The U.S. Takes On Climate and CO2

[leadbelly]

This is to explain to those who wonder what is going on with the U.S., in the efforts about CO2, etc. This gives some idea. It involves seed money for research, to spur private investment.

To quote my other thread-

"Research on removal and sequestration in the U.S. has been accused of some foot dragging, over the years (money from govt. programs). Since 2001, $37 billion has been planned for research, with $12 billion awarded, so far. And, White House wants another $7 billion added for 2008."

U.S. government seed programs to spur private investment do have targets and deadlines, not unlike Kyoto.

For example, Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005-

Title XVII authorizes the Secretary of Energy to make loan guarantees for projects that "avoid, reduce, or sequester air pollutants or anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases; and employ new or significantly improved technologies as compared to commercial technologies in service in the United States at the time the guarantee is issued."

Title XVII also identifies ten categories of technologies that, if employed in commercial projects, are potentially eligible for a loan guarantee. A principal goal of Title XVII is to encourage commercial use in the United States of new or significantly improved energy-related technologies. DOE believes that accelerated commercial use of new and improved technologies will help sustain economic growth, yield environmental benefits, and produce a more stable and secure energy supply and economy for the United States.

.......

On February 15, 2007, President Bush signed into law Public Law 110-5, the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (CR, or Pub. L. 110-5) which authorizes DOE to issue guarantees under the Title XVII program for loans in the "total principal amount, any part of which is to be guaranteed, of $4,000,000,000." This authorization provides DOE sufficient authority, under Title XVII and the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, 2 U.S.C. 661(a), to issue loan guarantees.

etc...

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 16, 2007 / Proposed Rules

OMB (White House), Coal, Hydrogen, Fusion Examples

The U.S produces around 6 GT of CO2. By 2030, it will be 8 GT.

June 2007-

"U.S. Energy Agency Leads Effort to Cut Carbon Dioxide Emissions."

On May 7 and May 10, the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF) conducted a "Capacity Building in Emerging Economies Workshop," held in conjunction with the Sixth Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Fifty-five delegates from the six emerging nation countries, including Brazil, China, Columbia, India, Mexico, and South Africa, attended the workshop.

Discussions focused on international efforts in developing improved cost-effective technologies related to the separation, capture, transport, and longterm storage of CO2. International delegates presented concerns they face in advancing CCS development and deployment in their countries, citing that technology transfer will play a major role in building CCS capacity. The delegates also discussed the importance of implementation, regulatory aspects, environmental issues, and public perception in building capacity for CCS.

Edited June 14, 2007 by leadbelly

[leadbelly]

Regarding the recent summit that some expressed dismay about-

EU is committed to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20% compared to 1990 levels by 2020. In light of the differences on global climate change regulation, the United States and EU expect that the April 2007 summit will launch initiatives jointly promoting technological advances in biofuels, energy efficiency, methane recovery, and clean coal and carbon capture and storage. Although European officials agree with the United States that these technologies should help to improve transatlantic energy security and to mitigate the negative effects of climate change, they are reportedly disappointed with a perceived U.S. reluctance to pursue international emissions and energy efficiency targets.

U.S. officials point out that from 2000-2004, carbon dioxide emissions increased at a faster rate in the EU than in the United States and so argue that the U.S. approach, based on fostering technological innovation as opposed to binding regulation, is proving more effective.

The U.S. has also had high-level meetings with EU presidency, regarding CO2 research.

Also, there is the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate Partnership of United States, Australia, China, India, Japan, and Republic of Korea. For green research, across industries, with 100 projects. Started in 2006. Takes limited government seed money to fuel private investment. Emphasis on power generation. APEC is the most significant public/private initiative established by U.S.

Focus on R&D and environmental performance regarding-

1. Aluminum- reduce emissions of perfluorocarbons (extremely potent, long-lived greenhouse gases), flourides, residues, re-cycling

2. Buildings and Appliances- APEC members use 20-40% of their electricity in this sector. Includes China's large refrigeration and air conditioning interests, stand-by power reduction, etc.

3. Cement- 40% of production cost is energy. APEC members make 61% of world's cement.

4. Cleaner Fossil Energy- 20 existing projects (with many sub-projects), for coal, methane, etc.

5. Coal Mining- 16 projects, intially.

6. Power Generation and Transmission- APEC partners produce 49% of world' electricity. 13 intial projects. U.S. will host Chinese, Indian, Australian, Japanese and Korean power plant engineers, to share information to improve power plant efficiency and reduce pollution.

7. Renewable Energy and Distributed Generation- Efforts focus on China, India, Korea (clean localized energy)

8. Steel- China and Japan are the world's two largest producers.

There is also the $1 billion FutureGen project, a 275-megawatt prototype and the world's first emissions-free coal-fueled power plant with carbon sequestration technologies, in addition to saving some of the hydrogen produced (2012). 12 companies from 4 countries- U.S., India, Australia, U.K., are contributing $215 million apiece to the non-profit program.

This is the basic idea. Just add in CO2 recovery, and saving some of the syngas (H2) for fuel cells-

Link

Edited June 14, 2007 by leadbelly

[leadbelly]

Future weather, weather futures, climate concern. It's almost official. An expert may be willing to look over your business plans, and give you a risk assessment based on climate changes.

O.K. The climate changes. Is it going to change noticeably, and over and beyond what seems to be the norm? Does business need projections out twenty years, or even on shorter timeframes? What if they are wrong?

As I have put forth, the U.S. is moving along with entering the "climate marketplace". It is the green thing to do...

Newark, Calif. – February 1, 2007 –

Risk Management Solutions (RMS), the world’s leading provider of products and services for the management of catastrophe risk, has announced the appointment of Dr. Celine Herweijer to the position of Principal Scientist, Future Climate. The role reflects a commitment by the company to explore the evaluation of future climate risk for today’s economic, business, and political decisions. Dr. Celine Herweijer is a climate scientist, recognized for her work on modeling drought and the impact of oceans on climate. In her new role, Dr. Herweijer will lead RMS work around the wide-ranging implications of future climate risk.

Independence and objective risk assessment go hand-in-hand at RMS. Our natural hazard risk modeling solutions are used by over 400 insurers, reinsurers, trading companies, and other financial institutions worldwide. As an established provider of risk modeling to companies across all market segments, RMS provides solutions that can be trusted as reliable benchmarks for strategic pricing, risk management, and risk transfer decisions.

----

Founded at Stanford University in 1988, RMS is the world's leading provider of products and services for the quantification and management of catastrophe risks. We grew rapidly in the 1990s, offering technology and services for the management of insurance catastrophe risk associated with natural perils such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and windstorms, as well as products for weather derivatives and enterprise risk management for the P&C insurance industry. Today, RMS is also the leader in risk modeling for man-made disasters associated with acts of terrorism by analyzing the impact of weapons of mass destruction on property and people for many sectors of the insurance industry.

Link

[leadbelly]

In keeping with the green movement and business, here is a general idea I have on recovering more energy from oil and gas, and perhaps gas from isolated coal beds.

Odds and ends-

8 min video clip carbon sequestration/ porosity

Various scenarios for CO2 include-

I already mentioned the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF), which helps fund certain projects to study and test CO2 sequestration. The Frio Brine Pilot Experiment (2004) and Frio 2 Brine Test (2006), pumped 1600 and 500 tons of CO2, respectively, a mile below ground, into a salt dome located northeast of Houston. There are over 70 salt domes in Texas. Seven of the 9 major geologic basins around Texas have salt strata, and dome regions. Scientists monitor how the CO2 moves through the subsurface.

It takes several days for a plume of CO2 to stop expanding through brine and porous sandstone. If the CO2 continues to remain in place this year, it will bolster confidence that CO2 sequestration works in salt domes. And, the physics learned will enable predictions on storage in other areas.

Where I think this is leading is to enable large repositories of CO2 (re-accessible) , which can be used to greatly enhance U.S. oil recovery. Estimates based on materials and technology have changed in recent years. Estimates for the amount of oil recoverable range between 40 and 80 billion barrels. That is as much as we use in 125-250 years, at today's rate. There are outside hopes for even more enhanced recovery.

Is all that oil possible?

There are around ten large geologic basins in Texas (and others in the U.S.). Eight of them have salt strata, with salt dome regions and over 70 salt domes. The Frio Brine well is near a dome with caprock, where the geology includes porous sandstone mixed with saline brine.

Here is a quick effort to represent the Texas case. The region in West Texas is called the Permian Basin (once an inland sea). It is about the only area with CO2 supplies near oil and gas fields. CO2/water is currently used to flood the well areas in the third stage of recovery. It enhances pressure, until it bypasses the oil "thief zones", and goes straight up the recovery pipe. At that point, the well is shut in . This is one such enhancement, besides chemical solutions, and gas re-injection.

But, new technologies; studies to produce new CO2 from (ethanol) refineries; coal-fired generation plants; and cheaper ways to use pipelines for transport, are under consideration.

Edited June 20, 2007 by leadbelly

[leadbelly]

The Frio Brine Tests, the first of their kind in the U.S., occured in 2004 and 2006. During injection, liquid CO2 is pumped through a heat exchanger (21 degrees C or 70 degrees F). The warm gas is then pumped through the injection well head. The CO2 enters the porous sandstone and brine through perforations in the well casing and spreads out in a plume.

LBNL developed a novel seismic source that fits down in the injection well between the injection pipe and the well casing. There is a space between the two pipes in which to place a “tubing conveyed seismic source". Ticking from the source travels from the injection well to an array of 24 seismic sensors in the observation well. When CO2 crosses between the source and a sensor, the sound slows down. Scientists use this to track the spread of the CO2 plume.

Simulation of CO2 injection into the 23 meter thick saline-bearing sandstone (saline aquifer). Injection well sends seismic signals to observer well. CO2 migration stops after 90 days.

Edited June 20, 2007 by leadbelly

[leadbelly]

[leadbelly]

Since this was a first step towards deep-sequestration of CO2, a few more details might be o.k. First, the Houston area has industries that produce CO2 by-product. Plus petrogeologic strata underly the region. The donated site was in the Liberty South Oil Field, in Liberty County, and next to the South Liberty Salt Dome.

"The area is known as the Oligocene Frio Formation. Thick, permeable, and laterally expansive sands are separated by regionally extensive shales. The Frio Formation, and its pore volume, is calculated to hold a CO2 density of 595 kg/m^3 (corresponding to an average reservoir pressure and temperature of 80°C and 200 bars) and a range of storage efficiency of from 1 to 6 percent, yield a capacity of the Frio of between 208 × 10^9 and 358 × 10^9 metric tons of CO2." Havorka, 2005

Two maps show the site, and how the sand and sandstone aquifers, and salt strata go from Sabine River down to the Rio Grande. The are some salt domes in the upper basin.

]

Just to the south, in Chambers county, Barbers Hill has a spacious dome. The Barbers Hill Salt Dome is the largest storage location for liquid hydrocarbon gases, in the U.S. Such formations dot the area, and the domes produce steep dips in the surrounding strata.

In the image of the Frio Brine core, a similar dip is noticeable. Samples showed between 16-18 degrees in cross-laminated fluvial sandstone (laid down by streams and rivers).

Blue sand is a term describing what happens to sandstone that comes into contact with methane-rich brine. It turns blue. The next images show various parts of the project, including recovering a soft blue sand core. It was frozen and sampled, and then the CO2 was injected. Readings were taken and now those will further the efforts to save CO2. I say save, because it is likely it will be reused. Current costs for injection are $200 per ton. With sufficient supply, and transport, a price of $10 per ton could make oil recovery go further.

Edited June 21, 2007 by leadbelly

[Reincarnated]

Powerful Interest Groups Complicate Swift Action on Energy in Congress

By H. Josef Hebert

The Associated Press

Washington - Three powerful lobbying forces - automakers, electric utilities and the coal industry - are confounding Democrats' efforts to forge a less-polluting energy policy.

Disputes over automobile fuel economy, use of coal as a motor fuel, and requirements for utilities to use more wind or biomass to generate electricity have threatened to stall energy legislation in both the Senate and House.

An intense GOP fight against the proposal has been waged largely at the behest of two of the country's biggest coal-burning electricity producers - the Atlanta-based Southern Company and the Tennessee Valley Authority. The companies, in letters to senators, argued that the requirement to produce 15 percent of their power from renewable energy sources can't be met without huge electricity cost increases. Supporters of the measure argue that is false.

The issues have been the focus of intense lobbying by the coal industry, electric utilities heavily dependent on coal, and by automobile manufacturers trying to block new fuel economy requirements from Washington and in a dozen states.

CONTINUE

[magnetar]

WASHINGTON -

<snip>.

Legislation calls for requiring automakers to increase the average fuel economy of new cars to 35 miles per gallon by 2020 and an additional 4 percent increase each year for a decade after that.

The auto industry said would require them to meet a fleet average of 52 mpg by 2030 for both cars, SUVs and small trucks.

Meanwhile, the House advanced a $16 billion energy tax package...$6 billion in tax credit bonds to promote energy conservation and greenhouse gas reduction programs...extended tax credits for biomass, wind and small irrigation hydropower, and solar energy and new tax breaks for producing cellulosic ethanol and so-called "plug in" vehicles that are power by electricity from the grid. The bill would end the "Hummer tax loophole" where people can take advantage of a tax incentive for business to buy large SUVs.

An attempt by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., to rescind the 54-cent tariff on ethanol imports was defeated 56-36..

Inhofe called for a "safety valve" on ethanol. But supporters of ethanol said more than half of the required ethanol would come from non-corn sources in 2022 and that the bill already allows a waiver to the production requirements in an emergency.

________________

For the past two decades, corn prices only had one major spike- 1996, when China was in high demand... So, corn is going to be only part of the ethanol plans?

Brazil ferments sugar cane. (Maybe we should partner with Cuba! : P) But, really, coal, oil, and gas underpin everything. Including agriculture. And, droughts come and go. Irrigation, water demand, electricity, ag chemicals...there is an entire picture. There are some dairies that make methane/electricity from "by-product". So, bottom line is that politics is alive and well...!

I remember Alan Greenspan saying he thought the next major hurdle for the U.S. was converting Middle East gas to liquid, and needing to build larger import terminals offshore, in the U.S. And, going coal-to-transportation liquid fuel ain't gonna be easy. It is heavy on water needs, and would use up coal reserves much faster, overall. (burning gas itself does not produce CO2).

Everyone wants cheaper, cleaner, reliable transport. How much fuel is wasted in the U.S., through inefficiency? We have improved things, pretty steadily, but making major input commitments is not easy, without either a new prime energy, or some radical breakthroughs.I am weighing the climate thing, but in the end, the drive for us all is preserving resources. If that means keeping ozone alive and smog from the north pole, all the better.

Electric plug-ins are 15% more efficient (and useful above 0 degrees celcius?)

An all purpose hybrid does not exist, but-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkUYyWYv_n8&NR=1