A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation with Humidity Swing Direct Air Capture of CO2 versus MEA-Based Postcombustion Capture

Coen van der Giesen, Christoph J. Meinrenken, René Kleijn, Benjamin Sprecher, Klaus S. Lackner, Gert Jan Kramer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

Most carbon capture and storage (CCS) envisions capturing CO2 from flue gas. Direct air capture (DAC) of CO2 has hitherto been deemed unviable because of the higher energy associated with capture at low atmospheric concentrations. We present a Life Cycle Assessment of coal-fired electricity generation that compares monoethanolamine (MEA)-based postcombustion capture (PCC) of CO2 with distributed, humidity-swing-based direct air capture (HS-DAC). Given suitable temperature, humidity, wind, and water availability, HS-DAC can be largely passive. Comparing energy requirements of HS-DAC and MEA-PCC, we find that the parasitic load of HS-DAC is less than twice that of MEA-PCC (60-72 kJ/mol versus 33-46 kJ/mol, respectively). We also compare other environmental impacts as a function of net greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation: To achieve the same 73% mitigation as MEA-PCC, HS-DAC would increase nine other environmental impacts by on average 38%, whereas MEA-PCC would increase them by 31%. Powering distributed HS-DAC with photovoltaics (instead of coal) while including recapture of all background GHG, reduces this increase to 18%, hypothetically enabling coal-based electricity with net-zero life-cycle GHG. We conclude that, in suitable geographies, HS-DAC can complement MEA-PCC to enable CO2 capture independent of time and location of emissions and recapture background GHG from fossil-based electricity beyond flue stack emissions.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages1024-1034
Number of pages11
JournalEnvironmental Science & Technology
Volume51
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 17 2017

Fingerprint

Ethanolamine
Coal
electricity generation
Life cycle
Atmospheric humidity
humidity
life cycle
Electricity
coal
air
Air
Greenhouse gases
greenhouse gas
Environmental impact
electricity
mitigation
environmental impact
Carbon capture
Flue gases
water availability

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Chemistry(all)
  • Environmental Chemistry

Cite this

A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation with Humidity Swing Direct Air Capture of CO2 versus MEA-Based Postcombustion Capture. / van der Giesen, Coen; Meinrenken, Christoph J.; Kleijn, René; Sprecher, Benjamin; Lackner, Klaus S.; Kramer, Gert Jan.

In: Environmental Science & Technology, Vol. 51, No. 2, 17.01.2017, p. 1024-1034.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

van der Giesen, Coen ; Meinrenken, Christoph J. ; Kleijn, René ; Sprecher, Benjamin ; Lackner, Klaus S. ; Kramer, Gert Jan. / A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation with Humidity Swing Direct Air Capture of CO2 versus MEA-Based Postcombustion Capture. In: Environmental Science & Technology. 2017 ; Vol. 51, No. 2. pp. 1024-1034
@article{3bba0282199b4ac087efc254a6c7e103,
title = "A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation with Humidity Swing Direct Air Capture of CO2 versus MEA-Based Postcombustion Capture",
abstract = "Most carbon capture and storage (CCS) envisions capturing CO2 from flue gas. Direct air capture (DAC) of CO2 has hitherto been deemed unviable because of the higher energy associated with capture at low atmospheric concentrations. We present a Life Cycle Assessment of coal-fired electricity generation that compares monoethanolamine (MEA)-based postcombustion capture (PCC) of CO2 with distributed, humidity-swing-based direct air capture (HS-DAC). Given suitable temperature, humidity, wind, and water availability, HS-DAC can be largely passive. Comparing energy requirements of HS-DAC and MEA-PCC, we find that the parasitic load of HS-DAC is less than twice that of MEA-PCC (60-72 kJ/mol versus 33-46 kJ/mol, respectively). We also compare other environmental impacts as a function of net greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation: To achieve the same 73{\%} mitigation as MEA-PCC, HS-DAC would increase nine other environmental impacts by on average 38{\%}, whereas MEA-PCC would increase them by 31{\%}. Powering distributed HS-DAC with photovoltaics (instead of coal) while including recapture of all background GHG, reduces this increase to 18{\%}, hypothetically enabling coal-based electricity with net-zero life-cycle GHG. We conclude that, in suitable geographies, HS-DAC can complement MEA-PCC to enable CO2 capture independent of time and location of emissions and recapture background GHG from fossil-based electricity beyond flue stack emissions.",
author = "{van der Giesen}, Coen and Meinrenken, {Christoph J.} and Ren{\'e} Kleijn and Benjamin Sprecher and Lackner, {Klaus S.} and Kramer, {Gert Jan}",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "17",
doi = "10.1021/acs.est.6b05028",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "1024--1034",
journal = "Environmental Science & Technology",
issn = "0013-936X",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Life Cycle Assessment Case Study of Coal-Fired Electricity Generation with Humidity Swing Direct Air Capture of CO2 versus MEA-Based Postcombustion Capture

