It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Zero Emission Power Plants Coming Next Year

page: 3
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2017 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Misleading headline. It's not zero emission, it produces excess CO2 which will then have to be pumped underground.

From the OP

The excess CO2 is a pipeline-ready CO2 byproduct, which will be supplied to third parties for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) or sequestered underground.


They've been working on carbon capture and storage for ages.




posted on Jan, 19 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock


originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
There are a couple moving part here. First is supercritical CO2 creation to turn a new, smaller, cheap turbine. Second is the closed-loop aspect where gas is burned with oxygen to create the CO2 for the first part which keeps it from the atmosphere (where it does it's nasty "global warming" dance).


Yeah, corrected that a page later. It was too late for a title change. Yes, the demo power plant does create CO2 that is used. After use it "pipeline" ready (their term, not mine) which can be any use not just stored.

Here is an NBC news article on the Carbon XPrize where uses of CO2 are explored. I like what the Opus 12 guys are doing and using oxygen, hydrogen, and CO2 to make various chemicals and pre-cursors. As the article states, all uses will probably be done depending on what product is needed or is sellable.

NBCnews.com, Jan. 18, 2017 - How the Carbon XPrize Is Turning Airborne Trash Into Treasure.



posted on Jan, 19 2017 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: JimTSpock


Misleading headline. It's not zero emission, it produces excess CO2 which will then have to be pumped underground.
They've been working on carbon capture and storage for ages.

Correct, more often than not, on the taxpayers dime.


Canada’s Economic Action Plan invests $1 billion for clean energy research and demonstration projects, including $650 million for large-scale carbon capture and storage projects.

Inexpensive energy should be the goal. If these processes were economical in any way shape or form, industry would be building them with their own dollars. Instead we see more corporate welfare during a period of huge job losses in the energy industry.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Researchers have developed a type of rechargeable battery called a flow cell that can be recharged with a water-based solution containing dissolved carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted from fossil fuel power plants. ...
...
In order to harness the potential energy in this concentration difference, the researchers first dissolved CO2 gas and ambient air in separate containers of an aqueous solution, in a process called sparging. At the end of this process, the CO2-sparged solution forms bicarbonate ions, which give it a lower pH of 7.7 compared to the air-sparged solution, which has a pH of 9.4.

After sparging, the researchers injected each solution into one of two channels in a flow cell, creating a pH gradient in the cell. The flow cell has electrodes on opposite sides of the two channels, along with a semi-porous membrane between the two channels that prevents instant mixing while still allowing ions to pass through. Due to the pH difference between the two solutions, various ions pass through the membrane, creating a voltage difference between the two electrodes and causing electrons to flow along a wire connecting the electrodes.

After the flow cell is discharged, it can be recharged again by switching the channels that the solutions flow through. By switching the solution that flows over each electrode, the charging mechanism is reversed so that the electrons flow in the opposite direction. Tests showed that the cell maintains its performance over 50 cycles of alternating solutions.

Phys.org, Feb. 9, 2017 - Battery can be recharged with carbon dioxide.

So there is another possible use of excess generated CO2 that can be done. Their idea is to use current power plant emissions. But they can do the same with a closed-cycle system and get double duty from CO2 generated.

The idea similar to a flow battery but this uses pH differences to create ion flow. They too are making bicarbonate ions but they do not need the baking soda so they leave it suspended in solution (the upcycling plant in India). Gee, that is three threads of mine right there: zero emission plant (sorry if that name misled anybody), flow battery, and India plant upcycling CO2. Now they have to see if this scales up to industrial sizes.

Funny, "sparging" is what it is called when you rinse your grains when making beer!
edit on 9-2-2017 by TEOTWAWKIAIFF because: spelling



posted on Feb, 22 2017 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Nice reads on the Demo Power Plant of OP


The Allam Cycle doesn’t utilize steam to create electricity. Instead, CO2 under pressure and in a supercritical state spins the turbines powering the generators. Combustion adds CO2 to keep the process going, and any excess is sent into a pipeline.

NetPower, 8 Rivers’ portfolio company constructing the first Allam Cycle plant [Texas demo plant from OP], describes the technology as truly clean, saying plants that utilize the Allam Cycle are able to “inherently eliminate all air emissions.” That means no particulate matter, mercury, nitrogen oxides, or sulfur oxides either. Plus, Allam’s technology can generate electricity at the same six cents per kilowatt-hour as other gas-fired turbines.

Inhabitat.com, Feb. 22, 2017 – Groundbreaking technology affordably captures CO2 from fossil fuel plants.

