This Natural Gas Plant Has Achieved Zero Emissions

This Natural Gas Plant Has Achieved Zero Emissions

For millions of years the earth has been perfectly good at absorbing carbon dioxide our forests seas and streams suck the gas up acting as natural carbon sinks that was until humans came along and tipped the scales if we Continue to burn fossil fuels at ever rising rates We could warm the planet by 7 and 9 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century and the impacts of that would be catastrophic there have been various attempts to capture this harmful co2, but they’ve all come with significant compromise until now Five four three two, one igniter on The reason this team is so happy is because they’ve just Completed the first successful ignition of the first co2 powered turbine in the world’s first carbon neutral Natural gas power plant, their company is called net power It’ll be the first truly zero emission power plant in the world in a traditional gas power plant The burning gas creates steam which turns a power generating turbine creating a lot of excess co2 in the process Previous attempts to capture that co2 have reduced efficiency and led to higher costs of production Generally, it was thought that carbon capture on natural gas was not economic So what we had to do was start with a blank sheet of paper enter this man Rodney alum He developed the system now referred to as the alum cycle. I set myself the objective of Devising something which would remove hundred percent of the co2 from the fossil fuel with no increase in the cost of electricity Rodney actually did most of his work on what’s called quadrille paper He has a point five millimeter mechanical pencil and a four function calculator And booked tables to look up his data when a complex computer model was created to check Rodney’s calculations Rodney’s pretty much right I Selected co2 is the fluid in the turbine rather than the steam or air which we use previously in steam systems or gas turbine systems And it worked We in effect turned the problem into the solution In Rodney’s design since the co2 is used to spin the turbine and as part of an entirely closed loop it never enters the atmosphere It’s captured by default And because the co2 power system is just as efficient as traditional natural gas plants the cost per kilowatt hour is the same We’ve designed a power cycle that is cheaper and cleaner rather than more costly imagine when you have economics driving a solution instead of policy aspirations Although the co2 never enters the atmosphere the alum cycle still generates a carbon by-product Which leaves us with the problem of what to do with all that carbon? 4,000 miles away engineers in Iceland have an interesting take on how to keep the captured co2 out of the atmosphere Shoving it directly into the ground Perfect is an R&D project that we started about 12 years ago with the objective of developing methods and technologies for capturing otherwise emitted co2 injecting it into basaltic formations we know that certain chemical processes are already happening in nature for example in vicinity of Volcanoes this year – dissolves into groundwater and forms new types of rock by interacting with themselves And we thought why not try and accelerate this process at an industrial scale Very simply carb fix takes the captured carbon and mixes it with water which basically creates Seltzer They then take the fizzy liquid and inject it deep into the earth where the carbon chemically bonds to the basalt rock Instead of co2 turning into rock in hundreds to thousands of years This would happen within the timeframe of a few years Here we have an example of a vein This is then a small fracture Where we would have dissolved part of the Passats and then we fill it up again with the carbonates and that’s where we see these pores filling up with cold sites If we take all passes available on earth, theoretically we could use it to Permanently store much more than all co2 that we would emit from burning all fossil fuel available globally But carb fix is still operating at a small scale and it would take Serious interest from industries and governments to grow to a size that would affect climate change worldwide In The meantime net power won’t be burying its co2 under the ground. They’ll be selling it for cold hard cash But cause for the first time we capture carbon dioxide it very inexpensive prices We open up whole new industries for reuse and recycling co2 that can be useful in building materials chemicals plastics in a myriad of other applications But one of the most common uses of industrial co2 is actually extracting fossil fuels from the ground In the u.s. You’re actually injecting over 20 million tons a year of co2 for enhanced or recovery at the moment. I Think I think if you do if you’re sensible about the way that hydrocarbons are used and you have a integrated idea as to how you’re going to how you’re gonna utilize that hydrocarbon in a clean way and that part is key if net powers excess co2 Essentially leads to more oil being extracted. It’s not a stretch to imagine It will mostly be used in traditional carbon spewing plants not clean ones like net power It very much appears that you know, the age of fossil fuels is likely coming to a close some of these technologies for capturing a sequestering carbon Might help provide sort of that bridge It’s gonna take a decade or two to to really make that transition in our global energy economy. I’m very optimistic All the technologies there and we just need the will That’s really happening now If we really want to succeed in in fighting climate change and we need to bring down the co2 levels in the atmosphere There is no silver bullet. There is no one solution. We have to use all the methods available

You May Also Like

About the Author: Oren Garnes


  1. The CO2 getting stored is "no waste", nuclear spent fuel getting stored is "waste". How much CO2 will have to be stored in a couple of years, and for how long ? A million years?

  2. People often think computers make people smarter, not true, it's just a tool which can be used to augment people with vision.


  4. The video fails to mention that the Allam Cycle requires purified oxygen, instead of air, for combustion. This means that on the front end of the process there is an air separation plant to extract oxygen from air to feed the process.

