EPA Outlines 30% Cut in Power-Gen CO2 by 2030: What’s the Role for Carbon Capture and Use, Algae?

by Jim Lane (Biofuels Digest) EPA comes down hard on CO2, with proposed rule calling for deep emission cuts, but opts for highly-flexible, state-by-state approach.   Carbon Capture and Use not deemed a key strategy, but algae advocates aim to change that thinking.
...
EPA will accept comment on the proposal for 120 days after publication in the Federal Register and will hold four public hearings on the proposed Clean Power Plan during the week of July 28 in the following cities: Denver, Atlanta, Washington, DC and Pittsburgh. Based on this input, EPA will finalize standards next June following the schedule laid out in the June 2013 Presidential Memorandum.   Power plants account for roughly one-third of all domestic greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.
...
For the biofuels industry, a key fear was that the proposed Rule would embrace Carbon Capture & Storage, but ignore Carbon Capture and Use technologies — like algae-based fuels, or others proposing to use low-cost power-plant supplied CO2 as a key feedstock for renewable fuels and chemicals.
The concern was that utilities would feel obligated to use underground storage — but not partner with algae companies for CCU technologies – as a mandated part of their carbon emission reduction plan.
Overtly, the proposed Rule embraces neither CCS nor CCU as a preferred strategy for existing power plants that do not have CCU or CCS units in place. Instead, it sees CCS as a viable strategy only for new plant construction.
How CCU and CCS compare
It really comes down to how you measure sequestration.
In the case of Carbon Capture and Use — in some cases, there is direct sequestration of CO2 inside a stable chemical or material — e.g. spandex made from butadiene in turn derived in part from from CO2. In other cases, the CO2 is sequestered until a fuel is burned, when the CO2 is then released into the atmosphere. This has troubled many, who have come to regard CCU as only a temporary time-shift of the emission, compared to the “sequestered now and forever” CO2 in stabilized CO2 underground storage, or CCS.
Another way to look at it is this: products that use CO2 and replace a barrel of oil, are not only sequestering CO2 directly from the power plant emission (for a while in the case of the fuel, or for the long-term in the case of a material), they are displacing a barrel of oil that otherwise would be pumped and burned. So, you have the opportunity to go carbon-negative with CO2 used by algae to make materials, or carbon neutral in the case of the fuel (the emission from the fuel is offset by the carbon savings from the avoided barrel).
The Algae Biomass Organization’s reaction on CCU and CCS
“The saying “if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail” is an appropriate metaphor for the approach to CO2 emissions reductions recently.  The “nail” of CO2 emissions, it is believed, can only be addressed by the “hammer” of regulations to bury, sequester or otherwise get rid of the waste.
Algae digest CO2 as they grow, returning clean oxygen to the environment while they produce oils and proteins. These oils and proteins can be used in the production of transportation fuels, animal feed, chemicals and food products. The more CO2 algae can consume, the faster they grow. As such, the US algae industry has a vested interest in obtaining as much CO2 as possible.
By co-locating algae production facilities at coal or gas fired power plants and onsite at other industrial emitters, they can become customers for waste CO2. One such demonstration facility, using CO2 from a coal fired power plant, has already been built in Kentucky. Another in Iowa is using the CO2 produced from ethanol production to create proteins for animal feed. This process is known as Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU).
The EPA stopped short of considering CCU as an approved strategy in its new rules for Existing Sources, so we will continue our efforts with EPA to try to get CCU qualified as an approved mitigation strategy.  Including utilization in this proposed rule will ensure that the new regulations accelerate the adoption of CCU technologies, like algae.  Furthermore, we look forward to being a resource for EGU’s to help them comply with the proposed rule.
Beneficial utilization of CO2 is the only option to turn the market forces and economics of waste CO2 into a ROI-driven, growth industry that will turn a huge problem into an economic opportunity. In doing so, we can achieve a rare trifecta – the reduction of emissions, the creation of jobs and economic development across the country, and a contribution to our food and energy security. READ MORE