Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has an interest in large scale hydrogen geostorage, which could offer substantial buffer capacity to meet possible disruptions in supply or changing seasonal demands. The geostorage site options being considered are salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers and hard rock caverns. The DOE has an interest in assessing the geological, geomechanical and economic viability for these types of geologic hydrogen storage options. This study has developed an economic analysis methodology and subsequent spreadsheet analysis to address costs entailed in developing and operating an underground geologic storage facility. This year the tool was updated specifically to (1) incorporate more site-specific model input assumptions for the wells and storage site modules, (2) develop a version that matches the general format of the HDSAM model developed and maintained by Argonne National Laboratory, and (3) incorporate specific demand scenarios illustrating the model's capability. Four general types of underground storage were analyzed: salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers, and hard rock caverns/other custom sites. Due to the substantial lessons learned from the geological storage of natural gas already employed, these options present a potentially sizable storage option. Understanding and including these various geologic storage types in the analysis physical and economic framework will help identify what geologic option would be best suited for the storage of hydrogen. It is important to note, however, that existing natural gas options may not translate to a hydrogen system where substantial engineering obstacles may be encountered. There are only three locations worldwide that currently store hydrogen underground and they are all in salt caverns. Two locations are in the U.S. (Texas), and are managed by ConocoPhillips and Praxair (Leighty, 2007). The third is in Teeside, U.K., managed by Sabic Petrochemicals (Crotogino et al., 2008; Panfilov et al., 2006). These existing H{sub 2} facilities are quite small by natural gas storage standards. The second stage of the analysis involved providing ANL with estimated geostorage costs of hydrogen within salt caverns for various market penetrations for four representative cities (Houston, Detroit, Pittsburgh and Los Angeles). Using these demand levels, the scale and cost of hydrogen storage necessary to meet 10%, 25% and 100% of vehicle summer demands was calculated.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

The National Water, Energy and Carbon Sequestration simulation model (WECSsim) is being developed to address the question, 'Where in the current and future U.S. fossil fuel based electricity generation fleet are there opportunities to couple CO{sub 2} storage and extracted water use, and what are the economic and water demand-related impacts of these systems compared to traditional power systems?' The WECSsim collaborative team initially applied this framework to a test case region in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico. Recently, the model has been expanded to incorporate the lower 48 states of the U.S. Significant effort has been spent characterizing locations throughout the U.S. where CO{sub 2} might be stored in saline formations including substantial data collection and analysis efforts to supplement the incomplete brine data offered in the NatCarb database. WECSsim calculates costs associated with CO{sub 2} capture and storage (CCS) for the power plant to saline formation combinations including parasitic energy costs of CO{sub 2} capture, CO{sub 2} pipelines, water treatment options, and the net benefit of water treatment for power plant cooling. Currently, the model can identify the least-cost deep saline formation CO{sub 2} storage option for any current or proposed coal or natural gas-fired power plant in the lower 48 states. Initial results suggest that additional, cumulative water withdrawals resulting from national scale CCS may range from 676 million gallons per day (MGD) to 30,155 MGD depending on the makeup power and cooling technologies being utilized. These demands represent 0.20% to 8.7% of the U.S. total fresh water withdrawals in the year 2000, respectively. These regional and ultimately nation-wide, bottom-up scenarios coupling power plants and saline formations throughout the U.S. can be used to support state or national energy development plans and strategies.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Concerns over rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have resulted in serious consideration of policies aimed at reduction of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. If large scale abatement efforts are undertaken, one critical tool will be geologic sequestration of CO2 captured from large point sources, specifically coal and natural gas fired power plants. Current CO2 capture technologies exact a substantial energy penalty on the source power plant, which must be offset with make-up power. Water demands increase at the source plant due to added cooling loads. In addition, new water demand is created by water requirements associated with generation of the make-up power. At the sequestration site however, saline water may be extracted to manage CO2 plum migration and pressure build up in the geologic formation. Thus, while CO2 capture creates new water demands, CO2 sequestration has the potential to create new supplies. Some or all of the added demand may be offset by treatment and use of the saline waters extracted from geologic formations during CO2 sequestration. Sandia National Laboratories, with guidance and support from the National Energy Technology Laboratory, is creating a model to evaluate the potential for a combined approach to saline formations, as a sink for CO2 and a source for saline waters that can be treated and beneficially reused to serve power plant water demands. This presentation will focus on the magnitude of added U.S. power plant water demand under different CO2 emissions reduction scenarios, and the portion of added demand that might be offset by saline waters extracted during the CO2 sequestration process.

Abstract not provided.

In an effort to address the potential to scale up of carbon dioxide (CO{sub 2}) capture and sequestration in the United States saline formations, an assessment model is being developed using a national database and modeling tool. This tool builds upon the existing NatCarb database as well as supplemental geological information to address scale up potential for carbon dioxide storage within these formations. The focus of the assessment model is to specifically address the question, 'Where are opportunities to couple CO{sub 2} storage and extracted water use for existing and expanding power plants, and what are the economic impacts of these systems relative to traditional power systems?' Initial findings indicate that approximately less than 20% of all the existing complete saline formation well data points meet the working criteria for combined CO{sub 2} storage and extracted water treatment systems. The initial results of the analysis indicate that less than 20% of all the existing complete saline formation well data may meet the working depth, salinity and formation intersecting criteria. These results were taken from examining updated NatCarb data. This finding, while just an initial result, suggests that the combined use of saline formations for CO{sub 2} storage and extracted water use may be limited by the selection criteria chosen. A second preliminary finding of the analysis suggests that some of the necessary data required for this analysis is not present in all of the NatCarb records. This type of analysis represents the beginning of the larger, in depth study for all existing coal and natural gas power plants and saline formations in the U.S. for the purpose of potential CO{sub 2} storage and water reuse for supplemental cooling. Additionally, this allows for potential policy insight when understanding the difficult nature of combined potential institutional (regulatory) and physical (engineered geological sequestration and extracted water system) constraints across the United States. Finally, a representative scenario for a 1,800 MW subcritical coal fired power plant (amongst other types including supercritical coal, integrated gasification combined cycle, natural gas turbine and natural gas combined cycle) can look to existing and new carbon capture, transportation, compression and sequestration technologies along with a suite of extracting and treating technologies for water to assess the system's overall physical and economic viability. Thus, this particular plant, with 90% capture, will reduce the net emissions of CO{sub 2} (original less the amount of energy and hence CO{sub 2} emissions required to power the carbon capture water treatment systems) less than 90%, and its water demands will increase by approximately 50%. These systems may increase the plant's LCOE by approximately 50% or more. This representative example suggests that scaling up these CO{sub 2} capture and sequestration technologies to many plants throughout the country could increase the water demands substantially at the regional, and possibly national level. These scenarios for all power plants and saline formations throughout U.S. can incorporate new information as it becomes available for potential new plant build out planning.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.