Carbon sequestration via CO mineralizationCarbon sequestration via CO2 mineralization
Presenters
May 6, 2011
ScientistsPresentersStephanie Greene Edward LeeAntoine Queval Mike Perez
Scientists Ronald Zuckermann and Chun-Long ChenLawrence Berkeley National Lab
Introduction and Overview
Technology Applications Feasibilityg
• Peptoids
Peptoid as
• Replace Carbon Capture
• Technical feasibility
• Peptoid as catalyst: CO2into calcium carbonate
Capture
• Sell “carbon negative”
• Costs
• Competitorsoutput
• Geologic Sequestration
• Regulation
Sequestration
2
Carbon sequestration via mineralization has many benefits
Stability and Safety Avoid pipeline development costs (and CO2 transport)( 2 p )
Potential for“carbon-negative” products
Bypasses geologic constraints for ‘siting’
3
Our technology and considerationsgy
Technology OverviewTechnology Overview
Potential ApplicationsPotential Applications
O ti i tOperating environment
Conclusions
4
Peptoid Technology makes “designer” polymer chains with unique propertiespolymer chains with unique properties
Library of molecules are used as building blocks WIDE VARIETY OFas building blocks
=
WIDE VARIETY OF APPLICATIONS
• Inhibitors• Antimicrobial agents• Cancer therapeutics
Blocks are put together to make a sequence-specific
polymer (“peptoid”)
Cancer therapeutics• Catalysts
5
Peptoid technology used as catalyst to t CO i t l i b tsequester CO2 into calcium carbonate
C l i Process:
PEPTOIDS
Calcium ions
CO2
Calcium Carbonate
(C CO )
23-times faster growth rate of crystal
Can use dilute inputsAlkalinity
(CaCO3)
Inputs OutputCatalyst
Can use dilute inputs and catalyst
Reusable catalystInputs OutputCatalyst
Output: Produces the most
b d t f fabundant form of CaCO3 (calcite)
6
Reaction: CaCl2 + CO2 + 2NaOH CaCO3 + 2 NaCl + H2O
Overall energy balance is a game-t b t P t id b d t dstopper, but Peptoids can be adapted
Carbon Mineralization Technologies
Turn CO2 into Mineralsu CO2 to e a s
PEPTOID CATALYST
Our current reaction:
PEPTOID CATALYST
Recommended reaction (example):Our current reaction:
CaCl2 + CO2 + 2NaOH CaCO3 + 2 NaCl + H2O
Recommended reaction (example):
Mg2SiO4 + 2CO2 2MgCO3 + SiO2
7
Net CO2 sequestration Net CO2 emissions
Applications of our technologypp gy
Technology OverviewTechnology Overview
Potential ApplicationsPotential Applications
O ti i tOperating environment
Conclusions
8
Carbon Mineralization Has Promising Commercial ApplicationsCommercial Applications
Bypass Carbon Capture
Above Ground:Alternative to Above Ground:Alternative to
Capture
Sell Output
Geologic SequestrationGeologic Sequestration
Replace Sequestration Only
Below Ground:Below Ground:Complement GeologicSequestration
Complement GeologicSequestration
Complement Sequestration
9
Sequestration Sequestration
Combining Capture and Sequestration Provides Promising Opportunitieso s g Oppo tu t es
1. BYPASS CARBON CAPTURE
Value PropositionAvoid costs from capture step- Avoid costs from capture step
- Sequestration on site- Avoid CO2 transport
Key Challenges
2 SELL C CO OUTPUT
Above Ground: Alternative to
Above Ground: Alternative to
Key Challenges- Alkalinity source- Cost
Future: 1-2 GT CO2/YrFuture: 1-2 GT CO2/Yr
2. SELL CaCO3 OUTPUTAlternative to Geologic Sequestration
Alternative to Geologic Sequestration Value Proposition
- “Carbon-negative” productsCarbon negative products
Key Challenges- Alkalinity source
C t
Future: 1-2 GT CO2/YrFuture: 1-2 GT CO2/Yr
~85 M tons CaCO3/ Yr~85 M tons CaCO3/ Yr
10
- Cost - Purity and Size of Output
Combining Capture with Selling our t t dd l k toutput can address a large market
85 Million Tons CaCO3/year; over $650B total industry size
#1 Largest User of C CO
#2 Largest User of C CO
Paper/Pulp Plastics
CaCO3
$327 B/yearCaCO3
$246 B/year5% f l b l
Cement #3 largest user of
Paint 5% of global
CO2
80-90% of input is
user of CaCO3
$85 B/ year
11
input is CaCO3
Complementing Geologic Sequestration is th ibl k tanother possible market
Future: 1-2 GT CO2/YrFuture: 1-2 GT CO2/Yr
Today: 45 M tons CO2/Yr
Today: 45 M tons CO2/Yr
COMPLEMENT SEQUESTRATION
Value Proposition- Speed, Stability, Safety- Avoid Monitoring
Below Ground: Complement
Below Ground: Complement Key Challenges
- Cost- Regulation-dependent
ComplementGeologicSequestration
ComplementGeologicSequestration
g- Small Market
12
Replacing sequestration is much more tt ti th l ti itattractive than complementing it
$250
$200Sell
CaCO3output~$10/ton is
$150
outputsequestration, only 50 ¢/ton monitoring
$100Transport
CaptureOur
Catalyst80% of C t
$0
$50p Catalyst
TodayCosts are from Capture
13
$0
CCS Average Our Technology Average
Operating environment dynamicsp g y
Technology OverviewTechnology Overview
Potential ApplicationsPotential Applications
O ti i tOperating environment
Conclusions
14
Nascent players in target segments
Competitor SegmentCarbon negative process produces: ‘Traditional’
productionCalcium b t
OtherC b t pcarbonate Carbonates
Key Players:Multinational
chemical producers
Stage of development: Moving towards commercialization
Moving towards commercialization
Commercial scaleproduction
NEW SKY ENERGY
commercialization commercialization production
Service / Product:
Carbon sequestration
Carbon capture
Sell CaC03 output
15
Implications for technologyp gy
Carbon mineralization market appears ppopen
Demonstrated financial backingg
While cost equation remains important, little financial information on e a c a o a o ocompetitors exists
16
Regulation: A Picture of C iFragmented Carbon Policy
I t ti l U it d St t Kyoto Protocol Tax Incentives
International United States
EU-ETS
NZ ETS
Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)
NZ ETS
GGAS / Tokyo Metropolitan
VERs
Carbon SequestrationMetropolitan Government
Carbon Sequestration Funds
Going Forward: It’s not “if” but “when.”
