National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25232.
×
Page R14

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

PREPUBLICATION COPY Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs Committee on Developing a Research Agenda for Utilization of Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology Division of Earth and Life Studies   This prepublication version of Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs has been provided to the public to facilitate timely access to the report. Although the substance of the report is final, editorial changes may be made throughout the text and citations will be checked prior to publication. The final report will be available through the National Academies Press early, 2019. A Consensus Study Report of

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This activity was supported by Contract No. DE-DT001236, DE-SC0017935, and DE-EP0000026 with the U.S Department of Energy and Shell. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: International Standard Book Number-10: Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25232 Additional copies of this publication are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2018 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25232 PREPUBLICATION COPY

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. PREPUBLICATION COPY

Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task. Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo. PREPUBLICATION COPY

COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPING A RESEARCH AGENDA FOR UTILIZATION OF GASEOUS CARBON WASTE STREAMS Members DAVID T. ALLEN, NAE, University of Texas, Austin MARK A. BARTEAU, NAE, Texas A&M University MICHAEL BURKART, University of California, San Diego JENNIFER DUNN, Northwestern University and Argonne National Laboratory ANNE M. GAFFNEY, Idaho National Laboratory RAGHUBIR GUPTA, Susteon, Inc. NILAY HAZARI, Yale University MATTHEW KANAN, Stanford University PAUL KENIS, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign HOWARD KLEE, World Business Council for Sustainable Development (retired) GAURAV N. SANT, University of California, Los Angeles CATHY L. TWAY, The Dow Chemical Company Staff DAVID M. ALLEN, Sr. Program Officer CAMLY TRAN, Sr. Program Officer ELIZABETH ZEITLER, Sr. Program Officer TERESA FRYBERGER, BCST Director ANNA SBEREGAEVA, Associate Program Officer ERIN MARKOVICH, Sr. Program Assistant/Research Assistant PREPUBLICATION COPY v

BOARD ON CHEMICAL SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY Co-Chairs DAVID BEM, PPG Industries JOAN BRENNECKE, NAE, University of Texas, Austin Members GERARD BAILLELY, Procter and Gamble MARK A. BARTEAU, NAE, Texas A&M MICHELLE V. BUCHANAN, Oak Ridge National Laboratory JENNIFER SINCLAIR CURTIS, University of California, Davis RICHARD EISENBERG, NAS, University of Rochester SAMUEL H. GELLMAN, NAS, University of Wisconsin–Madison SHARON C. GLOTZER, NAS, University of Michigan MIRIAM E. JOHN, Sandia National Laboratories (retired) ALAN D. PALKOWITZ, Eli Lilly and Company (retired) JOSEPH B. POWELL, Shell PETER J. ROSSKY, NAS, Rice University RICHMOND SARPONG, University of California, Berkeley TIMOTHY SWAGER, NAS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Staff TERESA FRYBERGER, Board Director MARILEE SHELTON-DAVENPORT, Senior Program Officer CAMLY TRAN, Senior Program Officer ANNA SBEREGAEVA, Associate Program Officer JARRETT I. NGUYEN, Senior Program Assistant JESSICA WOLFMAN, Senior Program Assistant SHUBHA BANSKOTA, Financial Associate PREPUBLICATION COPY vi

