File:CO2EmissionsComparison.JPG
CO2EmissionsComparison.JPG (600 × 600 pixels, file size: 75 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg)
Comparison of CO2 emissions from power plants with and without CO2 capture and storage. A power plant with CCS (lower bar) has increased CO2 production resulting from loss in overall efficiency because of the additional energy required for capture, transport, and storage. However, available technology can capture 85-95% of the CO2 processed in a capture plant, resulting in a net CO2 emission reduction (CO2 avoided) of 80-90% compared to the reference power plant (upper bar) without capture. CCS = carbon capture and storage. From Kaldi, J. G., C. M. Gibson-Poole, and T. H. D. Payenberg, 2009, Geological input to selection and evaluation of CO2 geosequestration sites, in M. Grobe, J. C. Pashin, and R. L. Dodge, eds., Carbon dioxide sequestration in geological media—State of the science: AAPG Studies in Geology 59 , p. 5–16.
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 16:14, 7 August 2014 | 600 × 600 (75 KB) | Molyneux (talk | contribs) | Comparison of CO2 emissions from power plants with and without CO2 capture and storage. A power plant with CCS (lower bar) has increased CO2 production resulting from loss in overall efficiency because of the additional energy required for capture, tra... |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage
The following page uses this file: