Technical Perspective of Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage

Qingyang Lin , Xiao Zhang , Tao Wang , Chenghang Zheng , Xiang Gao

Engineering ›› 2022, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (7) : 27 -32.

PDF (1806KB)
Engineering ›› 2022, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (7) :27 -32. DOI: 10.1016/j.eng.2021.12.013
Research
Perspectives

Technical Perspective of Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage

Author information +
History +
PDF (1806KB)

Abstract

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the primary greenhouse gas contributing to anthropogenic climate change which is associated with human activities. The majority of CO2 emissions are results of the burning of fossil fuels for energy, as well as industrial processes such as steel and cement production. Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) is a sustainability technology promising in terms of reducing CO2 emissions that would otherwise contribute to climate change. From this perspective, the discussion on carbon capture focuses on chemical absorption technology, primarily due to its commercialization potential. The CO2 absorptive capacity and absorption rate of various chemical solvents have been summarized. The carbon utilization focuses on electrochemical conversion routes converting CO2 into potentially valuable chemicals have received particular attention. The Faradaic conversion efficiencies for various CO2 reduction products are used to describe efficiency improvements. For carbon storage, successful deployment relies on a better understanding of fluid mechanics, geomechanics, and reactive transport, which are discussed in details.

Keywords

CCUS / Carbon capture / Carbon utilization / Carbon storage / Chemical absorption / Electrochemical conversion / Storage mechanism

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Qingyang Lin, Xiao Zhang, Tao Wang, Chenghang Zheng, Xiang Gao. Technical Perspective of Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage. Engineering, 2022, 14(7): 27-32 DOI:10.1016/j.eng.2021.12.013

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

1. Introduction

The emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere during industrialization and urbanization has contributed to global warming and thus climate change. As the main source of greenhouse gases, the global CO2 emission reached 33.1 Gt in 2018, accountig for approximately 67% of total greenhouse gas emissions. This has significantly increased atmospheric CO2 concentration (approximately 412 parts per million (ppm))[1–2]. Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) is a potentially disruptive technology that could help against the challenge of climate change. CO2 can be captured from emission sources, such as power plants and industrial plants, as well as from the atmosphere. The captured CO2 can be utilized as a feedstock for chemical synthesis or injected into the deep subsurface for permanent and safe storage.

As one of the technologies that can deliver net-zero emissions at a large scale, CCUS (also biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCUS) when using biomass) can be applied to existing coal- and gas-fired power plants and help provide low emissions generation capacity. In addition to contributing to the power supply sector, CCUS is possibly the only scalable and costeffective option for achieving deep decarbonization for certain industries such as steel, cement, glass, ceramics, as well as the manufacturing of chemicals that generate CO2 during the production processes. Analyses performed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the International Energy Agency (IEA) have shown that CCUS will be key in achieving ‘‘Net Zero” by 2050 which contributes one-sixth of global CO2 emissions reduction in order to limit the global temperature increase to within 1.5 °C, as stated by the Paris Agreement[3–4]. Without the successful deployment of CCUS, it will cost more to deal with climate challenge, for example, it will cost 25% more for China to achieve long-term climate change mitigation targets without CCUS [5].

In Section 2, carbon capture focusing on chemical absorption is discussed in detail. In Section 3, electrocatalytic CO2 reduction is selected as the main topic due to its great potential. Finally, Section 4 focuses on the fundamental CO2 trapping mechanisms which is of importance for carbon storage.

2. Carbon capture

CO2 is emitted during power generation, industrial processes, and energy transformation. Carbon capture techniques are divided into three routes: post-combustion capture, oxyfuel combustion, and pre-combustion capture. There are various physical and chemical processes employed in capture technology, including solvent-based absorption, solid sorbents for adsorption/absorption, membranes, cryogenics, and chemical looping for CO2 separation[6–8]. Among these methods, chemical absorption is currently one of the most widely and commercially used techniques (e.g., 1 million tonnes CO2 (tCO2) per year Boundary Dam CO2 capture plants in Canada [9] and 1.4 million tCO2 per year Petra Nova carbon capture and storage (CCS) project in the United States [10]). The current cost for carbon capture projects globally is approximately 60–110 USD·t–1 , and it is forecast to decrease to approximately 30–50 USD·t–1 by 2030. This would enhance the promotion of this technology at a commercial scale [11].

