Construction Begins on Largest Carbon Capture Project in the World

Carbon dioxide will be captured and piped to an oilfield

Dave Fehling/StateImpact Texas

Carbon dioxide will be captured and piped to an oilfield

Here’s a head-scratcher: Over a million of tons of carbon dioxide a year will be captured from a coal plant near Houston, Texas. Then that captured carbon will be used to get more fossil fuels out of the ground, specifically from an old oilfield that’s been in use since the 1930s. Construction has begun on the Petra Nova Project, which the U.S. Department of Energy is calling “the first commercial-scale post-combustion carbon capture retrofit project in the U.S.”

The carbon capture will take place at the NRG W.A. Parish coal plant in Fort Bend County, the largest coal plant in Texas. The carbon capture project has quadrupled since its conception, now aiming to capture 90 percent of the emissions from one of the generating units at the plant. That carbon dioxide will be compressed and sent via pipeline 80 miles away to the West Ranch Oil Field

Dave Fehling of StateImpact Texas took a look at the project in February 2012:

“The W.A. Parish plant burns some 36,000 tons of coal a day, producing tons of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas linked to climate change. The CO2 would normally go up and out the smokestacks. But now with the new system, the gas will be “captured” before it leaves the stack by spraying it with a chemical solvent. Then, the CO2 gas will be compressed and fed into a pipeline.

This is where what had been pollution becomes a way to produce oil.

This process of rejuvenating old oil fields by pumping in CO2 has been used for several decades, especially in West Texas. But getting the CO2 from a power plant is what’s new.”

The Department of Energy (which is providing part of the funding for the project) has more on how the process will work, and what will happen to the carbon dioxide after it’s used for enhanced oil recovery:

“The Petra Nova Project will capture 90 percent of the CO2 using a process previously deployed in a DOE-sponsored 3-year pilot-scale test in Alabama where it successfully captured more than 150,000 metric tons of CO2 per year from a coal power plant. With this capture rate, coal-fired power generation would have a greenhouse gas footprint much lower than that of a traditional natural gas-powered plant.

After compressing and transporting the captured CO2 via pipeline, the greenhouse gas will be used to displace previously unreachable oil. Once the oil is separated from the CO2, the greenhouse gas will be injected back into the underground oil field for permanent storage. Carbon dioxide has been successfully used since the early 1970s to safely bring up more oil from reservoirs previously considered to be uneconomic for further production.”

NRG is also looking at using carbon capture at some of its other coal power plants.

“Currently, from conventional operation, West Ranch is producing around 500 barrels of oil a day,” Arun Banskota, CEO of Petra Nova, tells Houston Public Media‘s Andrew Schneider. “Once we are able to get carbon dioxide into the West Ranch oil field, that field will produce something in the range of 15,000 barrels a day.”

Here’s a short radio story on the project from Houston Public Media today:

Comments

  • Mary VonZastrow

    Is this too good to be true?
    Waste used to facilitate the industry and then parked for good underground!
    Won’t it rise, leaking from the fracks, and, like salt domes – because less dense than the sedimentary surrounds – disturb (and pollute) our surface?

  • Stanley

    I think it would leak out. Likely needs more carbon to compress than is pumped underground.

  • http://hotelaloirav.wordpress.com/ Astri Roger

    It’s been some time since my organic chemistry days, but I think there should be some caution here (to moderate some of the euphoria). Underground deposits of methane as well as catalytic metals are inevitable. Carbon dioxide reacts with methane, endothermically, and with high geothermic temperatures and catalytic nickel could produce large amounts of toxic carbon monoxide. But, that is only 1/2 the problem, as equimolar amounts of molecular hydrogen are also produced. THAT is explosive at high temperatures, (like those found deep down in the well). Is there any way of insuring that a nice new Yellowstone volcano will not be born in situ? Will the preventative measures be as toxic as the other chemicals used to extract the
    fossil fuel? Seems to me, the Hotel Aloirav Pontibus is still the best option for carbon recovery. Drat!

  • dragonboneman

    Better idea: let’s stop blowing up mountains to burn coal for electricity in the first place. What goes down is liable to come back up.

    • SayWhat

      “…to burn coal for electricity…”
      To be replaced by what dispatchable energy source?

      • dragonboneman

        Probably natural gas until we can move on from that.

        • SayWhat

          “Probably natural gas until we can move on from that.”

          Greenies don’t like fracking either, got anything else?

          • dragonboneman

            I seem to recall there being natural gas long before there was hydraulic fracturing. Probably just my feeble greenie memory.

          • SayWhat

            Your feeble greenie memory is correct, dynamite or nitroglycerin was used long before pressurized fluids.

      • dragonboneman

        This is actually where we need to go, asap: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsgrahFln0s&feature=youtu.be

        • SayWhat

          Nice concept, if it wasn’t for the technical details and cost, we’d be all over it.

          You do know fossil fueled spinning reserve still burns fuels during idle.

  • ppiaseck

    can’t stop nature, it produces about 160 gigaton’s a year, while human activity only produces about 6 gigaton’s……………

    • dragonboneman

      Nature doesn’t “produce” CO2, it breaths it in and out again. That’s the concept behind biofuels. What we’re doing is digging up massive amounts from 240 million years ago and slamming it into the atmosphere.

      • ppiaseck

        It does, but can’t explain that to someone with third grade science knowledge

        • dragonboneman

          That would be “appeal to authority” or just plain ad hominem?

      • SayWhat

        Unless the abiotic oil theory proves true?

  • WilliamMcDavid

    For those who choose willful ignorance about human-caused climate-change, it is undeniable that mercury pollution (COAL) IS Human-caused, as are cadmium, SOx, NOx, Fly-Ash & Other types of pollution which cause serious medical conditions which cost our health-care system $Billions$.
    1-in-6 Women In USA has enough Mercury in her uterus to cause permanent mental deficiency in any child she may bear. Asthma, pertussis, COPD, lung cancer and other respiratory conditions, caused by air pollution, are epidemic in metropolitan areas.
    If fossil-fuel companies INVESTED half as much money to develop Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Tide/Wave & Hydrogen energy as they SPEND to lobby AGAINST it, they could STOP poisoning us all and our progeny in future generations.
    The solution to all these other types of pollution is the SAME as the solution to climate-change: CLEAN ENERGY!
    If you call yourself “Pro-Life” you should be pro-environment.

About StateImpact

StateImpact seeks to inform and engage local communities with broadcast and online news focused on how state government decisions affect your lives.
Learn More »

Economy
Education