Should we capture and use CO2 versus store it? Driving The Energy Transition: Episode 17
As summarized in a 2022 National Academies report on Carbon Capture and Utilization (Figure ET-22), it takes less energy to store captured COâ‚‚ underground than recycle it back to fuel. Synthetic fuels can be made from COâ‚‚, but the amount of energy needed is at least three times greater than the amount of energy in the original fuel. Renewable energy must be used, or we simply create more COâ‚‚ emissions than we mitigate.
This is evident from the science of thermodynamics: COâ‚‚ and water are the end products of complete combustion. They have no fuel value. Reversing them to recreate fuel by using water electrolysis to generate the hydrogen needed to react with COâ‚‚ to re-form the original fuel, for example, requires more energy input than the original combustion energy released. This is due to inherent inefficiencies in heat and combustion processes.
Gabrielli et al. [2] estimate 10X less energy is required simply to store the captured
COâ‚‚ underground after compressing it to a liquefied or supercritical state, compared
with using the captured COâ‚‚ to make fuels or chemicals. We therefore consider making
synthetic fuels only for the most difficult to decarbonize sectors and uses, such
as aviation fuels, or where we need to be able to transport and store renewable energy
using existing infrastructure via creation of a synthetic natural gas, or chemicals
to move to market.
Figure ET-22: Carbon Capture and Utilization
References
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Carbon Dioxide Utilization
Markets and Infrastructure: Status and Opportunities: A First Report. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press. .
Paolo Gabrielli, Matteo Gazzani, and Marco Mazzotti, The Role of Carbon Capture and
Utilization, Carbon Capture and Storage, and Biomass to Enable a Net-Zero-CO 2 Emissions
Chemical Industry Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2020 59 (15), 7033-7045
DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.9b06579