Considering that post-combustion with chemical absorption requires minimal retrofitting of existing facilities, it has the largest potential to be commercially available in the near future. Chemical absorption involves various physical and chemical capture processes that utilize chemical solvents to absorb CO2. Current limitations, such as high energy consumption for solvent regeneration, corrosiveness, high toxicity, volatility, and high cost, are the main barriers for the deployment of capture technology. Currently, the energy consumption for capturing CO2 for Boundary Dam and Petra Nova projects is approximately 0.25–0.30 MW·h·tCO2–1 , which results in an energy efficiency penalty. It has been estimated that the net power generation efficiency of the plant, for example, a pulverized coal-fired supercritical power plant, will be reduced from 41%–45% to 30%–35% when the CO2 capture rate is 90%, and it is expected to reduce the energy consumption by 30%–40% for commercial applications [12].

To improve the capture efficiency and economic competitiveness, the development of novel solvents with high performance and effective process configuration modifications are attractive areas of research interest. Ideal CO2 absorbents, as the core in a chemical absorption process, should have the characteristics of high absorption rate, large absorption capacity, and low regeneration energy requirement. These are followed by safety, stability, environmental friendliness, low corrosion to equipment, and economic feasibility. Fig. 1 and Table 1 [7,13–38] summarize the different types of CO2 capture absorbents. Amine-based absorbents, including single amines, amine blends, biphasic solvents, and water-lean solvents, have been employed to achieve better efficiency [39]. The concept of biphasic solvents is to have an absorbent system of one phase feeding into an absorber and turning into immiscible CO2-rich and CO2-lean phases [40]. Water-lean solvents are mixtures of an organic diluent and an amine. These solvents have enhanced mass transfer properties, increased absorption capacities, and lower heat generation. For effective process configuration modification, potential improvements, including inter-cooling, rich solvent recycling, and lean solvent splitting, can be applied for the absorption process, while methods such as inter-heating, rich solvent splitting, and flashing stripping can be applied for the desorption process. These efforts could provide a critical foundation for reducing operating costs.

Fig. 1. Various chemical solvents for CO2 absorption and associated absorptive capacity and absorption rate (see Table 1). g: gas; aq: aqueous; MEA: monoethanolamine.

Table 1 Absorptive capacity and absorption rate for various chemical solvents for CO2 absorption.

T: temperature; P: pressure; Q: flow rate; MDEA: N-methyldiethanolamine; AMP: 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol; DETA: diethylenetriamine; AEEA: N-(2-hydroxyethyl) ethylenediamine; ILs: ionic liquids; NDIL0309 and NDIL0230: types of micro-encapsulated CO2 sorbents

In addition to carbon capture from point sources, direct air capture (DAC) aims to directly remove low-concentration CO2 from the atmosphere. However, DAC techniques have not been well established, and the cost of CO2 capture is much higher than that of processes from high CO2 concentration emission sources. Currently, the cost of DAC at the pilot-scale is 94–232 USD·tCO2–1 , depending on the choice of technology. The overall cost is predicted to drop to approximately 60 USD·tCO2–1 by 2040, hastening the commercial viability of this technology [41].

3. Carbon utilization

CO2 utilization is proposed to elevate the economic competitiveness of CCUS technology through the profitable reuse of captured CO2. Generally, CO2 utilization includes the direct use of CO2 as dry ice, fire extinguisher, refrigerant, and in the food industry; other means include conversion of CO2 into high-value products through various chemical (e.g., chemical conversions into fuels and chemicals, mineralization) and biological (e.g., microalgae cultivation) processes. The scale of using CO2 to synthesize fuels ranges from 1.0 to 4.2 Gt CO2 per year [42]. Table 2[43,44] summarizes the market status of the representative chemicals and the maturity of the CO2-derived techniques. Electrochemical CO2 reduction is a promising method for coupling CO2 to fuel processes with renewable energy.

Table 2 Market status of representative chemicals and level of development of the CO2- derived technologies. Based on Refs.[43,44].

