Uncertainty in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) deployment projections: a cross-model comparison exercise
Uncertainty in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) deployment projections: a cross-model comparison exercise
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10584-013-1050-7
复制
发表时间：
2014-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
van Vuuren, Detlef P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Koelbl, Barbara Sophia;van den Broek, Machteld A.;van Vuuren, Detlef P.
碳捕集与封存（CCS）可能是一种有价值的二氧化碳减排选择，但CCS在未来将发挥何种作用尚不确定。在本文中，我们分析了参加第27轮能源建模论坛（EMF）的不同综合评估模型（iam）关于CCS在长期缓解情景中的作用的结果。具体来说，我们将研究CCS的使用与时间、减排目标、可再生能源的可用性及其与不同燃料的使用之间的关系。此外，我们探讨了将模型结果与一般和CCS特定模型假设联系起来的可能性。结果显示，2010-2100年期间（600-3050 GtCO(2)）的累计捕获范围很广，但没有一个模型项目低于600 GtCO(2)，这表明所有这些模型都认为CCS很重要。有趣的是，CCS储存速率通常预计在本世纪下半叶仍将增加。根据不同的情景，至少有六分之八的模型显示，2100年的存储速率高于2050年。在大多数模型中，CCS在累计一次能源使用中的份额随着目标的严格性或可再生能源可用性的保守性而增加。通过本样本中的跨模型比较，CCS部署预测率的强烈变化不可能与报告的模型假设差异有关。
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) can be a valuable CO2 mitigation option, but what role CCS will play in the future is uncertain. In this paper we analyze the results of different integrated assessment models (IAMs) taking part in the 27th round of the Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) with respect to the role of CCS in long term mitigation scenarios. Specifically we look into the use of CCS as a function of time, mitigation targets, availability of renewables and its use with different fuels. Furthermore, we explore the possibility to relate model results to general and CCS specific model assumptions. The results show a wide range of cumulative capture in the 2010-2100 period (600-3050 GtCO(2)), but the fact that no model projects less than 600 GtCO(2) indicates that CCS is considered to be important by all these models. Interestingly, CCS storage rates are often projected to be still increasing in the second half of this century. Depending on the scenario, at least six out of eight, up to all models show higher storage rates in 2100 than in 2050. CCS shares in cumulative primary energy use are in most models increasing with the stringency of the target or under conservative availability of renewables. The strong variations of CCS deployment projection rates could not be related to the reported differences in the assumptions of the models by means of a cross-model comparison in this sample.