![](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/web/20080916175140im_/http://www.netl.doe.gov/images/double-line.gif)
Carbon Sequestration
Systems & Analysis
The Carbon Sequestration Program conducts analyses to obtain an understanding of how NETL research and development (R&D) activities support national and international priorities related to energy supply, energy use, and environmental protection.
Systems analyses and economic modeling of potential new processes are crucial to guiding R&D efforts. For example, with technologies that have not moved past bench scale demonstration, a conceptual design is first generated with emphasis on mass and energy balances. Based on available data and/or engineering estimates, the technologies then are optimized, and “what-if” scenarios are evaluated both to identify barriers to deployment, and help the process developers establish performance targets.
Benefits are calculated in terms of reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and reduced cost of GHG mitigation, and provide decision-makers with sound, unbiased analysis of policy issues. NETL systems, policy, and benefits reports can be accessed on the Carbon Sequestration Reference Shelf. NETL focuses on the following areas of analysis:
|
Systems: |
Places research objectives (for example, improvements in the cost and efficiency of CO2 capture technologies) in the context of their impacts on commercial power generation systems and other industrial processes. |
|
Policy: |
Places carbon sequestration in the context of regulatory compliance and environmental policy. |
|
Benefits: |
Combines technology and policy to show economic and environmental costs and benefits that a successful sequestration program will provide, both within the United States and worldwide. |
Peer Review is a standard procedure for federal research conducted under the Carbon Sequestration Program. Each year, a number of federally funded research projects are subjected to a review by technology experts outside NETL, and a formal report is produced summarizing the peer review results.
|