In recent years, electrocatalytic CO2 reduction driven by renewable electricity to synthesize fuels and chemicals has attracted significant interest (Fig. 2[45–65]). Through careful design and screening of electrocatalysts, conversion of CO2 to two-electron reduction products, that is, carbon monoxide and formate, has been demonstrated with Faradaic efficiencies (FEs) > 95% [66]. In addition, the generation of deeply reduced products (electrontransfer number greater than two) with modest selectivity could only be obtained with copper-based electrocatalysts [67], but the stability of such systems still needs further improvement. Recently, the deployment of a gas-diffusion electrode architecture has enabled the operation of electrocatalytic CO2 reduction at high current densities (> 100 mA·cm–2 ), representing a significant step toward practical CO2 electrolyzer [68]. Furthermore, the formation of carbon-heteroatom (e.g., nitrogen) bonds coupled with electrocatalytic CO2 reduction could be a promising route for producing value-added chemicals under mild conditions [67]. With the rapid development of theoretical chemistry and data science, theoryand data-assisted catalyst design could markedly accelerate the discovery of high-performance CO2 reduction electrocatalysts [59]. In addition, CO2 is usually released into the atmosphere after consuming these products. Therefore, DAC could play an important role in further reducing the CO2 concentration in air.

Fig. 2. Electrocatalytic CO2 conversion for fuel and chemicals production. (a) Summary of current sources and corresponding electrochemical reaction conditions of representative products potentially generated from CO2. (b) Trends of Faradaic efficiencies for representative CO2 reduction products achieved at current densities greater than 10 mA·cm–2 , including carbon monoxide[45–47], formate[48–50], methanol[51–54], methane[55–58], ethylene[59–62], and ethanol[63–65]. : the standard electrode potential.

CO2 utilization has a great potential to reduce CO2 emissions. Although the utilization of CO2 has been proposed to reduce the cost of CCUS, many of the utilization technologies are not yet economically viable. Most chemical conversions of CO2 (except the acid-base neutralization reactions during mineralization) require the input of external energy, which also requires additional costs to drive the conversion processes. In this sense, the conversion of CO2 to certain products (e.g., methane) cannot compete with current petrochemical pathways in terms of price, even considering the projected performance improvement [69]. Therefore, CO2 conversion to high-value chemicals, such as polycarbonate and acrylate plastics [70], may be a feasible utilization pathway. Another factor that needs to be considered during the implementation of CO2 utilization is the logistics cost. Long-distance transportation between the CO2 emission sources, utilization facilities, and end-users should be avoided to reduce the overall costs of CCUS.

4. Carbon storage

Carbon storage is a process that CO2 is injected and stored permanently in the subsurface, such as oil/gas reservoirs, nonmineable coal seams, and deep saline aquifers. IPCC and IEA both state that any plausible path to net-zero emissions to cope with climate change involves carbon storage at a global scale[3,71]. In recent years, enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in oil/gas reservoirs and enhanced coal-bed methane recovery (ECBM) in nonmineable coal seams have become attractive CO2 geologic utilization techniques. The injection of CO2 extracts extra oil and gas, while simultaneously storing CO2. The principle of CO2-EOR is to inject CO2 by either immiscible or miscible flooding into the pore space of the reservoirs, which can enhance the pore-scale displacement efficiency. Currently, this technique has been widely deployed, as it can offset some of the costs by recovering an additional 30%–60% of oil [72]. The mechanism for CO2-ECBM is based on the preferential adsorption of CO2 onto the coal micropore surface compared to methane (CH4). Currently, CO2-ECBM is not commercially available because of technical difficulties in injecting CO2 into unmineable coal seams with low permeability and additional costs for a good drilling. Carbon storage in deep saline aquifers has a large storage potential, but it is not yet commercially available. There are generally four types of CO2 storage in geological systems: stratigraphic trapping by impermeable cap rocks, solubility trapping where CO2 dissolves into the brine, mineral trapping where CO2 reacts with the host rocks, and residual or capillary trapping where CO2 is trapped by the surrounding fluids in the pore space as droplets (or ganglia)[73,74].