Preface Global emissions of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, caused by human activities, are now in excess of 35,000 teragrams (tg) per year, or roughly 5 tons per person per year. In countries with advanced economies, like the United States, emissions per capita are larger, in excess of 15 tons per person per year. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions, to levels that are consistent with limiting the extent of global warming to less than a 2°C increase over pre-industrial temperatures, will require a variety of approaches. Some approaches, such as expanding the use of energy sources that have low greenhouse gas emissions, will prevent emissions. Other approaches involve capturing greenhouse gas emissions; however, capturing and permanently sequestering gigatons of waste gas per year is technically challenging and imposes costs. An alternative to sequestration is to find a productive use for captured greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide and methane. The Committee on Developing a Research Agenda for Utilization of Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams examined the roadblocks to commercialization of technologies that could utilize captured greenhouse gases. These technologies are mostly in their infancy, but, if successful, could create greenhouse gas mitigation technologies that can be operated at little cost or even provide net economic value. There are reasons to be optimistic. Already there are commercial technologies, operating at relatively small scale, that are or could be using waste gas as their raw materials. Additional fundamental research and process development could enable even more carbon utilization pathways operating at scales that could collectively approach a gigaton per year. Expanding carbon utilization to a gigaton scale, however, would require not just fundamental breakthroughs and process development but also the creation of enabling purification, transport, and other infrastructures. In its report, the Committee on Developing a Research Agenda for Utilization of Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams identifies advances that could enable much more extensive carbon utilization. Addressing this complex and multifaceted task required a committee with a broad set of expertise, ranging from fundamental research to product and process commercialization, and from biotechnology to cement and concrete production. I thank the committee members, who gave generously of their time and effort and who both learned from and informed their fellow committee members. I also thank the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine staff who organized us and our report, improved our writing, and supported the committee’s work in many other ways. Finally, I thank the reviewers, whose thoughtful comments improved the technical content and presentation of the report. David T. Allen, Chair Committee on Developing a Research Agenda for Utilization of Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams PREPUBLICATION COPY vii

Acknowledgments The completion of this study would not have been successful without the assistance of many individuals and organizations. The committee would especially like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their contribution during this study: U.S. Department of Energy and Shell, which sponsored the study and provided valuable data to help address the statement of task. The committee would especially like to thank Joe Powell (Shell), Todd Anderson (Office of Biological and Envrionmental Reseacrch), Bruce Garrett (Office of Basic Energy Sciences), Zia Haq (Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy), and John Litynski (Office of Fossil Energy), who served as the Department’s liaison to the committee and was effective in responding to the committee’s requests for information. Speakers and invited participants at the committee’s data-gathering meetings. These individuals are listed here: Madhav Acharya, ARPA-E; Vahit Atakan, Solidia Technologies; Harry Atwater, California Institute of Technology; Kathy Ayers, Proton Onsite; Andrew Bardow, Aachen University; Abhoyjit Bhown, Electric Power Research Institute; Jean Bogner, University of Illinois, Chicago; Walter Breidenstein, GasTechno; Paula Carey, Carbon8; Steven Chu, Stanford University; Travis Cone, Sen. Capito; Bernard David, Global Carbon Dioxide Initiative; Heleen DeWever, BioRecover; Marcius Extavour, Carbon X-Prize; Liam Forsythe, Sen. Heitkamp; Aaron Goldner, Sen. Whitehouse; Christopher Gurtler, Covestro; John Hansen, Haldor Topsoe A/S; David Hazlebeck, Global Algae Innovations; Rich Helling, The Dow Chemical Company; Howard Herzog, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Jennifer Holmgren, Lanztech; Elizabeth Horner, Sen. Barrasso; Hillary Hull, Environmental Defense Fund; Aqil Jamal, Aramco Performance Materials; Mark Jones, The Dow Chemical Company; Walter Leitner, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Energy; Stuart Licht, George Washington University; Sean Monkman, CarbonCure; Ah-Hyung Alissa Park, Columbia University; Bob Perciasepe, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions; Allison Pieja, Mango Materials; Phil Pienkos, National Renewable Energy Laboratory; Brian Sefton, Oakbio; Ómar Sigurbjörnsson, Carbon Recycling International; Steven Singer, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Tim Skone, National Energy Technology Laboratory; Eric Stangland, The Dow Chemical Company; and Ben Woolston, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. PREPUBLICATION COPY viii

Acknowledgment of Reviewers This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: ALEXIS BELL, University of California Berkeley (NAS/NAE) MARY BIDDY, National Renewable Energy Laboratory JENNIFER HOLMGREN, Lanzatech (NAE) CYNTHIA JENKS, Argonne National Laboratory CLIFF KUBIAK, University of California, San Diego DAVID MYERS, GCP Applied Technologies CORINNE SCOWN, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory STEVE SINGER, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory GREGORY STEPHANOPOULOS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (NAE) JENNIFER WILCOX, Colorado School of Mines HAIBO ZHAI, Carnegie Mellon University Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by JOHN ANDERSON, Illinois Institute of Technology, and ELISABETH DRAKE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies. PREPUBLICATION COPY ix

