The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The energy penalty of post-combustion CO2 capture & storage and its implications for retrofitting the U.S. installed base
Open accessAbstract
A review of the literature has found a factor of 4 spread in the estimated values of the energy penalty for post-combustion capture and storage of CO2 from pulverized-coal (PC) fired power plants. We elucidate the cause of that spread by deriving an analytic relationship for the energy penalty from thermodynamic principles and by identifying which variables are most difficult to constrain. We define the energy penalty for CCS to be the fraction of fuel that must be dedicated to CCS for a fixed quantity of work output. That penalty can manifest itself as either the additional fuel required to maintain a power plant's output or the loss of output for a constant fuel input. Of the 17 parameters that constitute the energy penalty, only the fraction of available waste heat that is recovered for use and the 2nd-law separation efficiency are poorly constrained. We provide an absolute lower bound for the energy penalty of ∼11%, and we demonstrate to what degree increasing the fraction of available-waste-heat recovery can reduce the energy penalty from the higher values reported. It is further argued that an energy penalty of ∼40% will be easily achieved while one of ∼29% represents a decent target value. Furthermore, we analyze the distribution of PC plants in the U.S. and calculate a distribution for the additional fuel required to operate all these plants with CO2 capture and storage (CCS).
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Carbon capture and storage: how green can black be
Haszeldine, R. S. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1172246 · Cited by 2,021
Economic and energetic analysis of capturing CO 2 from ambient air
House, K. Z., Baclig, A. C., Ranjan, M., van Nierop, E. A., Wilcox, J., & Herzog, H. J. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1012253108 · Cited by 524
Self-citationCO2 Capture from Dilute Gases as a Component of Modern Global Carbon Management
Jones, C. W. (2011) · Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-chembioeng-061010-114252 · Cited by 268
Sanna, A., Hall, M. R., & Maroto-Valer, M. (2012) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c2ee03455g · Cited by 145
Controlling the Adsorption Enthalpy of CO2 in Zeolites by Framework Topology and Composition
Grajciar, L., Čejka, J., Zukal, A., Otero Areán, C., Turnes Palomino, G., & Nachtigall, P. (2012) · ChemSusChem · doi:10.1002/cssc.201200270 · Cited by 112
Metadata
- Authors
- House, K. Z., Harvey, C. F., Aziz, M. J., & Schrag, D. P.
- Venue
- Energy & Environmental Science
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2009
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 193
- ISSN
- 1754-5692 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-5706
- OpenAlex
- W2131573167
- Cited by
- 284
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The energy penalty of post-combustion CO2 capture & storage and its implications for retrofitting the U.S. installed base. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/b811608c
- The paper
- House, K. Z., Harvey, C. F., Aziz, M. J., & Schrag, D. P. (2009). The energy penalty of post-combustion CO2 capture & storage and its implications for retrofitting the U.S. installed base. Energy & Environmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1039/b811608c
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.