AU - van der Giesen,Coen

AU - Meinrenken,Christoph J.

AU - Kleijn,René

AU - Sprecher,Benjamin

AU - Lackner,Klaus S.

AU - Kramer,Gert Jan

PY - 2017/1/17

Y1 - 2017/1/17

N2 - Most carbon capture and storage (CCS) envisions capturing CO2 from flue gas. Direct air capture (DAC) of CO2 has hitherto been deemed unviable because of the higher energy associated with capture at low atmospheric concentrations. We present a Life Cycle Assessment of coal-fired electricity generation that compares monoethanolamine (MEA)-based postcombustion capture (PCC) of CO2 with distributed, humidity-swing-based direct air capture (HS-DAC). Given suitable temperature, humidity, wind, and water availability, HS-DAC can be largely passive. Comparing energy requirements of HS-DAC and MEA-PCC, we find that the parasitic load of HS-DAC is less than twice that of MEA-PCC (60-72 kJ/mol versus 33-46 kJ/mol, respectively). We also compare other environmental impacts as a function of net greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation: To achieve the same 73% mitigation as MEA-PCC, HS-DAC would increase nine other environmental impacts by on average 38%, whereas MEA-PCC would increase them by 31%. Powering distributed HS-DAC with photovoltaics (instead of coal) while including recapture of all background GHG, reduces this increase to 18%, hypothetically enabling coal-based electricity with net-zero life-cycle GHG. We conclude that, in suitable geographies, HS-DAC can complement MEA-PCC to enable CO2 capture independent of time and location of emissions and recapture background GHG from fossil-based electricity beyond flue stack emissions.

AB - Most carbon capture and storage (CCS) envisions capturing CO2 from flue gas. Direct air capture (DAC) of CO2 has hitherto been deemed unviable because of the higher energy associated with capture at low atmospheric concentrations. We present a Life Cycle Assessment of coal-fired electricity generation that compares monoethanolamine (MEA)-based postcombustion capture (PCC) of CO2 with distributed, humidity-swing-based direct air capture (HS-DAC). Given suitable temperature, humidity, wind, and water availability, HS-DAC can be largely passive. Comparing energy requirements of HS-DAC and MEA-PCC, we find that the parasitic load of HS-DAC is less than twice that of MEA-PCC (60-72 kJ/mol versus 33-46 kJ/mol, respectively). We also compare other environmental impacts as a function of net greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation: To achieve the same 73% mitigation as MEA-PCC, HS-DAC would increase nine other environmental impacts by on average 38%, whereas MEA-PCC would increase them by 31%. Powering distributed HS-DAC with photovoltaics (instead of coal) while including recapture of all background GHG, reduces this increase to 18%, hypothetically enabling coal-based electricity with net-zero life-cycle GHG. We conclude that, in suitable geographies, HS-DAC can complement MEA-PCC to enable CO2 capture independent of time and location of emissions and recapture background GHG from fossil-based electricity beyond flue stack emissions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027519883&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027519883&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1021/acs.est.6b05028

DO - 10.1021/acs.est.6b05028

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 1024

EP - 1034

JO - Environmental Science & Technology

T2 - Environmental Science & Technology

JF - Environmental Science & Technology

SN - 0013-936X

IS - 2

ER -