| General > General Technical Chat |
| EV-based road transportation is not viable |
| << < (235/236) > >> |
| coppice:
--- Quote from: tom66 on January 23, 2024, 07:46:50 pm --- --- Quote from: coppice on January 23, 2024, 07:41:09 pm --- --- Quote from: tggzzz on January 23, 2024, 06:38:34 pm ---A lot of German "coal" is actually brown lignite, an especially polluting source. --- End quote --- If you are capturing the entire flue output for CCS, won't all those nasties be captured too? --- End quote --- No. Most CCS systems work by using amine gas treatment which only works on CO2 and H2S. The flue itself isn't stored so you get other emissions still like NOx. --- End quote --- Most CO2 capture to date has been for pulling H2S and CO2 out of a mix of stuff, and amine processing is widely used for that. A flue is basically CO2, H2O and some nasty trace contents. Amine capture is a high energy consumption process, and only works well with high pressure gas. That's not very compatible with an energy production process, with a low pressure flue. I assume they must be targeting other ways of doing CCS at Drax. Possibly storing the stuff in old mines around Yorkshire. That's certainly an approach to CCS from flues I keep hearing about. Of course, if you can't seal those mines well enough, the CO2 will leak out. Most things I see proposed for CCS don't sound like they are likely to offer good reliability. |
| tom66:
--- Quote from: coppice on January 23, 2024, 07:56:32 pm ---Most CO2 capture to date has been for pulling H2S and CO2 out of a mix of stuff, and amine processing is widely used for that. A flue is basically CO2, H2O and some nasty trace contents. Amine capture is a high energy consumption process, and only works well with high pressure gas. That's not very compatible with an energy production process, with a low pressure flue. I assume they must be targeting other ways of doing CCS at Drax. Possibly storing the stuff in old mines around Yorkshire. That's certainly an approach to CCS from flues I keep hearing about. Of course, if you can't seal those mines well enough, the CO2 will leak out. Most things I see proposed for CCS don't sound like they are likely to offer good reliability. --- End quote --- CCS for power plants, in general, doesn't really work in the real world. There's a reason most plants are doing pilot studies here or there but there are limited practical examples. The energy usage of a hypothetical 99% CCS, that would capture all of the CO2 from a plant, would represent a significant proportion of the production output of that plant. In any case, it hugely increases the cost of fossil fuel energy, to the point where it would be uncompetitive with renewables, so it could only ever form a small part of the grid. This is a good video: |
| coppice:
--- Quote from: tom66 on January 23, 2024, 08:19:11 pm ---CCS for power plants, in general, doesn't really work in the real world. There's a reason most plants are doing pilot studies here or there but there are limited practical examples. The energy usage of a hypothetical 99% CCS, that would capture all of the CO2 from a plant, would represent a significant proportion of the production output of that plant. In any case, it hugely increases the cost of fossil fuel energy, to the point where it would be uncompetitive with renewables, so it could only ever form a small part of the grid. --- End quote --- So why did you throw amine techniques into the discussion? Drax is, apparently, due to get a pile of cash which they need to waste by putting it into some vague unworkable concept of CCS. So, there must be a principal they are pushing. Filling old mines is the only one that comes to mind for Yorkshire. On the other hand they ship in the wood they burn from the US, so maybe they want to send the CO2 back to the US to be pumped into underground US cavities. Its doesn't need to make any sense. |
| tggzzz:
--- Quote from: coppice on January 23, 2024, 10:26:56 pm --- --- Quote from: tom66 on January 23, 2024, 08:19:11 pm ---CCS for power plants, in general, doesn't really work in the real world. There's a reason most plants are doing pilot studies here or there but there are limited practical examples. The energy usage of a hypothetical 99% CCS, that would capture all of the CO2 from a plant, would represent a significant proportion of the production output of that plant. In any case, it hugely increases the cost of fossil fuel energy, to the point where it would be uncompetitive with renewables, so it could only ever form a small part of the grid. --- End quote --- So why did you throw amine techniques into the discussion? Drax is, apparently, due to get a pile of cash which they need to waste by putting it into some vague unworkable concept of CCS. So, there must be a principal they are pushing. Filling old mines is the only one that comes to mind for Yorkshire. On the other hand they ship in the wood they burn from the US, so maybe they want to send the CO2 back to the US to be pumped into underground US cavities. Its doesn't need to make any sense. --- End quote --- I suspect it is the offshore caverns that used to contain North Sea gas. They are more likely to be taught than coal mines! |
| coppice:
--- Quote from: tggzzz on January 23, 2024, 10:40:21 pm --- --- Quote from: coppice on January 23, 2024, 10:26:56 pm --- --- Quote from: tom66 on January 23, 2024, 08:19:11 pm ---CCS for power plants, in general, doesn't really work in the real world. There's a reason most plants are doing pilot studies here or there but there are limited practical examples. The energy usage of a hypothetical 99% CCS, that would capture all of the CO2 from a plant, would represent a significant proportion of the production output of that plant. In any case, it hugely increases the cost of fossil fuel energy, to the point where it would be uncompetitive with renewables, so it could only ever form a small part of the grid. --- End quote --- So why did you throw amine techniques into the discussion? Drax is, apparently, due to get a pile of cash which they need to waste by putting it into some vague unworkable concept of CCS. So, there must be a principal they are pushing. Filling old mines is the only one that comes to mind for Yorkshire. On the other hand they ship in the wood they burn from the US, so maybe they want to send the CO2 back to the US to be pumped into underground US cavities. Its doesn't need to make any sense. --- End quote --- I suspect it is the offshore caverns that used to contain North Sea gas. They are more likely to be taught than coal mines! --- End quote --- Good point. All the underwater pipework must still be in place to feed stuff into those wells. Drax is about 50 miles from the coast. All they need is some pipe across land, some huge compressors, and a lot of energy to drive the compressors. Maybe they can build an extra power station to power those compressors. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |