Welcome to the Energy Blog

  • The Energy Blog is where all topics relating to The Energy Revolution are presented. Increasingly, expensive oil, coal and global warming are causing an energy revolution by requiring fossil fuels to be supplemented by alternative energy sources and by requiring changes in lifestyle. Please contact me with your comments and questions. Further Information about me can be found HERE.



After Gutenberg

Clean Break

The Oil Drum


Blog powered by Typepad

« IGCC, Conventional Coal Power Plants Debated | Main | Oxyfuel Pilot Plant Groundbreaking »

June 01, 2006



Any idea what percentage of the CO2 this system can capture? IGCC plants can enable capture of >90% of CO2 for sequestration. I doubt that a pulverized coal plant can capture as large a share. But, this is an interesting test project. Keep us posted, Jim.

Jim from The Energy Blog

The Powerspan process is designed to capture 90% of the CO2, but the process is in an early stage of development. Initial cost estimates indicate that the process would cost less than half of the best CO2 capture technologies currently available for use on coal-fired power plants. The current technologies are very expensive as indicated by this statement on the Powerspan website: "Although CO2 capture technologies are commercially available for use on coal-fired power plants, they have substantial capital and operating costs. According to a 2002 study conducted by the Electric Power Research Institute and Parsons Infrastructure & Technology Group, a new 490 MW pulverized coal plant with a commercially available amine-based CO2 capture system designed to remove 90% CO2 requires 27% of plant capacity to capture CO2 and compress for sequestration. Capital costs represent 42% of the cost of the new coal-fired power plant. The 27% power draw for this process is in sharp contrast to commercially available equipment that removes SO2, NOx, and mercury. Combined, these systems require approximately 3-5% of plant power to operate. The incremental cost of power production for CO2 removal is $0.04/kWh, and the cost per ton of CO2 removed is $47."


IGCC would still have greater thermal efficiency than this scheme, and pay off when (not if) coal becomes sufficiently expensive.

Worse:  when the price of coal goes up, it will be used as an excuse to abandon efforts at sequestration because it reduces output.  IGCC boosts output.

cheap clothing

Hi, interesting post. I have been pondering this topic,so thanks for writing. I'll probably be coming back to your blog. ...

The comments to this entry are closed.

. .

Batteries/Hybrid Vehicles