The Elephant in the Room: Dealing with Carbon Emissions From Synthetic Transportation Fuels Production
Abstract
There has been considerable interest in producing synthetic trans-
portation fuels via coal-to-liquids (CTL) hydrocarbon conversion, par-
ticularly in countries where there is an abundant domestic coal resource.
In the United States, there is currently a public policy debate over the
use of coal to produce liquid transportation fuels to increase energy
security and decrease dependence on imported petroleum and refined
products. There are a number of challenges to be faced by a possible
CTL industry, and one of the largest relates to the magnitude of carbon
dioxide (CO2) generated, from synthetic fuel production as well as from
the combustion of the synthetic transportation fuel itself.
CO 2 , produced by conversion of hydrocarbons to energy, pri-
marily via fossil fuel combustion, is one of the most ubiquitous and
significant greenhouse gases (GHGs). Concerns over climate change
precipitated by rising atmospheric GHG concentrations have prompt-
ed many industrialized nations to begin adopting limits on emissions
to inhibit increases in atmospheric CO 2 levels. The United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change states as a key goal the
stabilization of atmospheric GHGs at a level that prevents “dangerous
anthropogenic interference” with the world’s climate systems. This
will require sharply reducing CO 2 emissions across the globe, and ul-
timately a fundamental shift in the way in which energy is produced
and consumed.
Downloads
References
US GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office). Crude Oil: Uncertainty About
Future Oil Supply Makes It Important to Develop a Strategy for Addressing a
Peak and Decline in Oil Production, GAO-07-283, February 2007.
Milius, S. “Wildfire, Walleyes, and Wine. Latest predictions for life in North
American’s changing climate.” Science News, June 16, 2007 pp. 378-380.
Argonne National Laboratory. 2007. “The Greenhouse Gases, Regulated
Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) Model,” GREET 1,
Version 1.7, developed by the University of Chicago Argonne, LLC as Operator of
Argonne National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357 with the
U.S. Department of Energy.
Williams, R.H., S. Consonni, G. Fiorese, and E.D. Larson. “Synthetic Gasoline
and Diesel from Coal and Mixed Prairie Grasses for a Carbon-Constrained
World,” Sixth Annual Carbon Capture and Sequestration Conference, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, May 7-10, 2007.
Larson, E.D., H. Jin, G. Liu, and R.H. Williams. “Zero-Carbon FT Liquids via
Gasifi cation of Coal and Biomass with CCS,” Sixth Annual Carbon Capture and
Sequestration Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 7-10, 2007.
Wigley, T.M.L., R. Richels, and J.A. Edmonds. 1996. “Economic and Environmental
Choices in the Stabilization of Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations.” Nature, Vol.
(6562): 240-243.
Dooley, J.J., R.T. Dahowski, C.L. Davidson, M.A. Wise, N. Gupta, S.H. Kim,
E.L. Malone. May 2006. “Carbon Dioxide Capture and Geologic Storage: A Key
Component of a Global Energy Technology Strategy to Address Climate Change.”
Joint Global Change Research Institute, Battelle Pacific Northwest Division,
PNWD-3602, College Park, Maryland. (Available at http:///www.pnl.gov/gtsp/
docs/ccs_report.pdf)
Sminchak, J., R. Dahowski, J. Dooley, C. Davidson, and N. Gupta. 2007.
“Developing a Better Understanding of the Cost of CO 2 Transport and Storage:
Moving Beyond a Fixed Storage Cost Assumption,” Sixth Annual Carbon Capture
and Sequestration Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 7-10, 2007.
Dahowski, R.T., J.J. Dooley, C.L. Davidson, S. Bachu, and N. Gupta. 2005. Building
the Cost Curves for CO2 Storage: North America. Technical Report 2005/3. IEA
Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme.
McCollum, D. and J.M. Ogden. “Techno-Economic Models for Carbon Dioxide
Compression, Transport, and Storage and Correlations for Estimating Carbon
Dioxide Density and Viscosity.” Institute of Transportation Studies, University of
Spring 2008, Vol. 28, No. 1
California, Davis, Davis, California, October 2006.
Advanced Resources International, Basin-Oriented Strategies for CO2 EOR,
reports prepared for the Office of Fossil Energy, Office of Oil and Gas, U.S.
Department of Energy, February 2006.
Tinker, S. Carbon Capture Ready: What Next? Gasification Technologies
Conference, Washington, D.C., October 10, 2006.
Dahowski, R.T. and S. Bachu. 2007. Assessing the Effect of Timing of Availability
for Carbon Dioxide Storage in the Largest Oil and Gas Pools in the Alberta Basin:
Description of Data and Methodology. PNNL-16137, Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Eaton, D., and I. Duncan. 2006. “Creating a Carbon Capture and Storage Industry
in Texas.” Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs Policy Research Project
Report Number 154, A report by the Policy Research Project on Texas Energy
Policy, May 2006.
Dooley, J., R. Dahowski, M. Wise, C. Davidson. 2007. “Coal-to-Liquids and
Advanced Low-Emissions Coal-Fired Electricity Generation: Two Very Large and
Potentially Competing Demands for US Geologic CO2 Storage Capacity before
the Middle of the Century,” Sixth Annual Carbon Capture and Sequestration
Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, May 7-10, 2007