Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “BECCS”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Climate vs Energy Security: Quantifying the Trade-offs of BECCS Deployment and Overcoming Opportunity Costs on Set-Aside Land

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) sits at the nexus of the climate and energy security. We evaluated trade-offs between scenarios that support climate stabilization (negative emissions and net climate benefit) or energy security (ethanol production). Our spatially explicit model indicates that the foregone climate benefit from abandoned cropland (opportunity cost) increased carbon emissions per unit of energy produced by 14–36%, making geologic carbon capture and storage necessary to achieve negative emissions from any given energy crop. The toll of opportunity costs on the climate benefit of BECCS from set-aside land was offset through the spatial allocation of crops based on their individual biophysical constraints. Dedicated energy crops consistently outperformed mixed grasslands. We estimate that BECCS allocation to land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) could capture up to 9 Tg C year –1 from the atmosphere, deliver up to 16 Tg CE year –1 in emissions savings, and meet up to 10% of the US energy statutory targets, but contributions varied substantially as the priority shifted from climate stabilization to energy provision. Furthermore, our results indicate a significant potential to integrate energy security targets into sustainable pathways to climate stabilization but underpin the trade-offs of divergent policy-driven agendas.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Data for Climate vs Energy Security: Quantifying the Trade-offs of BECCS Deployment and Overcoming Opportunity Costs on Set-Aside Land

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) sits at the nexus of the climate and energy security. We evaluated trade-offs between scenarios that support climate stabilization (negative emissions and net climate benefit) or energy security (ethanol production). Our spatially explicit model indicates that the foregone climate benefit from abandoned cropland (opportunity cost) increased carbon emissions per unit of energy produced by 14–36%, making geologic carbon capture and storage necessary to achieve negative emissions from any given energy crop. The toll of opportunity costs on the climate benefit of BECCS from set-aside land was offset through the spatial allocation of crops based on their individual biophysical constraints. Dedicated energy crops consistently outperformed mixed grasslands. We estimate that BECCS allocation to land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) could capture up to 9 Tg C year–1 from the atmosphere, deliver up to 16 Tg CE year–1 in emissions savings, and meet up to 10% of the US energy statutory targets, but contributions varied substantially as the priority shifted from climate stabilization to energy provision. Our results indicate a significant potential to integrate energy security targets into sustainable pathways to climate stabilization but underpin the trade-offs of divergent policy-driven agendas.

Field Data↗
DOE OSTI2025

Quantifying Climate Change Effects of Bioenergy and BECCS: Critical Considerations and Guidance on Methodology

Bioenergy is a critical element in many national and international climate change mitigation efforts, including as a carbon dioxide removal strategy combined with the capture and durable geological storage of flue gas emissions (BECCS). However, divergent results on the effectiveness of bioenergy as a climate change mitigation measure are reported in the scientific literature. Climate impacts of bioenergy depend on case-specific factors, primarily biophysical features of the biomass production system, and the design and efficiency of conversion and capture processes. Estimates of climate impacts are also strongly affected by methodological choices and assumptions, and much of the divergence between studies derives from differences in the assumed alternate use of the land or feedstock, the alternate energy source and the system boundaries applied. We present a methodology to support robust estimates of the climate change effects of bioenergy systems, updating the standard methodology developed by the International Energy Agency's Technology Collaboration Program on Bioenergy. We provide guidance on the key choices including the reference land use and energy system that bioenergy is assumed to displace, spatial and temporal system boundaries, co-product handling, climate forcers considered, metrics applied and time horizon of impact assessment. Researchers should consider the whole bioenergy system including all life cycle stages, and choose system boundaries, reference systems and treatment of co-products that are consistent with the intended application of the results. The assessment should be normalised to a functional unit that can be compared with other systems delivering an equivalent quantity of the same function. All significant climate forcers should be included, and climate effects should be quantified using appropriate impact assessment methods that distinguish the impact of time. Consistency in methodology and interpretation will facilitate comparison between studies of different bioenergy systems.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Technoeconomic and Life Cycle Analysis for Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) Baseline

Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) is an attractive option from an environmental standpoint, as biomass regrowth removes CO 2 from the atmosphere, which offsets the emissions produced by burning the biomass. When combined with carbon capture, this produces a system that is capable of zero or even negative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This study examines the performance, environmental impact, and economics of co-firing biomass in pulverized coal (PC) power plants. The analysis is based on various plant configurations (with and without carbon dioxide [CO 2 ] capture) using hybrid poplar biomass at three levels of co-fire (20, 35, and 49 weight percent) with Illinois No. 6 coal. This study is an analysis of the overall performance and economics of the plant, which was used to determine the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and to perform a full environmental life cycle analysis (LCA) of greenfield PC plants co-firing biomass.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS): Achieving Net Zero and Beyond

This work evaluates the life cycle environmental performance of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) across different biomass types, processing technologies, and capture rates. Preliminary results suggest that carbon neutrality could be achieved if 35% biomass is co-fired with 90% carbon capture and sequestration.

Carlson, Derrick R.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Update to Techno-economic Analysis of BECCS Systems

Presentation of updated cost and performance results for coal and biomass co-firing in a pulverized coal power plant both with and without CO2 Capture at the Clearwater Clean Energy Conference. Update includes a 100% biomass fired case with and without capture.

Fout, Timothy↗
DOE OSTI2021

Comparison of Long-Term Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage to Reference Power Generation Technologies Using CO2 Avoidance Cost in the U.S.

Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) can sequester atmospheric CO2, while producing electricity. The CO2 avoidance cost (CAC) is used to calculate the marginal cost of avoided CO2 emissions for BECCS as compared to other established energy technologies. A comparative analysis using four different reference-case power plants for CAC calculations is performed here to evaluate the CO2 avoidance cost of BECCS implementation. Results from this work demonstrate that BECCS can generate electricity at costs competitive with other neutral emissions technologies, while simultaneously removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Approximately 73% of current coal power plants are approaching retirement by the year 2035 in the U.S. After considering CO2 sequestered from the atmosphere and coal power plant CO2 emissions displaced by BECCS, CO2 emissions can be reduced by 1.4 billion tonnes per year in the U.S. alone at a cost of $88 to $116 per tonne of CO2 removed from the atmosphere, for 10% to 90% of available biomass used, respectively. CAC calculations in this paper indicate that BECCS can help the U.S. and other countries transition to a decarbonized electricity grid, as simulations presented in this paper predict that BECCS power plants operate at lower CACs than coal plants with CCS.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Leveraging the bioeconomy for carbon drawdown

Stringent climate change mitigation scenarios rely on large-scale drawdown of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Amongst drawdown technologies, bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS) has received considerable attention in the climate mitigation literature. Recently, attention has shifted further from a relatively narrow focus on BECCS to a broader focus on Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS). The concept of BiCRS has the potential to enable a future where the climate mitigation value of biomass resources is more valuable than the energy value, due to the potential to remove and sequester large quantities atmospheric CO2. This article provides a qualitative overview of prominent BiCRS technologies from which a set of the most promising technologies are assessed quantitively through life cycle assessment. There are numerous opportunities to incorporate carbon removal and management within the bioeconomy, but the majority of immediate carbon removal potential exists in four bioproducts: bioenergy, bioplastics, biochar, and wood products. We analyze the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and disposition of sequestered carbon over 10 000 years for four bioproducts representative of each broader category: an advanced BECCS pathway, biopolyethylene, oriented strand board, and biochar soil amendment. We find that the BECCS pathway has the greatest magnitude and durability of CO2 storage over all time horizons. However, non-BECCS pathways achieve 34–64% of the drawdown magnitude relative to BECCS and retain 55–67% of their initial drawdown over 100 years (central estimate). We identify three engineering strategies for enhancing carbon drawdown: reducing biomass supply chain emissions, maximizing carbon stored in long-lived products, and extending the term of carbon storage. Finally, we highlight the need to characterize both the magnitude and permanence of carbon drawdown as a means for policymakers and technology developers to deploy limited biomass resources to maximize mitigation benefits.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Leveraging the bioeconomy for carbon drawdown

