DOE to Award $106M to Six CO2 Conversion Projects; $156M in Matching Private Funding
22 July 2010
The US Department of Energy has selected six projects for funding that aim to find ways of converting captured carbon dioxide emissions from industrial sources into useful products such as fuel, plastics, cement, and fertilizers.
Funded with $106 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act—matched with $156 million in private cost-share—the selections highlight the potential opportunity to use CO2 as an inexpensive raw material that can help reduce carbon dioxide emissions while producing useful by-products.
Converting captured CO2 into products such as chemicals, carbonates, plastics, fuels, building materials, and other commodities is an important aspect of carbon capture and storage technology, the DOE said. Converting CO2 into other useful forms can help reduce carbon emissions in areas where long-term storage of CO2 is not practical.
DOE anticipates that large volumes of CO2 will be available as fossil fuel-based power plants and other CO2-emitting industries are equipped with CO2 emissions control technologies to comply with regulatory requirements.
The six projects were initially selected for a first-phase funding in October 2009 as part of a $1.4 billion effort to capture CO2 from industrial sources for storage or beneficial use. Over the succeeding months, the project teams have performed experiments on novel concepts and produced preliminary designs for pilot plants to study the feasibility of capturing and using CO2 exhausted from industrial processes. The selected projects now enter a second phase in which researchers design, construct, and operate their innovations at pilot-scale and evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of applying them commercially.
The projects selected to demonstrate the beneficial use of CO2 include:
Phycal, LLC (Highland Heights, OH) Phycal will complete development of an integrated system designed to produce liquid biocrude fuel from microalgae cultivated with captured CO2. The algal biocrude can be blended with other fuels for power generation or processed into a variety of renewable drop-in replacement fuels such as jet fuel and biodiesel. Phycal will design, build, and operate a CO2-to-algae-to-biofuels facility at a nominal thirty acre site in Central O’ahu (near Wahiawa and Kapolei), Hawaii. Hawaii Electric Company will qualify the biocrude for boiler use, and Tesoro will supply CO2 and evaluate fuel products. (DOE Share: $24,243,509)
Touchstone Research Laboratory Ltd. (Triadelphia, WV) This project will pilot-test an open-pond algae production technology that can capture at least 60% of flue gas CO2 from an industrial coal-fired source to produce biofuel and other high value co-products. A novel phase change material incorporated in Touchstone’s technology will cover the algae pond surface to regulate daily temperature, reduce evaporation, and control the infiltration of invasive species. Lipids extracted from harvested algae will be converted to a bio-fuel, and an anaerobic digestion process will be developed and tested for converting residual biomass into methane. The host site for the pilot project is Cedar Lane Farms in Wooster, Ohio. (DOE Share: $6,239,542)
Skyonic Corporation (Austin, TX) Skyonic Corporation will continue the development of SkyMine mineralization technology-a potential replacement for existing scrubber technology. The SkyMine process transforms CO2 into solid carbonate and/or bicarbonate materials while also removing sulfur oxides, nitrogen dioxide, mercury and other heavy metals from flue gas streams of industrial processes. Solid carbonates are ideal for long-term, safe aboveground storage without pipelines, subterranean injection, or concern about CO2 re-release to the atmosphere. The project team plans to process CO2-laden flue gas from a Capital Aggregates, Ltd. cement manufacturing plant in San Antonio, Texas. (DOE Share: $25,000,000)
Calera Corporation (Los Gatos, CA) Calera Corporation is developing a process that directly mineralizes CO2 in flue gas to carbonates that can be converted into useful construction materials. An existing CO2 absorption facility for the project is operational at Moss Landing, Calif., for capture and mineralization. The project team will complete the detailed design, construction, and operation of a building material production system that at smaller scales has produced carbonate-containing aggregates suitable as construction fill or partial feedstock for use at cement production facilities. The building material production system will ultimately be integrated with the absorption facility to demonstrate viable process operation at a significant scale. (DOE Share: $19,895,553)
Novomer Inc. (Ithaca, NY) Teaming with Albemarle Corporation and the Eastman Kodak Co., Novomer will develop a process for converting waste CO2 into a number of polycarbonate products (plastics) for use in the packaging industry. Novomer’s novel catalyst technology enables CO2 to react with petrochemical epoxides to create a family of thermoplastic polymers that are up to 50% by weight CO2. The project has the potential to convert CO2 from an industrial waste stream into a lasting material that can be used in the manufacture of bottles, films, laminates, coatings on food and beverage cans, and in other wood and metal surface applications. Novomer has secured site commitments in Rochester, NY, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Orangeburg, SC and Ithaca, NY where Phase 2 work will be performed. (DOE Share: $18,417,989)
Alcoa, Inc. (Alcoa Center, PA) Alcoa’s pilot-scale process will demonstrate the high efficiency conversion of flue gas CO2 into soluble bicarbonate and carbonate using an in-duct scrubber system featuring an enzyme catalyst. The bicarbonate/carbonate scrubber blow down can be sequestered as solid mineral carbonates after reacting with alkaline clay, a by-product of aluminum refining. The carbonate product can be utilized as construction fill material, soil amendments, and green fertilizer. Alcoa will demonstrate and optimize the process at their Point Comfort, Texas aluminum refining plant. (DOE Share: $11,999,359)
One hopes that the DOE would fund only those CO2 conversion projects that give a net reduction of fossil carbon; it would be insane to fund any that were not. What is the net fossil carbon reduction of each of these projects?