    This air separation plant, while not technologically challenging, is costly to install and energy intensive to operate. This reduces the plant efficiency and leads to higher cost of production in just the same way as other processes do as mentioned at 1:40. This requirement is among the key pieces which drive the economics of electricity generation from the Allam Cycle.

    It is doubtful that an honest evaluation of the process would show that that the cost of electricity produced this way is comparable to the cost of electricity produced from conventional means….which is what Allam appears to suggest he achieved (his stated ‘objective’ at 1:59).

    It is bush league reporting to not address how this requirement for purified oxygen is met in the Net Power process without severely impacting the cost of electricity generation.

  5. I didn't realize youtube commenters were all skeptical mechanical engineers, electricians, and scientists.

  6. burn gas in a gas turbine, use the exhaust heat to produce steam for a steam turbine. for the exhaust gas, capture the co2 and use it in a sCO2 turbine… excess CO2 can be used for eor

  7. This only had 130k views a year later and yet the freaking kardashians do something and America freaking loses their mind. Our world is fucked, im calling it now. People just dont give a fuck about legitimate problems on this earth.

  8. 3:20 policy aspirations? Thats what they think saving the planet is? There wont be an economy if there is no earth. I applaud these engineers for what they have created but that comment was retarded.

  9. Mankind is not sensible in the use of fossil fuels. Supercritical CO2 has a lower heat of vaporization (I believe the physicists say) than water, therefore, a supercritical CO2 turbine would be more efficient than a steam turbine, the plant would still emit CO2 from burning natural gas. The carbon capture would be ideal if coupled to cement plants, they produce nearly pure CO2 in huge quantities.

  10. 1.5 Trillion barrels of Oil left. AKA 43 years. 50 years of Gas.
    We will Not continue to burn oil and gas. So relax already….

  11. I thought this is a place where all people conservatives and liberala alike can agree. I thought it would all be kumbaya

  12. Where's proof that co2 is harmful? Experiments with two identical greenhouses were done to prove this. One greenhouse had co2 % doubled. The plants grew faster and required less water. Why is this ignored?

  13. CO2 is not a problem. The theory of AGW is based on fraudulent temperature readings, observations, and models. Tony Heller and others are reporting on this issue.

  14. This title seems like false clickbait. They even say in the video the emissions are just a different form. This is not to mention all the emissions use to mine and transport the gas.

  15. It's a bit dishonest to say the plant has achieved zero emissions. The goal would be either to sequester the CO2 or find a market for it. I don't think the CO2 market is large enough to handle the supply from large plants using this cycle. Maybe sequestration is a viable option. That would increase costs though.

  16. As much as I can see these companies are working hard to avoid CO2 gas emissions, in the long run like Michael Mann said they ( The climate worshipers )want to get rid of anything fossil fuel / petro chemical involved which will really pose some challenges.. While I am not a big supporter of fossil fuels/petro chemicals because of pollution it will be hard to do do with out some of the things we are use to like plastics. And again while I am very anti plastic waste, plastic provides practical solutions in today's society, it just needs more controls and balance on how it is used. There is a feel that society pressured from Greenpeace etc will toss out the baby with the bath water. The message however is clear from the climate clerics anything fossil fuel is bad. I think the long term prospect is that these companies will be eventually forced to close. The same goes for the efficient new coal power plants. The main fanboys are solar and wind which are still waiting for a breakthrough in storage of power. We will just have to hope that happens soon. The only truly valid 24/7 clean reliable cheap energy left is Hydro, Geo-thermal, and Nuclear . But again they get less attention especially nuclear from the climate evangelists .

  17. The gas may leak from undeground few miles away from the plant. I doubt that anyone would monitor that… Just build green houses and pump CO2 there – at least some of it will turn into plants.

  18. In the beginning they keep showing Steam coming out of those chimneys. That white smoke? Mostly water, not CO2. (just nit-picking)

  19. This video is hopium. The Icelandic lady stating "If we take all the basalt available on earth, theoretically we could use it to permanently store much more than all co2 that we would emit from burning all fossil fuel available globally".. what a ridiculous statement. "If we take all the basalt on earth".. well, no, that is never going to be possible, so don't try and paint a rosy picture based on an impossibility.

  20. How far down did you pull the oil/gas, and how far down are you pumping the CO2? Realistically how long do you think it’ll take for it to resurface? Not long at all if you’re thinking long term. There are better energy sources

  21. zero emissions? did you research by reading their marketing brochures?!?
    it's only 0 emissions if you cool, compress and capture the CO2 – as in any other power plant. the only real difference here: less gas to capture because nitrogen is separated before the process (at significant cost)…misleading marketing clip.

  22. The c02 needs to go into the atmosphere. The plants are loving the extra. Tell these fools to cease and decist. The deep state money maker and fear peddling are OVER!

  23. What a load of bullshit. The planet is fine. The earth has been getting warmer and cooler for as long as it's been around. We don't need to be going out of our way to "save the planet"

  24. turned it off after i saw michael mann, this could have been an informative video…ill never know.