Some of the quotes are from a Forbes article. It is a nice read too. They talk to the guy (Allam) and there is a nice history. Basically he worked on carbon capture up until the 19070’s when he realized that it was not feasible. He gave up until supercritical CO-2 started being thought of to turn a turbine entered the picture! Then he joined back in. Some of the quotes come from here, like…


A full-size Net Power plant will generate 300MW and 800,000 tons of CO2 per year and cost around $300 million to build. "The plan is to build these in oil regions, then transport the power," says Daniel McCarthy, head of tech investments at CB&I. "If you can generate power without carbon dioxide and with no economic penalty versus existing technology, why wouldn't you do that?" It'll take a few months of operation before Net Power can prove the stability of the cycle. Allam predicts his invention will soon sell itself: "In a year we will know for sure."

Forbes.com, Feb. 21, 2017 – Revolutionary Power Plant Captures All Its Carbon Emissions, At No Extra Cost.

First, it is nice to see numbers as far as power generation goes $ 0.06 per kW/h and how much a power plant would cost. US$ 300 million for 300 MW, so… a million per MW does not seem like a lot of money. And you keep 800,000 tons of CO2 out of the atmosphere.

I still have not seen anything other than some green group basically saying, “You’ll shoot your eye out kid!” as far as dangers of S-CO2 go ("it might explode if it escapes the containment container!).

Both are good reads if you tried to follow how this works and still are slightly confused. The Forbes article is longer.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I was reading about another CO2 capture unit that is also in Texas.


Cost overruns at the Kemper plant [in Miss.] forced its owner, Southern Company, to raise electricity rates in Mississippi, drawing the ire of state residents. NRG doesn’t have that option, because in Texas’s deregulated electricity market, customers can simply switch to a cheaper competitor.

“There’s plenty of technology out there for capturing CO2, but doing it in a way that doesn’t affect the cost of electricity is the issue,” said NRG vice president for development David Greeson, who oversaw the construction of Petra Nova. “Everything NRG does is subject to competitive customer choice. If we raise our costs, consumers are going to choose someone else.”
...
According to NRG, the plant is currently capturing over ninety percent of the carbon released by the power plant’s flue gas—about 5,200 tons of CO2 per day. That CO2 is being piped to the West Ranch Oil Field, where it’s being used to recover oil left behind from previous drilling, after which the CO2 is permanently sequestered underground. Although Hilcorp hasn’t released figures for the field’s current productivity, it aims to produce around 15,000 barrels a day at full capacity.

Texasmonthly.om, Feb. 27, 2017 - A Texas Energy Company Offers a Glimpse of What Carbon Capture Could Look Like.

The company is NRG Energy and back in 2010 they laid out a plan to bolt onto their flue stack a carbon capture device. It came online right at the end of the year. This tech can be done. It should be done.

The closed-cycle demo plant cannot shift the cost off to their customers because their customers would leave. So that is one way this could work (supercritical CO2 turbine and a closed-cycle power plant), no net increase in costs. And if the power company can notice some profit from their excess CO2 it become like NRG Energy guys getting excess oil in return.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: jellyrev
a reply to: lordcomac

in other words a "global warming timebomb"


This is really cool. In 20 years or so when solar, wind and this are all market competitive life will be pretty cool and green. once energy is nearly free, and time becomes the major limiting factor, we will be in a weird different world.


We're so close right now. I don't think it will be 20 years. Solar is competitive. The Solar Panels on my house give me nearly 95% of the power I generate, I would say 80% of the time. The problem is Nevada Power raises their rates to compensate. The problem isn't technology but policy.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: jellyrev
a reply to: lordcomac

in other words a "global warming timebomb"


This is really cool. In 20 years or so when solar, wind and this are all market competitive life will be pretty cool and green. once energy is nearly free, and time becomes the major limiting factor, we will be in a weird different world.


We're so close right now. I don't think it will be 20 years. Solar is competitive. The Solar Panels on my house give me nearly 95% of the power I generate, I would say 80% of the time. The problem is Nevada Power raises their rates to compensate. The problem isn't technology but policy.


How long will it take for the solar panels to pay themselves off?



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: jellyrev
a reply to: lordcomac

in other words a "global warming timebomb"


This is really cool. In 20 years or so when solar, wind and this are all market competitive life will be pretty cool and green. once energy is nearly free, and time becomes the major limiting factor, we will be in a weird different world.


We're so close right now. I don't think it will be 20 years. Solar is competitive. The Solar Panels on my house give me nearly 95% of the power I generate, I would say 80% of the time. The problem is Nevada Power raises their rates to compensate. The problem isn't technology but policy.


How long will it take for the solar panels to pay themselves off?


I've got a lease so it was no money down and it's a selling point for a lot of people adding value to my house. It's really a win win situation.

The funny thing is that the month after they were installed we were told that solar technology has already advanced to the point that now they could put up half the amount of panels for the same output. That's probably half the price already. in 5 years that will be halved in both hardware needed and price again.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: jellyrev
a reply to: lordcomac

in other words a "global warming timebomb"


This is really cool. In 20 years or so when solar, wind and this are all market competitive life will be pretty cool and green. once energy is nearly free, and time becomes the major limiting factor, we will be in a weird different world.


We're so close right now. I don't think it will be 20 years. Solar is competitive. The Solar Panels on my house give me nearly 95% of the power I generate, I would say 80% of the time. The problem is Nevada Power raises their rates to compensate. The problem isn't technology but policy.


How long will it take for the solar panels to pay themselves off?


I've got a lease so it was no money down and it's a selling point for a lot of people adding value to my house. It's really a win win situation.

The funny thing is that the month after they were installed we were told that solar technology has already advanced to the point that now they could put up half the amount of panels for the same output. That's probably half the price already. in 5 years that will be halved in both hardware needed and price again.

Are you saving money with the solar panels?
What are the terms of the lease.
Are there government subsidies involved?



posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nickn3
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Where does the oxygen come from?


I finally have come across the answer to this simple question!

I really wish they had explained this a bit at their website.


There are some additional energy costs, though, that bring the final efficiency down. To get the oxygen necessary for the first step in the Allam cycle, Net Power has to run an air-separation unit, which as the name suggests, separates air into its components: nitrogen (78%), oxygen (21%), and argon (1%). Running the air-separation unit reduces overall energy efficiency by about 10%. And before the carbon dioxide is reinjected at the end of the cycle, it has to be put through a separate compressor to turn it back into supercritical CO2. That reduces efficiency by an additional 10%.

In the end, the Allam cycle is only slightly more efficient than typical combined-cycle systems. But it has the major added benefit of capturing all potential carbon dioxide emissions essentially for free.

Quartz.com, Dec. 5, 2017 - A radical startup has invented the world’s first zero-emissions fossil-fuel power plant.

They are taking the oxygen from the surrounding air.

Only took me a year to find your answer...



They are running tests on the various components. Earlier this year I heard around Thanksgiving, 2017. Now, the plant will come online "Spring 2018" (I know! A specific date would nice! "Charlie Brown Eyes")



posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: lordcomac

1500 PSI is nothing to worry about. Some fuel injection systems run at 30,000 PSI. 1500 kids toys.



posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   

The system operates at a high pressure of 300 atmospheres, and the development of its key equipment – a new combustor and its related turbine – was a critical challenge. Toshiba met that challenge by applying its high-temperature, high-pressure combustion and cooling technologies to the design, development and manufacture of a novel, supercritical CO2 combustor and turbine for the power system.

Last month, the test program broke new scientific ground by confirming stable operation at the system’s target pressure of 300 atmospheres, fully confirming Toshiba’s design. The recent successful testing of the combustor is a major step towards the realization of this disruptive power system, and Toshiba will continue testing to generate additional new data while further demonstrating the operability of the combustor.

International Turbo Machinery Magazine (turbomachinerymag.com), Aug. 2013 - Toshiba tests combustor for CO2 turbine.

A quick check at google: 1 atmosphere = 14.6959 PSI

If I have pressed the buttons right, that would around ~4,400 PSI. The temperature range is around 1,000 C.

Toshiba has tested it and manufactured the 25 MW SCO2 turbine. One of the biggest savings is size. From the Quanta article the entire site is about the size of a soccer field.



posted on Dec, 6 2017 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Just a side note...we don't want to eliminate ALL CO2 production, just mitigate excess. CO2 is necessary for plant plant growth. CO2 is not the enemy of Earth, in fact, without it we'd all be DEAD! It's a matter of degree.

Something the enviros conveniently tend to forget to tell people about.



No they don't. We need to eliminate all fossil fuel CO2 production. That is carbon which has been out of the biosphere for a very long time, and should stay out. Before fossil fuel emissions, the plants and oceans and atmosphere took care of CO2 all fine on its own without humans.
edit on 6-12-2017 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2017 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I still have not found any horror stories on current usage of supercritical CO2 explosions or what not.

I did find a paper that describes the benefits of changing over to SCO2 electricity generation. They have full size diagrams of what a SCO2 power plant would look like. They also delve into molten salt technologies in combination with nuclear reactors.

