Capture Of Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Coal Utilities May Be Economically Feasible In North Carolina With Pipeline Transport to Other States

Study by Duke University environmental economists finds carbon capture and sequestration possible to pursue even in the geologically unsuited Southeast region.

Contact: Eric Williams, (919) 613-8714, e.l.Williams@duke.edu

March 29, 2007

DURHAM, N.C. – A new study by environmental economists at Duke University finds that it may be economically feasible to capture greenhouse gas emissions from coal-powered electric utilities in North Carolina and transport them, via a pipeline, into underground storage reservoirs in the Appalachian Basin and Gulf Coast regions.

The study, which was prepared by Duke’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions and its Center on Global Change, examines the potential for capturing and storing carbon-dioxide emissions from coal-powered electric plants in North Carolina using two widely touted, “clean coal” technologies: supercritical pulverized coal (SPC) and integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC).

“Within the next decade, utilities plan to construct new coal-based generation plants in North Carolina,” said lead author Eric L. Williams, project director for economic analysis at the Nicholas Institute. “This study shows that carbon capture and sequestration investment can be economically viable even in a state that does not have geological sequestration capacity.”

A working paper that summarizes conclusions from the study is available online here >.

Among the findings:

Although carbon can be captured through both SPC and IGCC with carbon capture technology, the process of gasifying coal in IGCC plants promises the lowest capture costs at the present time. At just around $7 per ton for carbon dioxide prices in 2012 and rising to $45 per ton in 2050, IGCC with carbon capture will be less expensive than SPC with carbon capture over the lifetime of the plant.

Geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide emissions from power plants is not economically or technically feasible in North Carolina at the time. The best estimate of in-state storage capacity is about three years’ worth of captured emissions, the study finds.

For geologic sequestration to become feasible in the state, a new pipeline would have to be built to carry the emissions to underground reservoirs elsewhere. Emissions captured from N.C. coal-powered plants could be transported to viable geologic sinks in the Appalachian Basin and Gulf Coast regions. This would require the construction of a multi-state pipeline on existing right of ways alongside East Tennessee and Texas Eastern natural gas pipelines.

The study comes on the heels of a recently released report, “The Future of Coal,” from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which recommends early investment in carbon capture and sequestration technologies and infrastructure.

Carbon dioxide emissions are a major cause of global warming. In North Carolina, 41 percent of these greenhouse gas emissions are produced by electric power plants. Since 98 percent of the state’s carbon emissions from electricity production come from coal, “any credible greenhouse gas reduction strategy in North Carolina must address the usage of coal and conventional pulverized coal plants,” Williams said.

While the analysis focuses on North Carolina as a starting point, elements of the analysis can be applied to other states seeking emission-reduction opportunities, he stressed.

“The study found economically viable options for carbon capture and storage pipeline technology in North Carolina, demonstrating that even states that are geologically poor for sequestration can find ways to plan for a carbon-constrained future for new coal plants,” he said.

The study was produced by the Nicholas Institute and Center on Global Change as part of the Climate Change Policy Partnership, a four-year initiative that was launched in 2005 by Duke University and Duke Energy to pool the expertise of the university’s Nicholas Institute, Nicholas School of the Environment, and Center on Global Change with other concerned partners in the corporate and academic worlds.

For more information, contact Nicole St. Clair Knobloch, (202) 270-5125, nicole.stclair@duke.edu, or Tim Lucas, (919) 613-8084 or tdlucas@duke.edu.