Contents SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 15 Study Charge, 18 Study Approach, 18 Carbon Dioxide Utilization, 20 Methane Utilization, 22 Enabling Resources, Technologies, and Analyses, 24 References, 25 2. GASEOUS CARBON WASTE RESOURCES........................................................................ 27 Characterization of Carbon Waste Streams, 29 Matching Carbon Waste Streams with Utilization Processes: Research Needs, 36 References, 37 3. MINERAL CARBONATION TO PRODUCE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ................ 39 Emerging Technologies for Mineral Carbonation, 40 A Research Agenda for Mineral Carbonation, 52 Findings and Recommendations, 58 References, 51 4. CHEMICAL CONVERSION OF CO2 INTO CHEMICALS AND FUELS ........................... 63 Introduction, 63 Emerging Technologies for CO2 Conversion into Commodity Chemicals and Fuels Based on Product, 65 Intersecting Research Challenges for CO2 Conversion, 83 A Research Agenda for Chemical Utilization of Carbon Dioxide, 85 Findings, Conclusion, and Recommendations, 89 References, 91 5. BIOLOGICAL CONVERSION OF CO2 INTO CHEMICALS AND FUELS ........................ 99 Photosynthetic Approaches to Carbon Waste Gas Utilization, 99 Nonphotosynthetic Approaches to Carbon Utilization, 118 A Research Agenda for Biological Utilization of Carbon Dioxide, 126 Findings and Recommendations, 129 References, 131 PREPUBLICATION COPY xi

xii Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs 6. METHANE AND BIOGAS WASTE UTILIZATION .......................................................... 141 Commercial Technologies for the Chemical Utilization of Methane, 141 Direct Chemical Utilization of Methane Waste Gas Streams, 143 Biological Approaches for Utilization of Methane Waste Gas Streams, 146 A Research Agenda for Chemical and Biological Utilization of Methane and Biogas, 149 References, 154 7. ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES AND RESOURCES ........................................................... 157 Enabling Technologies, 157 Enabling Resources for Carbon Dioxide Utilization, 163 Findings, 167 References, 167 8. LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF CARBON UTILIZATION ............................................. 169 Factors to Consider in LCA of Carbon Utilization Systems, 172 Research Agenda Items, 180 References, 183 9. ASSESSING COMMERCIAL VIABILITY OF CARBON UTILIZATION TECHNOLOGIES ...................................................................................................................... 185 Introduction, 185 Assessment of the Technology Area, 186 Assessment of the Market Area, 192 Assessment of the Legal Area, 195 Overall Commercialization Conclusions, 197 Research Agenda Items, 198 References, 199 10. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING CARBON UTILIZATION TECHNOLOGIES ............. 203 Factors for Evaluation of Emerging Technologies, Including Carbon Utilization, 205 Criteria Specific to Carbon Waste Utilization, 210 Conclusions, 213 Reference, 214 PREPUBLICATION COPY

Table of Contents xiii 11. RESEARCH AGENDA ........................................................................................................ 215 Introduction, 215 Research Agenda, 217 Integration with Current Research Activities, 225 Potential for Disruptive Change, 227 Reference, 227 APPENDIX A. GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................... 229 APPENDIX B. COMMITTEE AND STAFF BIOSKETCHES................................................. 233 PREPUBLICATION COPY

Next: Summary »
Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $65.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

In the quest to mitigate the buildup of greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere, researchers and policymakers have increasingly turned their attention to techniques for capturing greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane, either from the locations where they are emitted or directly from the atmosphere. Once captured, these gases can be stored or put to use. While both carbon storage and carbon utilization have costs, utilization offers the opportunity to recover some of the cost and even generate economic value. While current carbon utilization projects operate at a relatively small scale, some estimates suggest the market for waste carbon-derived products could grow to hundreds of billions of dollars within a few decades, utilizing several thousand teragrams of waste carbon gases per year.

Gaseous Carbon Waste Streams Utilization: Status and Research Needs assesses research and development needs relevant to understanding and improving the commercial viability of waste carbon utilization technologies and defines a research agenda to address key challenges. The report is intended to help inform decision making surrounding the development and deployment of waste carbon utilization technologies under a variety of circumstances, whether motivated by a goal to improve processes for making carbon-based products, to generate revenue, or to achieve environmental goals.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!