MIT.edu (PDF) - Supercritical CO2 cycle for advanced NPP. (Nuclear Power Plants)

Slides 4 - 14 concern and describe SCO2 before they start to describe a transition to molten salt and NPPs.

A good read for those interested!



posted on May, 31 2018 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: TEOTWAWKIAIFF

Remember this thread? Well, NET Power's demo plant hit some obstacles and the plant's opening was delayed, twice. Last I heard was "Late spring."

A few details and technical info has come out since OP.
1. They are burning natural gas in pure oxygen in the combustor. The oxygen is purified by Air Liquide using some of the energy the plant makes right on site.
2. The numbers: CO2 in the combustor is at 30 MP; Ratio of CO2 to O2, 30-to-1; CO2 turns supercritical at 31.1 °C @ 7.39 megapascals, so they are operating beyond that!

UPDATE


It took some doing to figure out how to manage the 30-to-1 CO2-to-oxygen ratio, but in January 2013, Allam and the engineers at NET Power succeeded in getting a small-scale combustion chamber to light up and produce a stable flame at a pressure of 1 MPa. By July of that year, test pressure was up to 30 MPa with good results. “We learned in 2013 that the flame is so stable that the combustion does not need to be complicated,” says NET Power CEO Bill Brown.

NET Power fired up its combustor at the La Porte, Texas plant for the first time in May [May 30]. In this and future tests, the combustor is operating separately from the turbine. The idea is to push the equipment to failure without worrying about damaging the turbine, Toshiba’s $100 million in-kind investment in the plant.

“I hope they break the combustor,” Brown says. “I want to see what this thing can take.”

Spectrum.ieee.org, May 30, 2018 - This Power Plant Runs on CO2.

The article describes what is happening pretty well. In case you didn't catch it, they are igniting fuel in oxygen inside of a supercritical CO2 fog! They create a bit, pump it around, cool it down some (the water goes to the bottom), then at 8 MP, the SCO2 is pumped back into the oxy-combustor for another burn. It reaches 30 MP on this burn. Then it will be pumped to the SCO2 turbine.

Yesterday was the first fire of the oxy-combustor at this demonstration plant!!




posted on May, 31 2018 @ 06:53 PM
link   

The US energy startup, Net Power, has announced that it has successfully fired up its natural-gas plant in La Porte, Texas. In the age of climate change, when reducing emissions should be our primary goal, it may sound odd to celebrate the launch of a fossil fuel-burning plant. But Net Power is unique. Its new facility is the first fossil-fuel power plant that promises to capture all its emissions effectively at zero extra cost, and on May 30 it passed a major milestone in the step towards commercializing a climate-friendly technology.


In a small turbine, a combustor burns natural gas and pure oxygen—producing only carbon dioxide and water—in a chamber that’s already full of supercritical carbon dioxide at high pressure and temperature. That’s no small feat; it’s like trying to light a match while someone else is doing their best to put it out with an extinguisher. The combustion produces additional carbon dioxide, some water, and lots of heat. This hot, high-pressured mixture is then passed through a gas turbine, where the pressure turns a shaft to generate electricity.

The slightly cooled mixture exits the turbine, then is separated into parts. The necessary amount of carbon dioxide is compressed to become supercritical again and added back to the initial chamber, keeping a steady amount of the gas circulating through the system. The remaining, pure stream of CO2 can be buried underground. And the (clean) water is dumped. The heat transfer in this process is so efficient that for each unit of energy trapped in natural gas, the Allam cycle produces 0.8 units of electricity (compared to 0.6 units produced in the most advanced natural-gas power plants).

Quartz (qz.com) - [url=https://qz.com/1292891/net-powers-has-successfully-fired-up-its-zero-emissions-fossil-fuel-power-plant/]A radical US startup has successfully fired up its zero-emissions fossil-fuel power plant.

This here is a mess, "In a small turbine, a combustor burns natural gas and pure oxygen—producing only carbon dioxide and water". It should read something like, "In a combustor, a fine mist of natural gas and pure oxygen is burnt..." and the rest can continue, "in a chamber already that's already full..." then somewhere else mention, "only CO2 and water are created". Then the second half of the quote makes more sense.

Quartz did not even attribute the quote. They make it sound like it is from a previous article but it is not. The turbine is separate from the combustor and only receives SCO2. There are a bunch of steps involved including cooling and separating water but if it works it will be worth it!

North Dakota is keeping an eye on this as they have expressed interest in doing the same.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join