Secret Advice to Politicians: Design Better Regulations
This article comes as no surprise to anyone looking at the CCS issue:
Secret advice to politicians: oilsands emissions hard to scrub
…Little of the oilsands’ carbon dioxide can be captured because most emissions aren’t concentrated enough, the notes say. For efficient capture, there must be a high concentration of CO2 coming out of a smoke stack.
The article is correct to state that the streams of CO2 coming off the power units is not concentrated. Most In-Situ Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAG-D) units are running on natural gas (gas produces steam which is injected in the ground to loosen oil in the sand, which is then pumped to the surface). In these plants, natural gas powers a couple of co-generators and upwards of eight power boilers. Given the high efficiency of the co-generators and the low carbon content of the natural gas, emission rates are low and so CO2 is less concentrated. Total emission rates of CO2 from SAG-D facilities are in the order of 60 kg/bbl, but these units produce 100,000 plus barrels per day, so total emissions can approach 2 to 5 MT. This is a big number, and so it seems appropriate to target these facilities. But, what reductions do we get for what cost?
The article implies that capturing CO2 is not feasible from SAG-D units. But this is not right: CCS is technically feasible for SAG-D units, it just costs lots. Federal regulations, for example, require emission performance from new SAG-D units to match that of CCS. Cost estimates for these units could then be upwards of $200/tonne removed CO2 to achieve the 90% removal efficiency. Feasible yes, cost-effective, perhaps not.
And here is the problem. While most of Canada’s emissions remain unpriced, these units will be facing costs of upwards of $200/tonne. Equity aside, this leads to high cost abatement strategies. That is, we are requiring high cost reductions from these units while other emissions remained unpriced and lower cost abatement opportunities ignored. And oh yes, the embodied carbon emissions in a barrel of oil is roughly 340 kg, or 6 times that of SAG-D extraction. So, we can assume the moral high ground about oil sands needing to reduce emissions right up to the point when we turn the ignition. The real story implied in the article is the misaligned carbon prices across Canadian emissions. This needs to be fixed. This is the challenge for Canadian carbon policy.
.…
good info!…
frederick
30 Jul 14 at 9:31 pm
.…
?????????!…
jay
22 Aug 14 at 6:01 pm
.…
????? ?? ????!!…
fred
22 Aug 14 at 7:20 pm
.…
thank you!!…
Salvador
23 Aug 14 at 12:32 am
.…
tnx for info!!…
adam
23 Aug 14 at 2:05 pm
.…
????? ?? ????!…
kyle
23 Aug 14 at 5:14 pm
.…
??????? ?? ????….
Lester
26 Aug 14 at 12:25 pm
.…
áëàãîäàðñòâóþ….
donald
16 Nov 14 at 11:40 pm
.…
tnx for info….
tommy
17 Nov 14 at 4:42 am
.…
thanks!!…
byron
17 Nov 14 at 4:57 am
.…
ñýíêñ çà èíôó!…
chris
17 Nov 14 at 5:11 am
.…
ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…
glen
17 Nov 14 at 5:24 am
.…
thank you….
lawrence
17 Nov 14 at 5:38 am
.…
ñïñ!!…
Joel
21 Nov 14 at 9:16 pm
.…
ñïàñèáî çà èíôó….
Tyrone
25 Nov 14 at 4:35 pm
.…
áëàãîäàðåí….
Brian
26 Nov 14 at 8:06 pm
.…
ñïñ….
harry
28 Nov 14 at 1:03 pm
.…
áëàãîäàðñòâóþ….
gene
29 Nov 14 at 8:30 am
.…
ñïñ çà èíôó!!…
brad
30 Nov 14 at 3:23 am
.…
ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…
Adrian
5 Dec 14 at 7:59 pm
.…
tnx for info!!…
lewis
10 Dec 14 at 8:38 am
.…
ñïñ!!…
Gerald
10 Dec 14 at 3:12 pm
.…
tnx for info!…
dwayne
10 Dec 14 at 3:43 pm
.…
áëàãîäàðåí….
cory
10 Dec 14 at 8:01 pm
.…
áëàãîäàðåí….
francis
13 Dec 14 at 11:44 pm
.…
ñïñ çà èíôó!…
Troy
14 Dec 14 at 11:50 pm