Stringent climate change mitigation scenarios rely on large-scale drawdown of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Amongst drawdown technologies, bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS) has received considerable attention in the climate mitigation literature. Recently, attention has shifted further from a relatively narrow focus on BECCS to a broader focus on Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS). The concept of BiCRS has the potential to enable a future where the climate mitigation value of biomass resources is more valuable than the energy value, due to the potential to remove and sequester large quantities atmospheric CO 2 . This article provides a qualitative overview of prominent BiCRS technologies from which a set of the most promising technologies are assessed quantitively through life cycle assessment. There are numerous opportunities to incorporate carbon removal and management within the bioeconomy, but the majority of immediate carbon removal potential exists in four bioproducts: bioenergy, bioplastics, biochar, and wood products. We analyze the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions and disposition of sequestered carbon over 10,000 years for four bioproducts representative of each broader category: an advanced BECCS pathway, biopolyethylene, oriented strand board, and biochar soil amendment. We find that the BECCS pathway has the greatest magnitude and durability of CO 2 storage over all time horizons. However, non-BECCS pathways achieve 34–64% of the drawdown magnitude relative to BECCS and retain 55–67% of their initial drawdown over 100 years (central estimate). We identify three engineering strategies for enhancing carbon drawdown: reducing biomass supply chain emissions, maximizing carbon stored in long lived products, and extending the term of carbon storage. Finally, we highlight the need to characterize both the magnitude and permanence of carbon drawdown as a means for policymakers and technology develo pers to deploy limited biomass resources to maximize mitigation benefits.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Combining Eddy Covariance Towers, Field Measurements, and the MEMS 2 Ecosystem Model Improves Confidence in the Climate Impacts of Bioenergy With Carbon Capture and Storage

ABSTRACT Carbon dioxide removal technologies such as bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) are required if the effects of climate change are to be reversed over the next century. However, BECCS demands extensive land use change that may create positive or negative radiative forcing impacts upstream of the BECCS facility through changes to in situ greenhouse gas fluxes and land surface albedo. When quantifying these upstream climate impacts, even at a single site, different methods can give different estimates. Here we show how three common methods for estimating the net ecosystem carbon balance of bioenergy crops established on former grassland or former cropland can differ in their central estimates and uncertainty. We place these net ecosystem carbon balance forcings in the context of associated radiative forcings from changes to soil N 2 O and CH 4 fluxes, land surface albedo, embedded fossil fuel use, and geologically stored carbon. Results from long term eddy covariance measurements, a soil and plant carbon inventory, and the MEMS 2 process‐based ecosystem model all agree that establishing perennials such as switchgrass or mixed prairie on former cropland resulted in net negative radiative forcing (i.e., global cooling) of −26.5 to −39.6 fW m −2 over 100 years. Establishing these perennials on former grassland sites had similar climate mitigation impacts of −19.3 to −42.5 fW m −2 . However, the largest climate mitigation came from establishing corn for BECCS on former cropland or grassland, with radiative forcings from −38.4 to −50.5 fW m −2 , due to its higher plant productivity and therefore more geologically stored carbon. Our results highlight the strengths and limitations of each method for quantifying the field scale climate impacts of BECCS and show that utilizing multiple methods can increase confidence in the final radiative forcing estimates.

Falvo, Grant [Department of Plant, Soil and Microb↗
NASA NTRS2018

Land-Use Emissions Play a Critical Role in Land Based Mitigation for Paris Climate Targets

Scenarios that limit global warming to below 2 degrees Centigrade by 2100 assume significant land-use change to support large-scale carbon dioxide (CO2) removal from the atmosphere by afforestation/reforestation, avoided deforestation, and Biomass Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). The more ambitious mitigation scenarios require even greater land area for mitigation and/or earlier adoption of CO2 removal strategies. Here we show that additional land-use change to meet a 1.5 degrees Centigrade climate change target could result in net losses of carbon from the land. The effectiveness of BECCS strongly depends on several assumptions related to the choice of biomass, the fate of initial above ground biomass, and the fossil-fuel emissions offset in the energy system. Depending on these factors, carbon removed from the atmosphere through BECCS could easily be offset by losses due to land-use change. If BECCS involves replacing high-carbon content ecosystems with crops, then forest-based mitigation could be more efficient for atmospheric CO2 removal than BECCS.

Harper, Anna B.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Mobilizing mine lands for biobased decarbonization strategies

Over 163 000 ha of mine lands in Pennsylvania (PA) have the potential to produce willow as a feedstock for renewable energy generation. Each year these lands could produce between 454 000 and 907 000 dry Mg of willow, which can be a feedstock for bioenergy (i.e., biopower) with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS) or sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) production. We used a spatially explicit model to explore cost-minimized allocation of willow biomass from abandoned mine lands (AML) to be used for BECCS or SAF production and to abate carbon dioxide. The results suggest that between 454 000 and 907 000 dry Mg of biomass can be produced on AML in PA at costs from $94 to $250 per dry Mg. This AML willow biomass could be combined with other available biomass and aggregated to ten facilities to produce 17.9 TWh of power; alternatively, it could produce 958 million liters of jet fuel, 638 million liters of renewable diesel, and 1.289 billion liters of naphtha, along with 0.735 TWh of electricity. From this analysis, in PA, under the BECCS pathway, up to 36 million Mg per year of CO2 could be abated at costs of up to $134 per Mg; under the SAF pathway, up to 17.5 million Mg per year of CO2 could be abated at costs up to $150 per Mg of CO2. The use of mine land willow as a supplemental feedstock for SAF and BECCS would need strong incentive programs if costs of production are to be comparable with production on agricultural land.

Wahlstrom, Mallory [Pennsylvania State University]↗
DOE OSTI2026

Life cycle assessment of co-firing biomass at coal-fired power plants with carbon capture and storage toward net-zero emissions

Co-firing biomass with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) offers a technological option to decarbonize coal-fired power plants toward net-zero emissions. This study estimates the life cycle emissions of co-firing biomass at coal-fired power plants with CCS and quantifies its variability and uncertainty. Deployment of co-firing BECCS at coal-fired power plants can significantly reduce the life cycle emissions toward the net-zero target but lower the power plant performance, which vary with numerous factors, including coal type, biomass type, co-firing level, and CO 2 capture rate. The breakeven co-firing levels required for biomass at coal-fired power plants with 90 % CO 2 capture to reach net-zero emissions fall with a range roughly from 15 % to 25 % on an energy basis, depending on coal and biomass types. Increasing the CO 2 capture rate from 90 % to 95 % can lower the breakeven co-firing levels by about 5 to 8 percentage points for the biomass resources of interest, which can lower reliance on biomass resources and facilitate large-scale deployment of co-firing BECCS in fossil-rich regions but with limited biomass resources. Furthermore, findings improve the understanding of the techno-environmental performance of co-firing BECCS and inform strategic planning decisions on net-zero emissions in the coal-fired power sector.

Breakeven co-firing level↗
DOE OSTI2024

Trade-offs in land-based carbon removal measures under 1.5 °C and 2 °C futures

Land-based carbon removals, specifically afforestation/reforestation and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), vary widely in 1.5 °C and 2 °C scenarios generated by integrated assessment models. Because underlying drivers are difficult to assess, we use a well-known integrated assessment model, GCAM, to demonstrate that land-based carbon removals are sensitive to the strength and scope of land-based mitigation policies. We find that while cumulative afforestation/reforestation and BECCS deployment are inversely related, they are both typically part of cost-effective mitigation pathways, with forestry options deployed earlier. While the CO 2 removal intensity (removal per unit land) of BECCS is typically higher than afforestation/reforestation over long time horizons, the BECCS removal intensity is sensitive to feedstock and technology choices whereas the afforestation/reforestation removal intensity is sensitive to land policy choices. Finally, we find a generally positive relationship between agricultural prices and removal effectiveness of land-based mitigation, suggesting that some trade-offs may be difficult to avoid.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

