A problem at present is that present high-voltage/alternating current
distribution lines mean that low-cost transmission of electricity is
limited to a few hundred miles, so one would have to disperse DAC. If
instead there were large-scale high-voltage/direct current distribution
lines (see MacDonald et al., Nature, January 2016), then there could be
long distance, low-cost transmission over large distances and one would
have a much better likelihood of having access to any stranded energy
(from wind, solar, geothermal, nuclear, etc.), all while having DAC
located where it would be optimally able to store the captured carbon.
Just another reason, among many, for having large-scale HV/DC networks
across the world's continents.
Mike MacCracken
On 9/17/17 10:50 AM, Hawkins, Dave wrote:
Using stranded renewable energy for DAC is an interesting idea.
Question is what energy resource will be used during periods when
there is no surplus RE? If DAC does not run 24/7 its costs go up. If
DAC uses RE to run 24/7, that requires a larger RE system with
associated stranding. If DAC uses something other than RE, what is it?
Ideally, we would have an economically dispatchable zero-carbon resource.
This is not an argument against DAC, just an observation on system
complexity.
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 17, 2017, at 3:58 AM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Does anyone have a breakdown of projected input costs for Direct Air
Capture? I'm interested in quantifying the energy component.
Swanson's law predicts reliable falls in the cost of solar. Without
storage, much peak-time solar could be wasted, unless it's used for
time-insensitive applications like DAC or desalination.
(I understand Keith's process needs electricity, but Lackner's
instead needs heat.)
My hypothesis is that DAC could become vastly cheaper, if energy
costs trended down as expected due to Swanson's law, and cheaper
still if it became a way to use this stranded energy.
I'd welcome thoughts, data, projections and comments.
Thanks
Andrew Lockley
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
