Industries Across Lenses
Each carbon management industry has its benefits and drawbacks. Use this side-by-side comparison tool to assess the impact of each industry across a variety of lenses.
LENS 1
LENS 2
Land Use
To capture 1 million metric tons of CO2, the land use requirements of facilities vary considerably. Across the examined industries, estimated footprints range from 0.08 to 2.73 square miles (49-1730 acres). In cases where there is not an operational facility with the capacity to capture carbon at the million ton scale (L-DAC, S-DAC and green hydrogen from biomass) these footprints are industry-provided estimates of needed space. For established industries (steel and BiCRS), the range of values reflects the variability of existing facility footprints, most of which are not actively capturing CO2. The range in land use is mostly due to availability and affordability of land, and the retrofitting of these types of facilities with carbon capture equipment would likely not result in a significant change in areal footprint. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.
Cost to Build
Building a new carbon management site comes with considerable expense—securing land, planning, engineering, permitting and zoning, environmental assessments, and other details will need to be handled before construction even begins. Across all of these carbon management industries, upfront costs range from $278 million to 1.7 billion. Costs are generally expected to be higher for the direct air capture industries (L-DAC and S-DAC) than for the biomass-based hydrogen production, BiCRS and steel facilities. However, many of these industries have never been built at a scale that could capture 1 million metric tons of CO2 per year, which accounts for the large ranges of uncertainty in their upfront costs. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.
Energy Use
Most carbon management industries (L-DAC, S-DAC, green hydrogen from biomass, and steel) are energy intensive, requiring both electricity and heat energy. DAC technologies require the largest amounts of energy per ton of CO2 captured, whereas most of the energy demand for steel goes into steel production (the light shaded region) rather than CO2 capture (the dark shaded region). Green hydrogen from biomass is less energy-intensive, and like steel, the energy needs also generate a different primary output: production of H2 gas. Other forms of BiCRS (including BECCS) generate more energy than they consume, and are thus able to power their own production, with some facilities also selling energy to the grid. As a result, BiCRS facilities do not require an external energy supply unless it is more profitable to sell their output (i.e. biofuel, syngas) than to use it to operate the facility. An additional critical factor to note is that any facility using solar PV for their energy needs will also require electricity and heat storage (batteries) to ensure uninterrupted supply of electricity and that heat is provided at the required temperatures (100-1000°C, depending on industry). *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used. The more power supplied by solar energy, the less CO2 the steel mill would produce.
Cost to Capture
The levelized cost per metric ton of CO2 is a good way to consider overall costs—it accounts for the cost of building the facility (capital costs), the cost of maintenance and labor (operational costs), and the cost of energy (heat + electricity) over the lifetime of the plant. In these estimates, the plant lifetime has been fixed at 30 years to standardize estimates, though some of these facilities may have longer or shorter lifetimes. The cost of carbon capture is lowest for steel emissions, given the relatively high concentration of CO2 in exhaust gases from this kind of facility, as well as the maturity of the technology. Biomass-based carbon capture (BiCRS or biomass hydrogen production) also generally have lower levelized cost estimate ranges than direct air capture (L-DAC and S-DAC). However, it is worth noting that 1) all of these costs are likely to decrease as carbon capture technologies mature, and 2) which of these industries is economically viable depends both on the levelized cost and on the potential sources of revenue to recoup that cost, which varies across industries. *The cost to capture CO2 for the steel facility only considers the cost of building and operating the capture equipment. It does not incorporate the capital and operational costs of the steel mill itself.
Jobs
The job growth potential of carbon management facilities can be difficult to quantify, as different companies rely on different processes—even within the same industry—that shapes their labor demands. Industries like BiCRS and hydrogen production via biomass expect to have lower labor demands, similar to that required to operate bioenergy power plants that do not utilize carbon capture. L-DAC and S-DAC have larger expected labor demands, mainly to monitor and maintain contactor units, although it is possible that some of these jobs could be performed remotely, and would not necessarily benefit the host community. Steel is likely to provide the most jobs. It is important to note that job growth potential for many of these industries was determined from the number of jobs at smaller facilities, and because the need for workers does not scale linearly with facility size, these are rough estimates. Furthermore, the possibilities of increased automation and remote monitoring means that steps should be taken in the planning and permitting process to ensure jobs for any new carbon management facility benefits local communities. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.
Water Use
Water use is one of the most variable categories across carbon management industries. Hydrogen production via biomass, steel and particularly L-DAC technologies are water-intensive practices, using as much as 16,200 acre feet of water annually. Meanwhile, BiCRS and S-DAC technologies can actually generate excess water by capturing it from biomass feedstocks or the atmosphere. This water yield depends on the specific process a facility uses, but could be as much as 1,650 acre feet annually. Due to the arid environment in large parts of Kern County, mindfulness about the water intensity of these industries is crucial to ensure supplies can continue to meet a mixture of residential, agricultural, and industrial demands for decades to come. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.