  25. This is all fine and dandy, but does it mean these gas power plants need to be near a certain type of rock formation to make it economically viable?

  26. so are they capturing co2 from regular power stations and reusing it or are they making a whole power station just for this? in which case if they are burning gas just for the co2 then why not use the heat to boil water for a regular turbine as well?

  27. We have 10 years to stop using fossil fuels or we all die. Millenials and Gen Z will be running, starving, and dying from Climate Change. We need to stop messing around with Carbon. Use renewable energy

  28. By the time these technologies became profitable (and that won't happen, btw) enough to evolve as mainstream, it wouldn't make a difference anyway.

  29. Arent we trying to save earth but this guy wants to sell it so they can make plastic yeh hes pretty brain dead

  30. I mean, captured carbon rods are a lot safer then nuclear rods that have to be buried with crossed figners that their wont be a massive quake in 100K years.

  31. This is a brilliant way to re-design the traditional power plant into one that fully captures CO2.  Meanwhile C02 is a marketable product, so they can generate money for their byproduct. *Yes it would be interesting to know how energy intensive the O2 capture is, however I assume they factored that into the whole efficiency equation when they stated that it is just as efficient as a traditional natural gas plant that has no CO2 capture.*Yes there is proven CO2 capture and sequestration. There is a shell refinery in Alberta that has hit the 4 million ton CO2 capture mark this year. They sequester the CO2 from and pump it deep underground for permanent storage.

  32. Talk to Duke Energy in the Carolinas since they are converting some coal plants to natural gas or half coal / half gas.

  33. By the way it sounds like BS, there is only so much you can do with dry ice and liquid CO2 and it ends up in the atmosphere anyways.

  34. Plants love CO2. It makes them grow yuge and GREEN. Why are people trying to choke off the beautiful trees. Why is Bloomberg promoting this travesty.

  35. Your cutting down the CO2 carbon capture> Trees absorb CO2 and expel Oxygen. CO2 was at its lowest when the Planet was at its greenest. Massive Removal of CO2.

  36. Why do we even try. 8 billion people, and growing, will not be able to group together in order to create a stable environment. It just will not happen. Thankfully this planet will take care of itself and reset, as it should.

  37. Great Reporting… 3:27 What carbon byproduct??? Be more specific. Is it a solid, liquid, or gas? Is it carbon monoxide, methane, mellitus anhydride or diamonds? After all, you are trying to see if this system impacts the environment or not. Bitterly disappointed.

  38. enter the startup firm Hypersolar, on the verge of creating an industrial scale photovoltaic capability to dissociate H2O

  39. I can't believe all the people essentially nitpicking this. This is a realistic step forward. If the developing world used technology like this the overall carbon output would be much lower than using conventional means. Sometimes you have to compromise, you don't get to live in Neverland and expect the whole world to be 100% renewable with zero emissions overnight. That will happen as our technology continues to evolve and economic incentives align with that evolution.

  40. We should concentrate on the use of net power and nuclear if we really want to keep the economy alive while also trying to reduce emissions

  41. One great solution to Global Warming (GW) is the Nuclear solution, as follows.

    The idea comes from Ian Jones of Sydney Univercity. His ocean nourishment works like this.

    Step 1. Make hydrogen from solar wind hydro and nuclear via electrolysis.

    Step 2. Combine hydrogen with nitrogen to make ammonia.

    Step 3. Combine ammonia with this carbon dioxide CO2 sourse to make Urea and water H2O.

    Step 4. Dump the Urea into the ocean. Urea is highly dissolvable in water.


    This helps the growth of phytoplankton. This is at the bottom of the food chain that can support fish populations and help feed the world as it grows it takes CO2 out of the air and producing oxygen. When it dies it falls to the bottom or the ocean taking carbon with it.

    Talk to Ian Jones at Univercity of Sydney Au. For details and / or down load his PDF Ocean Nourishment. This has an effect on decreased ocean acidification.

    It is nuclear that can make as much hydrogen as you like to make the ammonia.

  42. Some basis of costing involved in setting up the plant (on a per MW basis) will be very helpful for comparison and further analysis

  43. this is retarded… you can inject browns gas and get 0 emissions and get increased energy…. water injection turbines are basically clean energy / super efficient energy of the future… the problem is communism and fake news about climate change

  44. This really is a great innovation! CH4 is renewable! You animals fart it, it's produce in landfills and it's naturally venting from the Earth (flare gas in oil and gas)! Oxygen rich combustion is usually performed by combustion with excess air. Air contains only 21% O2, a variable amount of moisture, 78% nitrogen, 1% Argon and 400+ppm of CO2; too much in the way to be efficient. But the cost of feeding the combustion process with pure oxygen has got to be very costly! Makes it alot easier to remove the excess working fluid (CO2 byproduct) since it condenses at 74F and 876 psig.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *