Techno-Economic and Partial Environmental Analysis of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCU/S): Case Study from Proposed Waste-Fed District-Heating Incinerator in Sweden

Lena Mikhelkis and Venkatesh Govindarajan
Additional contact information
Lena Mikhelkis: Stockholm Exergi, Jägmästargatan 2, 115 42 Stockholm, Sweden
Venkatesh Govindarajan: Department of Engineering and Chemical Sciences, Karlstad University, 65188 Karlstad, Sweden

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 15, 1-18

Abstract: Sweden aspires to become totally carbon dioxide-neutral by 2045. Indisputably, what is needed is not just a reduction in the emissions of CO 2 (greenhouse gases in general) from the technosphere, but also a manipulated diversion of CO 2 from the atmosphere to ‘traps’ in the lithosphere, technosphere, hydrosphere, and biosphere. The case study in this paper focused on Stockholm Exergi’s proposed waste-to-energy incineration plant in Lövsta, which is keen on incorporating carbon capture and storage (CCS), but is also interested in understanding the potential of carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCU/S) in helping it to achieve ‘carbon-dioxide-negativity’. Waste-to-energy incineration plants (in cases where the petro-plastics in the waste mix can be substantially reduced) are a key component of a circular bio-economy, though the circularity here pertains to recovering energy from materials which may or may not be recyclable. CCS (storage in the North Sea) was compared with CCU/S (CO 2 sintered into high-quality building blocks made of recycled slag from the steel sector) from techno-economic and environmental perspectives. The comparative analysis shows, inter alia, that a hybridized approach—a combination of CCS and CCU/S—is worth investing in. CCU/S, at the time of writing, is simply a pilot project in Belgium, a possible creatively-destructive technology which may or may not usurp prominence from CCS. The authors believe that political will and support with incentives, subsidies, and tax rebates are indispensable to motivate investments in such ground-breaking technologies and moving away from the easier route of paying carbon taxes or purchasing emission rights.

Keywords: carbon capture and storage (CCS); carbon capture; utilization and storage (CCU/S); carbon sinks; carbonation; building blocks (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/15/5922/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/15/5922/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:15:p:5922-:d:388450

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().