then be purified and compressed for transport and storage. It is possible to reduce the CO2 emissions from new power plants by about 80 to 90%, but this increases the cost of electricity produced by 35 to 85%. For industrial processes where a relatively pure CO2 stream is produced, the cost per tonne of CO2 captured is .

Zinc is an element commonly found in the Earth's crust. It is released to the environment from both natural and anthropogenic sources; however, releases from anthropogenic sources are greater than those from natural sources. The primary anthropogenic sources of zinc in the environment (air, water, soil) are

anthropogenic. The Middle East region also experiences dust storms from a mix of natural and anthropogenic sources. The Aral Sea is an active dust source, as well as dry riverbeds in Saudi Arabia. There is a cluster of anthropogenic and hydrologic sources along the Jordan

[Class XII : Accountancy] [110] CHAPTER 7 ACCOUNTING FOR SHARE CAPIT AL (Share and Share Capital : Nature and types) “A Company is an artificial person created by law, having separate entity with a