In the past decades, pore-scale imaging techniques have been developed to visualize and quantify multiphase flow in porous rocks at the pore scale [75]. The mechanisms of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers and oil/gas reservoirs, which are associated with wettability, are now fully explained (Fig. 3 [76]). In saline aquifers, CO2 can be stored through capillary trapping: Water wets the rock surfaces and flows through wetting layers, leaving CO2, the nonwetting phase, stranded in the centers of the larger pores in disconnected blobs, and a significant amount of CO2 can become trapped in the subsurface. When storing CO2 in hydrocarbon reservoirs, the presence of hydrocarbons in porous rock over geological time also changes the wettability toward more oil-wet conditions, and concepts from CO2–water flow cannot be simply applied. It has been observed that wettability is dependent on the pore structure and fluid properties: CO2 may be the most non-wetting phase, occupying the largest pores, which facilitates flow and allows capillary trapping. In other cases, water becomes non-wetting, confining CO2 to low-permeability layers in the pore space but hinders capillary trapping.

Fig. 3. Mechanisms of CO2 storage and the wettability status of stored CO2 in geological formation. (a) In a saline aquifer, CO2 is the non-wetting phase and can be trapped in the center of larger pores. (b) In an oilfield under immiscible conditions, CO2 is the most non-wetting phase and can be capillary trapped by either oil (top) or water (bottom). (c) In an oilfield at near-miscible conditions, water is the most non-wetting phase, followed by CO2 and oil. CO2 exists in layers surrounding the water phase, and its flow is restricted [76].

From a scientific perspective, while the concept and mechanisms of CO2 storage have been demonstrated, there is still concern over the storage efficiency and the long-term fate of CO2 in the subsurface when injected at the envisaged scales. The questions around geologic CO2 utilization and storage remain: How is CO2 trapped in the pore space and how does trapping cause changes in geological systems such as in sedimentary basins, depleted oil fields or hydrophobic formations, and in unconventional environments, for example, shale, coalbeds, and fractured rock? What is the impact of physical and chemical heterogeneity on storage? How should CO2 injection be designed to maximize storage security? How can CO2 storage be efficiently coupled with EOR and ECBM to provide permanent storage and efficient and economical fuel production? To answer these questions, a good understanding of three important aspects that can help design injection and storage strategies to enhance storage efficiency:

(1) The impact of geomechanics, such as the stress state and overburden pressure to the change of pore structure and flow properties such as permeability.

(2) Reactive transport (e.g., rock dissolution in the presence of CO2 in the pore space under reservoir conditions) and its consequence to the change in pore structure, flow path, and flow properties.

(3) The complex fluid mechanics of multiple fluid phases flowing in the pore spaces.

5. Conclusions and perspective

The increasing of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere is becoming a major environmental concern, pointing to global warming and climate change. Some specific technical aspects of CCUS have been discussed. For CO2 capture, chemical absorption is considered a potential candidate for commercial deployment. However, the cost of this technology is required to drop to 30–50 USD·t–1 with energy consumption for capturing CO2 lower than approximately 0.21 MW·h·tCO2–1 . To achieve this, absorbents with high efficiency and low regeneration cost are required to achieve a reduction in the capture cost for the successful deployment of this technology. For CO2 utilization, electrochemical conversion has the potential to convert CO2 into valuable chemicals. The future direction for this technique is to develop highly active, selective, and stable electrocatalysts and optimize the electrolyzer design to promote demonstrations at pilot scales, benefiting the assessment of the overall energy efficiency and cost of such processes. CO2 storage in the subsurface has great potential, where the storage of CO2 can be combined with energy production (e.g., EOR and ECBM) to bring economic benefits. Although the fundamental principles of CO2 trapping have now been explained, further studies of fluid mechanics, geomechanics, and reactive transport, as well as on how these processes could be coupled, are still challenging for optimized and safe storage requirements. This could be achieved using advanced and novel techniques, such as nondestructive imaging tomography techniques.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51836006).

Compliance with ethics guidelines

Qingyang Lin, Xiao Zhang, Tao Wang, Chenghang Zheng, and Xiang Gao declare that they have no conflicts of interest or financial conflicts to disclose.

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]

Yoro KO, Daramola MO. Chapter 1—CO2 emission sources, greenhouse gases, and the global warming effect. In: Rahimpour MR, Farsi M, Makarem MA, editors. Advances in carbon capture. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing; 2020. p. 3–28.
[2]

Zhang Z, Wang T, Blunt MJ, Anthony EJ, Park AH, Hughes RW, et al. Advances in carbon capture, utilization and storage. Appl Energy 2020;278:115627.
[3]

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Global warming of 1.5 C: an IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change. Report. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; 2018.
[4]

International Energy Agency. Global energy & CO2 status report 2019. Report. Paris: International Energy Agency; 2020.
[5]

Fan JL, Shen S, Xu M, Yang Y, Yang L, Zhang X. Cost-benefit comparison of carbon capture, utilization, and storage retrofitted to different thermal power plants in China based on real options approach. Adv Clim Chang Res 2020;11 (4):415–28.
[6]

Wang T, Liu F, Ge K, Fang M. Reaction kinetics of carbon dioxide absorption in aqueous solutions of piperazine, N-(2-aminoethyl) ethanolamine and their blends. Chem Eng J 2017;314:123–31.
[7]

Yu W, Wang T, Park AH, Fang M. Review of liquid nano-absorbents for enhanced CO2 capture. Nanoscale 2019;11(37):17137–56.
[8]

Boot-Handford ME, Abanades JC, Anthony EJ, Blunt MJ, Brandani S, Mac Dowell N, et al. Carbon capture and storage update. Energy Environ Sci 2014;7 (1):130–89.
[9]

Stéphenne K. Start-up of world’s first commercial post-combustion coal fired CCS project: contribution of Shell Cansolv to Saskpower Boundary Dam ICCS project. Energy Procedia 2014;63:6106–10.
[10]

Mantripragada HC, Zhai H, Rubin ES. Boundary Dam or Petra Nova—which is a better model for CCS energy supply? Int J Greenh Gas Control 2019;82:59–68.
[11]

Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute. Carbon capture and storage: global status report 2019. Report. Melbourne: Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute; 2019.
[12]

Wu X, Wang M, Liao P, Shen J, Li Y. Solvent-based post-combustion CO2 capture for power plants: a critical review and perspective on dynamic modelling, system identification, process control and flexible operation. Appl Energy 2020;257:113941.
[13]

Aronu UE, Hoff KA, Svendsen HF. CO2 capture solvent selection by combined absorption–desorption analysis. Chem Eng Res Des 2011;89(8):1197–203.
[14]

Dallos A, Altsach T, Kotsis L. Enthalpies of absorption and solubility of carbon dioxide in aqueous polyamine solutions. J Therm Anal Calorim 2001;65 (2):419–23.
[15]

Singh P, Niederer JPM, Versteeg GF. Structure and activity relationships for amine-based CO2 absorbents—II. Chem Eng Res Des 2009;87(2):135–44.
[16]

Zhu D, Fang M, Lv Z, Wang Z, Luo Z. Selection of blended solvents for CO2 absorption from coal-fired flue gas. Part 1: monoethanolamine (MEA)-based solvents. Energy Fuels 2012;26(1):147–53.
[17]

Kim S, Shi H, Lee JY. CO2 absorption mechanism in amine solvents and enhancement of CO2 capture capability in blended amine solvent. Int J Greenh Gas Control 2016;45:181–8.
[18]

Liu F, Fang M, Yi N, Wang T. Research on alkanolamine-based physical– chemical solutions as biphasic solvents for CO2 capture. Energy Fuels 2019;33 (11):11389–98.
[19]

Zhou X, Jing G, Lv B, Liu F, Zhou Z. Low-viscosity and efficient regeneration of carbon dioxide capture using a biphasic solvent regulated by 2-amino-2- methyl-1-propanol. Appl Energy 2019;235:379–90.
[20]

Lv B, Zhou X, Zhou Z, Jing G. Kinetics and thermodynamics of CO2 absorption into a novel DETA–AMP–PMDETA biphasic solvent. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 2019;7(15):13400–10.
[21]

Yuan Y, Rochelle GT. CO2 absorption rate in semi-aqueous monoethanolamine. Chem Eng Sci 2018;182:56–66.
[22]

