Carbon Capture fractions. A corporate con-job on the taxpayer dime

Australia’s most well -known carbon capture and storage facility captures only a portion of the total emissions it produces. David Mcewen explains.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), fossil fuel companies had to be a solution that allowed high -emissions fossil fuels, which they claim to have allowed their products to be used for decades for decades. Governments around the world fell for this, contributing Including subsidies of at least $ 30 billion 1.3B $ By the Australian governments.

However, despite this investment (and special expenditures), the amount of carbon listed globally Still trivial -Equivalent to three Australian coal fuel power plant.

Nevertheless, Santos recently greeted Increasing recognition of carbon capture and storage potential based on a report from EY. It is clear that they haven’t given up the Con yet.

And Chevron’s ‘flagship’ CCS project in Western Australia Gorgon captures 1% of his emissions.

Captured Carbon: Santos E -Posts Gas Giant reveals “environmental protection” laws

CCS methods announced

The storage lice of CCs usually includes either carbon dioxide deep underground (geological storage), converting it into an inert solid (mineralization), and/or caught carbon dioxide is used in fuel, plastic or chemicals (emissions can only discard the product to the end of the life).

Despite the promotion, many people are still sketchy on details, including several different types of carbon captures that reach different goals. In general, they can be classified as follows:

After burning, It includes strengthening a factory or coal/gas power station to capture carbon dioxide, also known as ‘dot welding’. Currently there are currently CCS facilities after commercial combustion in Australia. Expensive and energy intensive.

Direct air capture (DAC) Removes carbon dioxide directly from the ambient air using a chemical process and energy. This largest plant in Iceland has recently been found. spread more than you caught. Again, in Australia, nothing works on any useful scale (or indeed in the world).

Wellhead CCS Because many underground methane (AKA “natural” or fossil gas) reservoirs have a fair ratio of mixed carbon dioxide. Both carbon dioxide and methane are greenhouse gases, but when it comes to gas drilling, methane is a product, and carbon dioxide is an unwanted by -product.

Therefore, instead of ventilating carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, Wellhead CCS tries to capture and bury (sort) in a stable geological formation.

The only commercial-scale plants in Australia-Chevron’s distressed The Gorgon factory and the Moomba factory of Santos – are Wellhead CCS, the focus of the rest of this article.

Fractions Problem

Wellhead CCS suffers from what I say is the problem of a part of a part of some of the part of a part ”.

Fraction 1 It is a percentage of carbon dioxide mixed with methane you can really catch.

Fraction 2 It is the percentage of the “factory” or “building” supply chain emissions, which are generally spread as methane. 85 times stronger as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. In other words, when a kilogram of methane is released into the atmosphere, 85 kilograms of carbon dioxide for a period of 20 years. These supply chain emissions include:

• • Emissions at the well are produced by ventilation and flaming methane.
  • Methane gas pipelines leak on the way to process plants.
  • Processing facilities use large amounts of gas to compress the gas and put it on a ship – about 10% of those exported as LNG are used for processing.
  • Some of the LNG (liquid methane) may evaporate while on the ship.
  • At the import terminal, there is more losses associated with recycling LNG into gas and receiving a distribution pipeline (leak and requiring energy for pumps).

In the end, the gas reaches the machine or device in which it is used, which leads to the following:

Fraction 3Emissions associated with the burning of methane gas in a factory or building. When methane gas (or coal or wood for this subject) is burned, it combines with the oxygen in the air to form carbon carbon dioxide in the fuel (the hydrogen atoms in the fuel combine with oxygen in the air to form water vapor).

In addition, there is often a ventilation of knowledgeable meta. For example, an instant (without a tank) hot water unit, before the spark gas ignite – even if one second, the hot tap allows a methane puff each time it opens. This is about 1 % The release of the gas used in the device as a methane.

CCS example

Chevron’s Gorgon Gas Field 14 % carbon dioxideThe rest is methane. CCS managed to capture CCS facility in 2023-24 about 30% Carbon dioxide.

1 kg of methane is burning versions 2.75 kg of carbon dioxide (more than the weight of the fuel, because oxygen atoms – “dioxide” atmosphere).

We don’t know exactly the methane emissions caused by ventilation, leakage, evaporation and other supply chain factors. Not properly predictedHowever, it is unlikely that the commodity is lower than 3%. This US data. This is multiplied by 85 to equate equivalent amounts of carbon dioxide. (Chevron reported 8.8 million tons In 2023-24, the emissions of the Gorgon facility are responsible for approximately 2% of the total emissions of Australia!)

First, 14kg carbon dioxide and 86kg methane for every 100 kilograms of gas from Gorgon Reservoir.

Then, fraction 2, 86 kg 3% of real commodity, 2.6 kg along the supply chain is lost and 83.4kg burns (Fraction 3).

223.6 kg carbon dioxide is multiplied by 2.6 kg methane 85 (see up) to give equivalent.

In summary, for every 100 kg emissions from Gorgon,

• 4.2KG caught (30% of 14kg carbon dioxide)
• 9.8kg was not caught
• 223.6 kg carbon dioxide equivalent of supply chain methane losses
• 229.35 kg carbon dioxide from the burning of the commodity

This is a total of 462.75 kg for every 100kg from Gorgon, and a total of 462.75 kg equivalent to “good for the factory” or “good for the building”.

The only thing captured and stored is 4.2 kg, only 0.9%!

Connerate a subsidized

Australian government has committed 60 million dollars According to the general costs of CCS facility, according to Chevron’s CCS facility 3.5B $. Considering the amount of press releases from Australia and WA governments, Chevron and their industrial boosters, perhaps you are forgiven for waiting for a little more than 0.9% of the total supply chain emissions of the facility.

Now, I’m sure there will be people who want to discuss about mathematics and assumptions used,¹ However, I doubt that even the most appropriate analysis can be removed beyond one -digit steps.

Wellhead CCS-Avustralia is a part of some of the only commercial-scale CCS-a fraction proposal.

Know what is the cleaning of gas giant Chevron?

NOTE 1:

In the absence of a proper measurement of supply chain methane losses, a 3% estimation was applied. This analysis also uses the 20 -year -old “global warming potential” (GWP) The number 85 for methane reflects the fact that most of the climate damage of the commodity is done within 20 years after emissions to the atmosphere. If it’s more traditional 100 YEARS GWP 28 It is used and an optimistic 1% loss rate is applied, the “fraction 2” number is equivalent to 24.1 kg carbon dioxide. This replaces the percentage of Gorgon’s CCS facility below 1.6%. It is still quite insignificant in the scheme of things.

Of course, some of them may indicate that “Fraction 3” combustion emissions are abroad for the exported gas, so that Chevron or Australia is not a problem. However, this is equivalent to saying that a dam explosion in the Chinese section of the Mekong River will not affect lower countries like Vietnam.