Cited by 19

What is the Value of CCS in the Future Energy System?

Heuberger, Clara F., Staffell, Iain, Shah, Nilay, Dowell, Niall Mac·2017·Energy Procedia

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1888

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The carbon intensity of power generation will need to be reduced from 0.5 tCO2 MWh-1 to 0.045 tCO2 MWh-1 by 2035.

    “Furthermore, the carbon intensity of power generation will need to be reduced from 0.5 tCO 2 MWh -1 to 0.045 tCO 2 MWh -1 by 2035 (Heuberger et al., 2017).”

    From Electric and hydrogen buses: Shifting from conventionally fuelled cars in the UK (2020) · cites this paper as Heuberger et al., 2017

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. A. Boston, "Delivering a secure electricity supply on a low carbon pathway," Energy Policy, pp. 55-59, 2013.
  2. N. Mac Dowell, N. Florin, A. Buchard and e. al., "An overview of CO2 capture technologies," Energy & Environmental Science, vol. 3, pp. 1645-1669, 2010.
  3. M. E. Boot-Hatford, J. C. Abanades, E. J. Anthony and e. al., "Carbon capture and storage update," Energy & Environmental Science, vol. 7, pp. 130-189, 2014.
  4. T. Adams and N. Mac Dowell, "Off-design point modelling of a 420MW CCGT power plant integrated with an amine-based post- combustion CO2 capture and compression process," Applied Energy, vol. 178, pp. 681-702, 2016.
  5. A. Alhajaj, N. Mac Dowell and N. Shah, "A techno-economic analysis of post-combustion CO2 capture and compression applied to a combined cycle gas turbine: Part I. A parametric study of the key technical performance indicators," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 44, pp. 26-41, 2016.
  6. A. Alhajaj, N. Mac Dowell and N. Shah, "A techno-economic analysis of post-combustion CO2 capture and compression applied to a combined cycle gas turbine: Part II. Identifying the cost-optimal control and design variables," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 52, pp. 331-343, 2016.
  7. N. S. I. Mac Dowell, "The role of flexible CCS in the UK's future energy system," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 48, pp. 327-344, 2016.
  8. N. Mac Dowell and N. Shah, "The multi-period optimisation of an amine based CO2 capture process integrated with a super-critical coal- fired power station for flexible operation," Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 74, pp. 169-183, 2015.
  9. N. Mac Dowell and N. Shah, "Optimisation of Post-combustion CO2 Capture for Flexible Operation," Energy Procedia, vol. 63, pp. 1525- 1535, 2014.
  10. N. Mac Dowell and N. Shah, "Dynamic modelling and analysis of a coal-fired power plant integrated with a novel split-flow configuration post-combustion CO2 capture process," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, vol. 27, pp. 103-119, 2014.
  11. P. L. Joskow, "Comparing the Costs of Intermittent and Dispatchable Electricity Generating Technologies," American Economic Review, vol. 101, no. 3, pp. 238-241, 2011.
  12. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, "Managing Large-Scale Penetration of Intermittent Renewables: An MIT Energy Initiative Symposium," 2011.
  13. H. Holttinen, P. Meibom, A. Orths and e. al., "Impacts of large amounts of wind power on design and operation of power systems, results of IEA collaboration," Wind Energy, vol. 14, p. 179-192, 2011.
  14. F. Ueckerdt, L. Hirth, G. Luderer and O. Edenhofer, "System LCOE: What are the costs of variable renewables?," Energy, vol. 63, pp. 61- 75, 2013.
  15. C. F. Heuberger, I. Staffell, N. Shah and N. Mac Dowell, "Levelised Value of Electricity -A Systemic Approach to Technology Valuation," Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, vol. 38, pp. 721-726, 2016.
  16. C. Mone, A. Smith, B. Maples and M. Hand, "2013 Cost of Wind Energy Review," National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 2015.
  17. I. Staffell and R. Green, "How does wind farm performance decline with age?," Renewable Energy, vol. 66, pp. 775-786, 2014.
  18. C. F. Heuberger, I. Staffell, N. Shah and N. Mac Dowell, "Quantifying the value of CCS for the future electricity system," Energy & Environmental Science, vol. 9, pp. 2497-2510, 2016.
  19. B. Nyamdash, E. Dennzy and M. O'Malley, "The viability of balancing wind generation with large scale energy storage," Energy Policy, vol. 38, no. 11, p. 7200-7208, 2008.
  20. M. G. Rasmussen, G. B. Andersen and M. Greiner, "Storage and balancing synergies in a fully or highly renewable pan-European power system," Energy Policy, vol. 51, p. 642-651, 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Heuberger, C. F., Staffell, I., Shah, N., & Dowell, N. M.
Venue
Energy Procedia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-07
Volume
114
Pages
7564-7572
ISSN
1876-6102
Cited by
19
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review