Technical and commercial conclusions
Technology OverviewTechnology Overview
Potential ApplicationsPotential Applications
O ti i tOperating environment
Conclusions
18
Technological Challenges and Questions
Use of flue gas
Inputs Catalyst+ Output=
Use of flue gasas CO2 source
NaOH cost, Lower costs at
scale
Purity of CaCO3Number of times catalyst can be
d
aO cost,availability, and
energy use
reusedAvailability of CaCl2
Overall Energy Balance
19
Overall Energy Balance
Overall energy balance is a game-t b t P t id b d t dstopper, but Peptoids can be adapted
Carbon Mineralization Technologies
Turn CO2 into Mineralsu CO2 to e a s
PEPTOID CATALYST
Our current reaction:
PEPTOID CATALYST
Recommended reaction (example):Our current reaction:
CaCl2 + CO2 + 2NaOH CaCO3 + 2 NaCl + H2O
Recommended reaction (example):
Mg2SiO4 + 2CO2 2MgCO3 + SiO2
20
Net CO2 sequestration Net CO2 emissions
Commercial opportunity exists pp ywith some caveats
A potentialA potential alternative to
geological sequestration
Addressing technological
Changes to regulatory framework
challenges at scale
framework should make market more
attractive
21
Immediate focus on technology gydevelopment…
Match technology gy
with a marketAddress concerns around
Explore commercial
opportunities
technology
opportunities
22
Thank youy
Questions?Q
23
APPENDIX APPENDIX SLIDES
Our technology has a range of potential gy g pcosts, from $160 to $360/ton of CaCO3
400
300
350
200
250Alkalinity
Ca2+
100
150 CO2
Peptoids
CaCO3 market
0
50
CaCO3 spot Low-Peptoid High-Peptoid Low Peptoid High Peptoid
25
market Cost Cost + Pay for Inputs
+ Pay for Inputs
How much carbon is usable in chemical outputs?
- Global Top 100 chemicals production total = 0.5 Gt/year- CO2 emissions ~30Gt/Year
A CO2 ACO2 Th f li it d li f A d li it d l f
26
- A+CO2 ACO2 Therefore limited supplies of A and limited sales of ACO2 constrain our opportunity.
Slide adapted from Berend Smit, LBNL
Market Exploration – Below Ground: Replace or Complement Geologic SequestrationTotal Annual Market: 45 Million Tons CO2 today:
Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR): 40
EOR & Sequestration:
Pure Sequestration:
Future Potential:
Costs of Current Geologic Sequestration: $5-$15/ton
(EOR): 40 million tons 2 million tons 3 million tons 1-2 GT
Costs of Current Geologic Sequestration: $5 $15/ton Regulatory Incentives exist today: tax incentives (up to
$30/ton) and state-led RPS (e.g., Illinois) Competitive Advantage of our Technology: Competitive Advantage of our Technology:
Avoid Transport Costs: Average of $25/ton, $1-2 M/mile for new pipelines.
Stable and safe form eliminates monitoring
27
Market Exploration – Above Ground: pCarbon Capture Only Current Technologies: Most typical is post-combustion
t t h l (MEA M th l i )capture – common technology (MEA – Mono-ethanol-amine)
Costs of Current Technology: $60-$110+/ton
Key Markets and Market Size: Total future market: 1-2 GT CO2/year Natural gas “cleaning” & small-scale pilots.
Gl b ll 1900 MW f i t ll d b t i Globally, 1900 MW of installed carbon capture in power plants in 2011.
Competitive Advantage of our Technology:p g gy Avoid transport costs to geologic sites Lower projected cost of capture
28