Posted by: richard schumacher | 23 July 2010 at 07:31 AM
Mineralization of CO2 to Mg or Ca carbonates is very dubious. If seawater is used as a Calcium-source, it will acidify the sea and take out calcium that would otherwise have reacted with 'natural' CO2 and sequestered it. Although tons of carbonates may be produced in the plant, it is actually doing nothing, because it does the chemical reactions that would otherwise have happened in the ocean. Moreover, it not only acidifies the ocean (which is already very damaging) but it also takes away the precious calcium, which makes it even worse.
On the other hand, if mineral calcium and magnesium oxides (stones) are used and transformed to carbonates, it may be very beneficial, since it not only really sequesters the CO2, but also improves the acidity and calcium load of the oceans (when the carbonates eventually erode to the sea)
So, (almost) the same technology can be very positive of negative, depending on the source of the calcium/magnesium.
Posted by: Alain | 23 July 2010 at 05:29 PM
I love the ideas, waste should always be considered a resource. But of course we should also be concerned with reducing emissions in the first place.
The Neenan Company
Posted by: daniela_says | 24 July 2010 at 10:23 AM
There was an article about a company that makes cement and dry wall out of CO2. There may come a time when CO2 is considered such a valuable raw material that people would wonder why we just spewed it by the billions of tons into the atmosphere.
Posted by: SJC | 24 July 2010 at 11:02 AM
Oh! let us just stop breathing CO2 out into the air and a massive reduction of CO2 releases will follow.
It is impossible to reduce the CO2 in the air very much in the next ten years even if the US did not release another gram. Do not impose any restrictions on CO2 in the US or it will eliminate US jobs to go to other countries, and all of the taxes for that job go away too.
We are importing coal from foreign countries in the form of chemicals and other products. Does Australia pay a carbon tax on the coal it exports. The US does not use its own coal because the oil company paid lobbyiests tell the lawmakers that it releases more CO2 than does oil. with all of the oil and CO2 and natural gas vented in the source country, this cannot be proved.
The ocean is no where near acidified; it still measures basic and it will take many many years and much more CO2 to turn it acid; perhaps there is not enough coal and oil together to turn it acid. The plants complicate the problem by turning the CO2 into non acid carbohydrates. Coral may dissolve in the less basic environment but much more plant life is produced.
The amount of basic magnesium compounds in the ocean is stagering, perhaps enough to build another MT. Everest or many, and until they are all gone the ocean will not become acidic. Rivers put more of it in every year from eroded volcanic rocks. Volcanos were probably the source of most CO2 that formed most coal and oil. ..HG..
Posted by: Henry Gibson | 25 July 2010 at 03:23 AM
Aussie government grants 5 million to turn carbon into algae oil!
Proof that Origin Oil’s and MBD Energy technology works?
Mbd energy is origin oils first customer. The two are collaborating to capture carbon from existing power plants and produce oil. If successful profitability is inevitable. The oil produced will be able to take part in fueling our nations energy needs.
Below is a quote and link explaining their agreement.
Article published may 11
http://www.originoil.com/company-news/originoil-announces-its-first-customer.html
” In the initial phase, OriginOil will equip MBD Energy’s research and development facility at James Cook University in Queensland, Australia, where testing will take place. The two companies agreed that, subject to the success of the initial test phase, MBD will purchase significantly larger feeding and OriginOil extraction units to serve facilities planned for its three Algal Synthesizer power station projects in Australia: Tarong Energy (Queensland), Loy Yang A (Victoria) and Eraring energy(New South Wales).”
(If trials work, mbd will be fully financially committed to the purchasing and production of this technology.)
This article published by James Cook university allows potential investors and thosfogng origin oil and mbd energy to conclude that the tests were a success and that mbd energy is going to be purchasing larger more expensive units from Origin Oil. The link below followed by an important quote will explain my claims.
article from july 9th
http://www.jcu.edu.au/blogs/atjcu/entry/innovative_algae_to_fuel_project
“Senator Carr visited the MBD-JCU research facility at the Townsville campus and inspected the facility – a pilot project that is aimed at commercializing the development of Bio Carbon and Capture Storage technology. The process consumes large quantities of greenhouse gases while producing low cost bio-oil and animal feedstock” after the inspection the Aussie government grant MBD energy with a 5 million dollar grant.
(the research facility at the Townsville campus was an integration of Mbd and Originoil’s technology.)
Summary-First, Origin Oil and MBD energy integrated and tested each others technology at James Cook university. The trials were successful. They called in the Aussie government to evaluate. The Aussie government evaluated the facility and their successes with government funding.
You may be wondering-
If this is true why hasn’t Origin Oil reported it?
This is because MBD Energy is a private company and the two companies have most likely signed to a non disclosure agreement. Meaning origin oil by law is not able to publicly report the process of the project till time stated in contract.
I hope this has made you want to do more research on your own, thank you!
Posted by: Theodore Sturos | 25 July 2010 at 12:02 PM