Engineering economic analysis of biomass IGCC with carbon capture and storage

204 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Techno-economic comparison of ethanol and electricity coproduction schemes from sugarcane residues at existing sugar mills in Southern Africa (2014, background): “However, for the BIGCC it was seen that capital estimates tended to be based on whole plant costs in the literature [16,93].”
Climate Strategy with Co2 Capture from the Air (2006, unknown): “We estimate that a biomass gasi(cid:2)cation combined cycle power plant with CO 2 capture from the syngas using physical absorption in glycol would produce electricity at about 8 c/kWhr while effectively capturing CO 2 at a rate of 0.29 kg-C/kWhr [Rhodes and Keith, 2005].”
Counting only the hits? The risk of underestimating the costs of stringent climate policy (2010, background): “Abatement costs are convex in the policy objective, but two distinct patterns are revealed, depending on whether the models feature or not bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECS; Rhodes and Keith 2005).”