The contribution of bioenergy to the decarbonization of transport: a multi-model assessment

The expected growth in the demand for passenger and freight services exacerbates the challenges of reducing transport GHG emissions, especially as commercial low-carbon alternatives to petroleum fuels are limited for shipping, air and long-distance road travel. Biofuels can offer a pathway to significantly reduce emissions from these sectors, as they can easily substitute for conventional liquid fuels in internal combustion engines. In this paper, we assess the potential of bioenergy to reduce transport GHG emissions through an analysis leveraging various integrated assessment models and scenarios, as part of the 33rd Energy Modeling Forum study (EMF-33). Furthermore, we find that bioenergy can contribute a significant, albeit not dominant, proportion of energy supply to the future transport sector: in scenarios aiming to keep the temperature increase below 2 °C by the end of the twenty-first century, models project that in 2100 bioenergy can provide on average 42 EJ/yr (ranging from 5 to 85 EJ/yr) for transport (compared to 3.7 EJ in 2018), mainly through lignocellulosic fuels. This makes up 9–62% of final transport energy use. Only a small amount of bioenergy is projected to be used in transport through electricity and hydrogen pathways, with a larger role for biofuels in road passenger transport than in freight. The association of carbon capture and storage (CCS) with bioenergy technologies (BECCS) is a key determinant in the role of biofuels in transport, because of the competition for biomass feedstock to provide other final energy carriers along with carbon removal. Among models that consider CCS in the biofuel conversion process the average market share of biofuels is 21% in 2100 (ranging from 2 to 44%), compared to 10% (0–30%) for models that do not. Cumulative direct emissions from the transport sector account for half of the emission budget (from 306 to 776 out of 1,000 GtCO 2 ). However, the carbon intensity of transport decreases as much as other energy sectors in 2100 when accounting for process emissions, including carbon removal from BECCS. Lignocellulosic fuels become more attractive for transport decarbonization if BECCS is not feasible for any energy sectors. Since global transport service demand increases and biomass supply is limited, its allocation to and within the transport sector is uncertain and sensitive to assumptions about political as well as technological and socioeconomic factors.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Bioenergy pathways within United States net-zero CO 2 emissions scenarios in the Energy Modeling Forum 37 study

The Energy Modeling Forum 37 study is organized around carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) mitigation scenarios reaching net-zero CO 2 emissions by 2050 in the United States. Here, this paper summarizes the potential contribution of bioenergy use in the electric power, transportation, industrial, and buildings sectors toward meeting that target based on model results. Thirteen modeling teams reported bioenergy consumption in the Reference and Net Zero scenarios. Consumption of bioenergy increased over time in the Reference scenario, from an average across models of 3.2 exajoules (EJ) in 2020 to 3.8 EJ in 2050. Average bioenergy consumption in 2050 increased further to 7.3 EJ in the Net Zero scenario. All scenarios that reach net-zero emissions required some form of carbon dioxide removal to offset emissions that are difficult to reduce. Carbon dioxide removal using bioenergy with CO 2 capture and storage (BECCS) varies widely across models, up to 1000 Mt CO 2 in 2050. Some models rely instead on direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), up to 2200 Mt CO 2 , and others use a combination of BECCS and DACCS. Model results show a strong inverse relationship between the amounts of BECCS and DACCS deployed. All modeling teams assumed a carbon sink from land use, land use change, and forestry, further offsetting a portion of emissions from fossil fuels and industry that are expensive to eliminate. Bioenergy consumption in 2050 decreased by an average of 1.5 EJ across eight models in a Net Zero+ scenario relative to the Net Zero scenario, due in part to a lower equilibrium carbon price resulting from optimistic cost assumptions for all energy technologies.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