Cost to Build
Building a new carbon management site comes with considerable expense—securing land, planning, engineering, permitting and zoning, environmental assessments, and other details will need to be handled before construction even begins. Across all of these carbon management industries, upfront costs range from $278 million to 1.7 billion. Costs are generally expected to be higher for the direct air capture industries (L-DAC and S-DAC) than for the biomass-based hydrogen production, BiCRS and steel facilities. However, many of these industries have never been built at a scale that could capture 1 million metric tons of CO2 per year, which accounts for the large ranges of uncertainty in their upfront costs. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.
Land Use
To capture 1 million metric tons of CO2, the land use requirements of facilities vary considerably. Across the examined industries, estimated footprints range from 0.08 to 2.73 square miles (49-1730 acres). In cases where there is not an operational facility with the capacity to capture carbon at the million ton scale (L-DAC, S-DAC and green hydrogen from biomass) these footprints are industry-provided estimates of needed space. For established industries (steel and BiCRS), the range of values reflects the variability of existing facility footprints, most of which are not actively capturing CO2. The range in land use is mostly due to availability and affordability of land, and the retrofitting of these types of facilities with carbon capture equipment would likely not result in a significant change in areal footprint. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.
Energy Use
Most carbon management industries (L-DAC, S-DAC, green hydrogen from biomass, and steel) are energy intensive, requiring both electricity and heat energy. DAC technologies require the largest amounts of energy per ton of CO2 captured, whereas most of the energy demand for steel goes into steel production (the light shaded region) rather than CO2 capture (the dark shaded region). Green hydrogen from biomass is less energy-intensive, and like steel, the energy needs also generate a different primary output: production of H2 gas. Other forms of BiCRS (including BECCS) generate more energy than they consume, and are thus able to power their own production, with some facilities also selling energy to the grid. As a result, BiCRS facilities do not require an external energy supply unless it is more profitable to sell their output (i.e. biofuel, syngas) than to use it to operate the facility. An additional critical factor to note is that any facility using solar PV for their energy needs will also require electricity and heat storage (batteries) to ensure uninterrupted supply of electricity and that heat is provided at the required temperatures (100-1000°C, depending on industry). *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used. The more power supplied by solar energy, the less CO2 the steel mill would produce.
Cost to Capture
The levelized cost per metric ton of CO2 is a good way to consider overall costs—it accounts for the cost of building the facility (capital costs), the cost of maintenance and labor (operational costs), and the cost of energy (heat + electricity) over the lifetime of the plant. In these estimates, the plant lifetime has been fixed at 30 years to standardize estimates, though some of these facilities may have longer or shorter lifetimes. The cost of carbon capture is lowest for steel emissions, given the relatively high concentration of CO2 in exhaust gases from this kind of facility, as well as the maturity of the technology. Biomass-based carbon capture (BiCRS or biomass hydrogen production) also generally have lower levelized cost estimate ranges than direct air capture (L-DAC and S-DAC). However, it is worth noting that 1) all of these costs are likely to decrease as carbon capture technologies mature, and 2) which of these industries is economically viable depends both on the levelized cost and on the potential sources of revenue to recoup that cost, which varies across industries. *The cost to capture CO2 for the steel facility only considers the cost of building and operating the capture equipment. It does not incorporate the capital and operational costs of the steel mill itself.
Jobs
The job growth potential of carbon management facilities can be difficult to quantify, as different companies rely on different processes—even within the same industry—that shapes their labor demands. Industries like BiCRS and hydrogen production via biomass expect to have lower labor demands, similar to that required to operate bioenergy power plants that do not utilize carbon capture. L-DAC and S-DAC have larger expected labor demands, mainly to monitor and maintain contactor units, although it is possible that some of these jobs could be performed remotely, and would not necessarily benefit the host community. Steel is likely to provide the most jobs. It is important to note that job growth potential for many of these industries was determined from the number of jobs at smaller facilities, and because the need for workers does not scale linearly with facility size, these are rough estimates. Furthermore, the possibilities of increased automation and remote monitoring means that steps should be taken in the planning and permitting process to ensure jobs for any new carbon management facility benefits local communities. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.
Water Use
Water use is one of the most variable categories across carbon management industries. Hydrogen production via biomass, steel and particularly L-DAC technologies are water-intensive practices, using as much as 16,200 acre feet of water annually. Meanwhile, BiCRS and S-DAC technologies can actually generate excess water by capturing it from biomass feedstocks or the atmosphere. This water yield depends on the specific process a facility uses, but could be as much as 1,650 acre feet annually. Due to the arid environment in large parts of Kern County, mindfulness about the water intensity of these industries is crucial to ensure supplies can continue to meet a mixture of residential, agricultural, and industrial demands for decades to come. *A steel facility of the size modeled here could produce up to 1 million tons of CO2, but it depends on the source of iron and type of energy used.