Guo H, Li H, Shen S. CO2 capture by water-lean amino acid salts: absorption performance and mechanism. Energy Fuels 2018;32(6):6943–54.
[23]

Wanderley RR, Knuutila HK. Mapping diluents for water-lean solvents: a parametric study. Ind Eng Chem Res 2020;59(25):11656–80.
[24]

Lu R, Li K, Chen J, Yu H, Tade M. CO2 capture using piperazine-promoted, aqueous ammonia solution: rate-based modelling and process simulation. Int J Greenh Gas Control 2017;65:65–75.
[25]

Liu J, Wang S, Svendsen HF, Idrees MU, Kim I, Chen C. Heat of absorption of CO2 in aqueous ammonia, piperazine solutions and their mixtures. Int J Greenh Gas Control 2012;9:148–59.
[26]

Qi G, Wang S, Lu W, Yu J, Chen C. Vapor–liquid equilibrium of CO2 in NH3–CO2– SO2–H2O system. Fluid Phase Equilib 2015;386:47–55.
[27]

Kurz F, Rumpf B, Maurer G. Vapor–liquid–solid equilibria in the system NH3– CO2–H2O from around 310 to 470 K: new experimental data and modeling. Fluid Phase Equilib 1995;104:261–75.
[28]

Lee A, Mumford KA, Wu Y, Nicholas N, Stevens GW. Understanding the vapour–liquid equilibrium of CO2 in mixed solutions of potassium carbonate and potassium glycinate. Int J Greenh Gas Control 2016;47:303–9.
[29]

Kang D, Lee MG, Yoo Y, Park J. Absorption characteristics of potassium carbonate-based solutions with rate promoters and corrosion inhibitors. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 2018;20(3):1562–73.
[30]

Wang T, Ge K, Chen K, Hou C, Fang M. Theoretical studies on CO2 capture behavior of quaternary ammonium-based polymeric ionic liquids. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2016;18(18):13084–91.
[31]

Wang C, Luo X, Zhu X, Cui G, Jiang D, Deng D, et al. The strategies for improving carbon dioxide chemisorption by functionalized ionic liquids. RSC Adv 2013;3 (36):15518.
[32]

Song HJ, Park S, Kim H, Gaur A, Park JW, Lee SJ. Carbon dioxide absorption characteristics of aqueous amino acid salt solutions. Int J Greenh Gas Control 2012;11:64–72.
[33]

Zarei A, Hafizi A, Rahimpour MR, Raeissi S. Carbon dioxide absorption into aqueous potassium salt solutions of glutamine amino acid. J Mol Liq 2020;301:111743.
[34]

Ma’mun S. Amino-acid-salt-based carbon dioxide capture: precipitation behavior of potassium sarcosine solution. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng 2020;811(1):012033.
[35]

Knipe JM, Chavez KP, Hornbostel KM, Worthington MA, Nguyen DT, Ye C, et al. Evaluating the performance of micro-encapsulated CO2 sorbents during CO2 absorption and regeneration cycling. Environ Sci Technol 2019;53(5):2926–36.
[36]

Vericella JJ, Baker SE, Stolaroff JK, Duoss EB, Hardin JO, Lewicki J, et al. Encapsulated liquid sorbents for carbon dioxide capture. Nat Commun 2015;6 (1):6124.
[37]

Kaviani S, Kolahchyan S, Hickenbottom KL, Lopez AM, Nejati S. Enhanced solubility of carbon dioxide for encapsulated ionic liquids in polymeric materials. Chem Eng J 2018;354:753–7.
[38]

Jiang Y, Zhang Z, Fan J, Yu J, Bi D, Li B, et al. Experimental study on comprehensive carbon capture performance of TETA-based nanofluids with surfactants. Int J Greenh Gas Control 2019;88:311–20.
[39]

Du Y, Yuan Y, Rochelle GT. Capacity and absorption rate of tertiary and hindered amines blended with piperazine for CO2 capture. Chem Eng Sci 2016;155:397–404.
[40]

Zhuang Q, Clements B, Dai J, Carrigan L. Ten years of research on phase separation absorbents for carbon capture: achievements and next steps. Int J Greenh Gas Control 2016;52:449–60.
[41]

