FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1820768942> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1820768942 endingPage "766" @default.
• W1820768942 startingPage "753" @default.
• W1820768942 abstract "Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) should be a key technology in order to achieve a decline in the CO<sub>2<sub/> emissions intensity of the power sector and other intensive industry, but this potential deployment could be restricted by cost issues as the International Energy Agency (IEA) in their last projections (World Energy Outlook 2013) has considered only around 1% of global fossil fuel-fired power plants could be equipped with CCS by 2035.The SiteChar project funded by 7th Framework Programme of European Commission gives the opportunity to evaluate the most influential parameters of techno-economic evaluations of four feasible European projects for CO<sub>2<sub/> geological storage located onshore and offshore and related to aquifer storage or oil and gas reservoirs, at different stages of characterization.Four potential CO<sub>2<sub/> storage sites have been assessed in terms of storage costs per tonne of CO<sub>2<sub/> permanently stored (equivalent cost based). They are located offshore UK, onshore Denmark, offshore Norway and offshore Italy. The four SiteChar techno-economic evaluations confirm it is not possible to derive any meaningful average cost for a CO<sub>2<sub/> storage site. The results demonstrate that the structure of costs for a project is heterogeneous and the storage cost is consequently site dependent. The strategy of the site development is fundamental, the technical choices such as the timing, rate and duration of injection are also important. The way monitoring is managed, using observation wells and logging has a strong impact on the estimated monitoring costs. Options to lower monitoring costs, such as permanent surveys, exist and should be further investigated. below summarizes the cost range in Euro per tonne (Discount Rate (DR) at 8%) for the different sites, which illustrates the various orders of magnitude due to the specificities of each site. These figures have how to be considered with care. In particular the Italian and Norwegian sites present very specific features that explain the high estimated costs. For the Italian site, the short duration of CO<sub>2<sub/> injection associated with a low injection rate makes the CO<sub>2<sub/> project comparable to a demo project. The Norwegian site is an offshore site located in a virgin area with high infrastructure costs and a combination of injection duration and injection rate that makes the derived costs very sensitive to the discount rate. Table 1. Summary of the cost range in Euro per tonne (discount rate at 8%) €/t CO<sub>2<sub/> Equivalent storage cost at 8% DR Injectivity (Mt CO<sub>2<sub/>/year) Injection duration (year) Base case Base case Base case UK 11.4 5 20 Denmark 3.2 1.5 40 Norway 26.6 1 40 Italy 29 1 10 The results for both UK and Danish sites confirm therefore the value range calculated by the European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP).The main uncertainties in the costs are linked both to the choice of economic parameters (e.g. injected quantities, contingencies) and to the technical choice of operations. This has been studied by sensitivity analyses: for example, if an injection rate is halved and the injection duration is doubled, the Equivalent Storage Cost (ESC) increases by 23% (UK case at 8% DR). Introducing a water production well and water treatment facilities also increases the ESC by 23%, at least on an onshore site. Techno-economic assessments were basically carried out using an 8% discount rate. For projects of long lifetime such a rate severely discounts the late cash flow, especially after 40 years, so that a discount rate of around 4% more in logic of public investment. Compared to other studies, it has to be noted that the scope of the SiteChar analysis does not consider compression and pumping cost, nor transportation cost. This simplifies the techno-economic evaluation but it may not adequately reflect the specific conditions of the individual developments and, hence, distort the comparison between different cases.Lastly, techno-economic evaluation poses questions to policy makers about the real lifetime of a CO<sub>2<sub/> storage project: what should be the abandon phase and the associated cost and what is the real value of the liability transfer after 20 years of storage? This issue is still an open question, which has been addressed in SiteChar assuming the same approach as ZEP (2011).To counterbalance these CO<sub>2<sub/> storage costs, policy makers have to set up incentives, either through ETS (Emission Trading System) credits, tax credits or public funding. To improve the commerciality of CCS, Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) should be taken into account in the regulation of CCS, as it is one of the rare sources for revenue from a commodity with a real market value. CO<sub>2<sub/> storage in a saline aquifer close to oil and gas fields could also be considered as a source for CO<sub>2<sub/> EOR." @default.
• W1820768942 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5018645080 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5028316998 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5043694082 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5043740867 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5044675996 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5046851537 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5047688522 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5051030247 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5056330633 @default.
• W1820768942 creator A5082497798 @default.
• W1820768942 date "2015-01-01" @default.
• W1820768942 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W1820768942 title "Techno-Economic Assessment of Four CO₂Storage Sites" @default.
• W1820768942 doi "https://doi.org/10.2516/ogst/2014057" @default.
• W1820768942 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W1820768942 type Work @default.
• W1820768942 sameAs 1820768942 @default.
• W1820768942 citedByCount "7" @default.
• W1820768942 countsByYear W18207689422015 @default.
• W1820768942 countsByYear W18207689422017 @default.
• W1820768942 countsByYear W18207689422021 @default.
• W1820768942 countsByYear W18207689422023 @default.
• W1820768942 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5018645080 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5028316998 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5043694082 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5043740867 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5044675996 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5046851537 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5047688522 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5051030247 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5056330633 @default.
• W1820768942 hasAuthorship W1820768942A5082497798 @default.
• W1820768942 hasBestOaLocation W18207689421 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C105339364 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C107826830 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C111368507 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C115903868 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C127313418 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C132651083 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C134560507 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C162284963 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C187320778 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C2778379663 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C39432304 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C548081761 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C68189081 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConcept C76758496 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C105339364 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C107826830 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C111368507 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C115903868 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C127313418 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C127413603 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C132651083 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C134560507 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C144133560 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C162284963 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C162324750 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C187320778 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C2778379663 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C39432304 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C548081761 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C68189081 @default.
• W1820768942 hasConceptScore W1820768942C76758496 @default.
• W1820768942 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W1820768942 hasLocation W18207689421 @default.
• W1820768942 hasLocation W18207689422 @default.
• W1820768942 hasLocation W18207689423 @default.
• W1820768942 hasLocation W18207689424 @default.
• W1820768942 hasOpenAccess W1820768942 @default.
• W1820768942 hasPrimaryLocation W18207689421 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W2069645725 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W2133500463 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W2344278840 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W2776403386 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W2912126961 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W2952641387 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W3097367911 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W3121690666 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W3185959185 @default.
• W1820768942 hasRelatedWork W3200857208 @default.
• W1820768942 hasVolume "70" @default.
• W1820768942 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1820768942 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1820768942 magId "1820768942" @default.
• W1820768942 workType "article" @default.