Can CO2 sequestration in basalt efficiently reduce greenhouse gas emission?. Issue 7 (21st March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schwartz, Michael O.
• Is Part Of: Environmental technology. Volume 43:Issue 7(2022)
• Page Start: 1082
• Page End: 1092
• Publication Date: 2022-03-21
• Subjects: Carbon dioxide -- sequestration -- basalt -- nuclear waste disposal -- greenhouse gas; Environmental engineering -- Periodicals; Environmental protection -- Periodicals; 628.05
• DOI: 10.1080/09593330.2020.1815859
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0959-3330

Abstract

ABSTRACT: The research on the Columbia River Basalt is a unique combination of projects that minimise CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. Both are underground waste disposal projects: CO2 waste versus nuclear waste. The recent Wallula CO2 project and the previous nuclear-waste project in the Columbia River Basalt (CRB), USA, provide the database for a high-capacity CO2 sequestration model. Due to geomechanical constraints, the injection rate of CO2 sequestration must be limited in order not to jeopardise the integrity of the reservoir and cap rock. The interbed in the continental flood basalt tested in the Wallula project only allows injection at a rate in the range of 9–19 kg CO2 /s, depending on permeability (4 × 10 −14 –10 −13 m 2 ) and porosity (0.1–0.15). At the end of a 50-year injection period, the fraction of CO2 converted to carbonate minerals is 37.1–67.1%. Underground space for waste disposal is a rare asset. The Columbia River Basalt occupies an area of 200, 000 km 2 . Fifty years of CO2 sequestration from a single well would require about the same fraction of the area as that of a nuclear waste repository (0.025%). The repository design is for a capacity of 70, 000 MTHM (metric tons heavy metal). If all the waste is spent nuclear fuel, it originates from 1.2 × 10 4 –8.4 × 10 4 TWh electric power production, depending on reactor type. The CO2 injection well operating at maximum capacity (19 kg CO2 /s) represents 50 TWh generated in a gas power station minus the energy consumed for CO2 separation, i.e. less than 0.4% of the nuclear option. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: UF0001