Sutherland BR. Pricing CO2 direct air capture. Joule 2019;3(7):1571–3.
[42]

Hepburn C, Adlen E, Beddington J, Carter EA, Fuss S, Mac Dowell N, et al. The technological and economic prospects for CO2 utilization and removal. Nature 2019;575(7781):87–97.
[43]

Chauvy R, De Weireld G. CO2 utilization technologies in Europe: a short review. Energy Technol 2020;8(12):2000627.
[44]

Chauvy R, Meunier N, Thomas D, De Weireld G. Selecting emerging CO2 utilization products for short- to mid-term deployment. Appl Energy 2019;236:662–80.
[45]

Gao D, Zhou H, Wang J, Miao S, Yang F, Wang G, et al. Size-dependent electrocatalytic reduction of CO2 over Pd nanoparticles. J Am Chem Soc 2015;137(13):4288–91.
[46]

Gu J, Hsu CS, Bai L, Chen HM, Hu X. Atomically dispersed Fe3+ sites catalyze efficient CO2 electroreduction to CO. Science 2019;364(6445):1091–4.
[47]

Zhang X, Wang Y, Gu M, Wang M, Zhang Z, Pan W, et al. Molecular engineering of dispersed nickel phthalocyanines on carbon nanotubes for selective CO2 reduction. Nat Energy 2020;5(9):684–92.
[48]

Gao S, Lin Y, Jiao X, Sun Y, Luo Q, Zhang W, et al. Partially oxidized atomic cobalt layers for carbon dioxide electroreduction to liquid fuel. Nature 2016;529(7584):68–71.
[49]

Zheng X, De Luna P, García de Arquer FP, Zhang B, Becknell N, Ross MB, et al. Sulfur-modulated tin sites enable highly selective electrochemical reduction of CO2 to formate. Joule 2017;1(4):794–805.
[50]

Fan K, Jia Y, Ji Y, Kuang P, Zhu B, Liu X, et al. Curved surface boosts electrochemical CO2 reduction to formate via bismuth nanotubes in a wide potential window. ACS Catal 2020;10(1):358–64.
[51]

Le M, Ren M, Zhang Z, Sprunger PT, Kurtz RL, Flake JC. Electrochemical reduction of CO2 to CH3OH at copper oxide surfaces. J Electrochem Soc 2011;158(5):E45–9.
[52]

Safdar Hossain S, Rahman S, Ahmed S. Electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide over CNT-supported nanoscale copper electrocatalysts. J Nanomater 2014;2014:1–10.
[53]

Zhao K, Liu Y, Quan X, Chen S, Yu H. CO2 electroreduction at low overpotential on oxide-derived Cu/carbons fabricated from metal organic framework. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 2017;9(6):5302–11.
[54]

Zhao Q, Zhang C, Hu R, Du Z, Gu J, Cui Y, et al. Selective etching quaternary MAX Phase toward single atom copper immobilized MXene (Ti3C2Clx) for efficient CO2 electroreduction to methanol. ACS Nano 2021;15(3):4927–36.
[55]

Weng Z, Jiang J, Wu Y, Wu Z, Guo X, Materna KL, et al. Electrochemical CO2 reduction to hydrocarbons on a heterogeneous molecular Cu catalyst in aqueous solution. J Am Chem Soc 2016;138(26):8076–9.
[56]

Wang Y, Chen Z, Han P, Du Y, Gu Z, Xu X, et al. Single-atomic Cu with multiple oxygen vacancies on ceria for electrocatalytic CO2 reduction to CH4. ACS Catal 2018;8(8):7113–9.
[57]

Jeon HS, Timoshenko J, Scholten F, Sinev I, Herzog A, Haase FT, et al. Operando insight into the correlation between the structure and composition of CuZn nanoparticles and their selectivity for the electrochemical CO2 reduction. J Am Chem Soc 2019;141(50):19879–87.
[58]

Hu Q, Han Z, Wang X, Li G, Wang Z, Huang X, et al. Facile synthesis of subnanometric copper clusters by double confinement enables selective reduction of carbon dioxide to methane. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2020;59(43):19054–9.
[59]

Zhong M, Tran K, Min Y, Wang C, Wang Z, Dinh CT, et al. Accelerated discovery of CO2 electrocatalysts using active machine learning. Nature 2020;581 (7807):178–83.
[60]

Ren D, Deng Y, Handoko AD, Chen CS, Malkhandi S, Yeo BS. Selective electrochemical reduction of carbon dioxide to ethylene and ethanol on copper(I) oxide catalysts. ACS Catal 2015;5(5):2814–21.
[61]

Ma S, Sadakiyo M, Heima M, Luo R, Haasch RT, Gold JI, et al. Electroreduction of carbon dioxide to hydrocarbons using bimetallic Cu–Pd catalysts with different mixing patterns. J Am Chem Soc 2017;139(1):47–50.
[62]

Hoang TTH, Verma S, Ma S, Fister TT, Timoshenko J, Frenkel AI, et al. Nanoporous copper–silver alloys by additive-controlled electrodeposition for the selective electroreduction of CO2 to ethylene and ethanol. J Am Chem Soc 2018;140(17):5791–7.
[63]

Ren D, Ang BSH, Yeo BS. Tuning the selectivity of carbon dioxide electroreduction toward ethanol on oxide-derived Cu Zn catalysts. ACS Catal 2016;6(12):8239–47.
[64]

Li YC, Wang Z, Yuan T, Nam DH, Luo M, Wicks J, et al. Binding site diversity promotes CO2 electroreduction to ethanol. J Am Chem Soc 2019;141 (21):8584–91.
[65]

Wang X, Wang Z, García de Arquer FP, Dinh CT, Ozden A, Li YC, et al. Efficient electrically powered CO2-to-ethanol via suppression of deoxygenation. Nat Energy 2020;5(6):478–86.
[66]

Nitopi S, Bertheussen E, Scott SB, Liu X, Engstfeld AK, Horch S, et al. Progress and perspectives of electrochemical CO2 reduction on copper in aqueous electrolyte. Chem Rev 2019;119(12):7610–72.
[67]

Chen C, Zhu X, Wen X, Zhou Y, Zhou L, Li H, et al. Coupling N2 and CO2 in H2O to synthesize urea under ambient conditions. Nat Chem 2020;12 (8):717–24.
[68]

Dinh CT, Burdyny T, Kibria MG, Seifitokaldani A, Gabardo CM, García de Arquer FP, et al. CO2 electroreduction to ethylene via hydroxide-mediated copper catalysis at an abrupt interface. Science 2018;360(6390):783–7.
[69]

De Luna P, Hahn C, Higgins D, Jaffer SA, Jaramillo TF, Sargent EH. What would it take for renewably powered electrosynthesis to displace petrochemical processes? Science 2019;364(6438):eaav3506. Corrected in: Science 2020;367(6482):abb0992.
[70]

Zhang Z, Pan SY, Li H, Cai J, Olabi AG, Anthony EJ, et al. Recent advances in carbon dioxide utilization. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2020;125:109799.
[71]

International Energy Agency. World Energy Outlook 2019: the gold standard of energy analysis. Report. Paris: International Energy Agency; 2019.
[72]

Cuéllar-Franca RM, Azapagic A. Carbon capture, storage and utilisation technologies: a critical analysis and comparison of their life cycle environmental impacts. J CO2 Util 2015;9:82–102.
[73]

de Coninck H, Benson SM. Carbon dioxide capture and storage: issues and prospects. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2014;39(1):243–70.
[74]

Altman SJ, Aminzadeh B, Balhoff MT, Bennett PC, Bryant SL, Cardenas MB, et al. Chemical and hydrodynamic mechanisms for long-term geological carbon storage. J Phys Chem C 2014;118(28):15103–13.
[75]

Blunt MJ. Multiphase flow in permeable media: a pore-scale perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2017 Feb.
[76]

Alhosani A, Scanziani A, Lin Q, Raeini AQ, Bijeljic B, Blunt MJ. Pore-scale mechanisms of CO2 storage in oilfields. Sci Rep 2020;10:8534.

Funding

()

PDF (1806KB)

11728

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail
Sections
Recommended

/

〈 〉