The following extract from a discussion to a Chemical Engineering thesis contains most of the stages suggested in previous screens for a Discussion. Using the drop down options on the right, select the appropriate label for the Discussion text on each row to see how the argument builds up. You will note that some of the stages are repeated. You need to use all of the labels.

There has, until now, been limited modelling done to estimate the costs for Australian power plant operators to adopt CO2 capture and sequestration.

A recent project by the Australian Coal Association Research Program (ACARP) has attempted to translate the results from the IEA Greenhouse Gas Research and Development Program to Australian conditions.

... (details of location, aims etc)

Some of the results from this study are shown in Table 10.7-2. In each case a 90% recovery of CO2 was achieved using an amine based absorption process.

The ACARP study estimated the cost for ocean disposal at 500m for the coastal Queensland power station to be $AUD 52 tonne/ CO2. recovered. The modelling results from this thesis estimated this cost at $AUS 61 tonne/ recovered for a power station located approx. 50-60 km from the coast. Thus, assuming that a "coastal location" is within these bounds, our estimates for the costs of CO2 capture via amine absorption and disposal in the ocean at a depth of 500 m are in general agreement (within 20%) with the results of the ACARP study.

The estimated costs for CO2 sequestration in gas reservoirs around the Surat, Bowen and Cooper-Eromanga basins from QLD1 and QLD2 were all higher than the costs estimated for the ACARP study. This may be due to the position of the theoretical power stations not corresponding between the two studies. However, since again the results from this thesis are 15-30% higher than the ACARP results, the inconsistency may be due to the assumed costs of CO2 capture (as these make up the majority of the total costs for sequestration.)

The similarity between the results generated in this thesis and the ACARP study is likely due to the fact that both were based largely on results from the IEA Greenhouse Gas Research and Development Program. Australian coal-fired power operators and environmentalists alike would have much to gain from having access to more data generated specifically for Australian conditions.

Both sets of results presented here indicate that, despite the variability in estimated sequestration costs for various options, there does exist potential for sequestration to be achieved in Australia as economically as for overseas nations, particularly if a carbon trading emissions market is established.

These results show there is potential to develop CO2 capture and sequestration processes in Australia.

The results therefore imply that the government and industry leaders should not only be waiting for the outcome of decisions made about the use of carbon "sinks" and carbon trading to determine the direction of their greenhouse strategy. These leaders should be proactive in further supporting research into the potential emission reduction strategy of CO2 sequestration.

Regardless of whether or not a carbon trading system is established, the results indicate that the costs of CO2 capture and sequestration to Australian coal-fired power plant owners will be similar to those for other operators in other countries. However, the coastal location of many Australian coal-fired power plants and Australia's vast resources of coal seam methane, may in fact lead to Australian coal-fired operators having cost advantages over other international operators.

It should be remembered however that the largest costs of sequestration would still be dependent on the chosen CO2 capture process rather than the choice of sequestration. Hence it is recommended that this work be continued in order to provide a more technical evaluation, particularly focused on how to decrease the energy requirements of the capture processes through heat integration with the rest of the power plant.

The results of such studies would be greatly welcomed by both the Australian electricity industry and the Government.

Attempts: 0 out of 3.