If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now
Skyonic's SkyMine Plant

Texas Carbon Capture Plant Breaks Ground

Skyonic's SkyMine PlantSkyonic has started construction on the Capitol SkyMine plant (pictured), a commercial-scale carbon capture and utilization plant, in San Antonio, Texas, Clean Edge reports.

The clean-tech news site says Capitol SkyMine will be first such plant built to commercial scale in the US.

Located onsite at the Capitol Aggregates Cement Factory, the plant is expected to capture 75,000 tons of CO2 and to offset an additional 225,000 tons annually.

The company expects Capitol SkyMine to turn a profit by selling products produced during the carbon capture process. The plant will use Skyonic’s SkyMine technology, which removes CO2 from industrial waste streams through co-generation of saleable carbonate and/or bicarbonate materials.

In addition to capturing and mineralizing CO2, the SkyMine process cleans SOx and NO2 from the flue gas, and removes heavy metals such as mercury, the company says. Existing power plants and industrial plants can be retrofitted with SkyMine.

Clean Edge reports the estimated 75,000 tons of CO2 and other pollutants captured annually at the Capitol SkyMine plant will be mineralized into solid product, sodium bicarbonate, and produce byproducts, hydrochloric acid and bleach.

In July, Skyonic awarded a $117 million contract to Toyo-Thai-USA, a subsidiary of Toyo-Thai Corporation, to build the carbon capture and utilization plant in San Antonio.

In other carbon capture news, existing coal-fired power plants won’t be required to use carbon capture technology under new EPA rules, according to media reports.

Last week, the EPA issued carbon pollution limits for new power plants; the agency will issue proposed standards for existing power plants by June 1, 2014.

While new coal plants will have to use carbon capture to comply with the new standard of 1,100 pounds of CO2 per MWh, the EPA’s rules for existing plants will allow states to use energy efficiency, clean-energy installations or demand cuts to reduce coal plants’ greenhouse gas emissions, Reuters reports.

US-based Arch Coal, one of the world’s top coal producers, says near-zero-emission coal plants will be achievable in time — but that technology is not available today.

“The Administration’s proposal goes way too far, way too fast, and threatens to arrest rather than spur technology advances,” says Deck S. Slone, Arch Coal senior vice president of strategy and public policy.

 

Choosing the Correct Emission Control Technology
Sponsored By: Anguil Environmental Systems

  
Four Key Questions to Ask Before Your Next Energy Purchase
Sponsored By: EnerNOC, Inc.

  
10 Tactics of Successful Energy Managers
Sponsored By: EnergyCap, Inc.

  
Approaches to Managing EHS&S Data
Sponsored By: Enablon

  

6 thoughts on “Texas Carbon Capture Plant Breaks Ground

  1. Hello Sir and fellow American,

    I would like to address Global Warming,the lack there of. The facts I’m going to give you are the truth and encourage you to research information that is at everyone disposal.

    The Air you exhale out of your nose is between 3 and 5% CO2. The air you inhale 81% Nitrogen, 18% Oxygen and of the remaining 1% are many elements and one is CO2 and it is .03% percent. VERY SMALL AMOUNT! These numbers have been constant for more than 5000 years.
    Things to ponder. Do you know what would happen if we were to lose that .03 tenths of one percent out of are environment? Well you would die, in fact every one would die. When you look out side every thing that is green takes in CO2 during the day and gives off oxygen at night. That includes potatoes, tomatoes, carrots, corn, soybeans, sunflowers etc. My effort here is to show you what a HOAX our GOVERNMENT IS PUSHING ON US. Trees as you might assume give more oxygen than small plants, BUT don’t get the silly idea that we depend on trees for our oxygen. We don’t we get 85% of our oxygen from the ocean! THINGS YOU CAN DO. Everyone know someone that has a green thumb and her plants almost take over her home, then you probably knows someone that their plants are yellow and weak. The difference between these two people? One cooks with a gas stove, it floods her house with CO2 and a small amount of moisture. and the other has an all electric home and does not open her windows to let .03% of one percent to keep her plants healthy. In Norway a year ago they set up a green house and sealed it up. Then they filled it with new plants and flooded it with CO2 (did not disclose what percentage of CO2). After 30 days they stop the study, the plants grew like they were in the rain forest. Much like it was before the Ice Age, when North America was a tropical paradise, and dinosaurs stood 50 tall and trees grew to 100 feet tall. Then the ice age, all of the huge trees were buried and turned into oil, coal, and methane gas from the rotting green matter. One more point, everything made of wood is called sequestered CO2 for it never gives up it’s CO2 until you throw it out and let it rot or you BURN IT! I cannot comprehend the billions or maybe Trillions of tons of CO2 released by the fires in the western states. So now you know the truth about Global Warming. The fact is Obama promised the third world people that they all deserve a living wage, The Carbon Tax is what he is planning to use to do this. There has been two articles in the DesMoines Register out lining this for both the far east and Europe. Everything I have written is the truth and you should have learned this in High School.
    Vincent Loeckle

  2. I presume most people who read this are already well aware that most of what Vincent Loeckle wrote above is pure nonsense.
    Mr. Loeckle, I will point out to you just a few of your egregious errors.
    1) Your statement that the atmospheric composition percentage of CO2 has been unchanged for 5000 years is false. CO2 has been increasing, and the amount of increase has been well measured and well documented.
    2) Climate change is not a hoax, and furthermore the government is not “pushing” it on us. About 98% of the relevant top scientists all over the world accept the fact of human-influenced climate change.
    3) Where the majority of oxygen comes from, is totally irrelevant to the question. Furthermore, no climate scientist is ignoring the role of the oceans anyway.
    4) Carbon is not “sequestered” in wood. The term ‘sequestration’ is reserved for the condition of carbon being totally removed, or sequestered, (via geologic processes) from the various biological cycles that together constitute our biome. The carbon in wood is temporarily ‘fixed’, but is readily re-released back into the biome for participation in further cycling processes (as you yourself indirectly admit when you talk about rotting or burning wood). The reason why this distinction is so important; is that the main human driver of climate change is the frenetic dumping of previously sequestered carbon back into the biome – via the burning of fossil fuels that contain carbon that was sequestered over millions of years but that is now being released by humans in a mere 100 or 200 years. Such a vast and rapid change naturally leads to severe consequences.
    5) President Obama never “promised” a living wage to people living in the third world. He was never in a position to do so anyway, since by definition the third world is not a part of the U.S. He may or may not think that such people deserve a living wage, but he never promised them one. They aren’t U.S. voters anyway, and the preposterous suggestion that he would make such a promise, makes zero sense.
    Virtually nothing you wrote is the truth, and you should have learned better than that in high school …

  3. Thanks Doug. I just love these people who think they are doing us a favour by telling us to stick our head in the sand.
    You hit the nail on the head. Its not about the amount of carbon released, or whether that amount has been in the atmosphere before, it is the volume over time and how much vegetation there was when it was higher and whether we were around at the time.
    All these deniers (they are not sceptics) still can’t tell me where all the carbon we pump out goes if not into the ocean or the atmosphere, and if they can’t do that, they then can’t tell you how if it goes into the ocean or atmosphere (which it obviously does and has been shown to be occurring) how it does not create accelerated warming or ocean acidification. They can’t because its simple physics. Hoping its not true and cherry picking snippets of information is not the same as the truth. I don’t see any scientific qualifications after your name Mr Loeckle?

  4. Aditionally, not only are we pumping out carbon continuously and increasingly as third world nations industrialise, and have been since well before the European industrial revolution (think Vikings and Romans clearing forests to smelt steel and the Dutch and English to build boats), we have at the same time been decreasing our planets forest cover. Anyone who thinks we can continue to do this over a short period of time with no consequences clearly didn’t learn much in High School at all. Certainly not how to construct rational and logical arguments. “but its the truth” , “believe me because I say so”. pffft!

Leave a Comment