Adsorption - Introduction to Carbon Capture and Sequestration - page 271

Table 6.6.1 Total use of metals for worldwide carbon capture
using MOFs

Metal Use for CCS in % Total use (until 2050) in %

Fe 0.080 0.02
Al 2.2 0.2
Cu 5.6 2.3
Mn 7.0 2.3
Zn 7.5 5.9
Cr 12 12
Mg 14 1.9
Ti 23 3.6
Ni 58 19
Zr 103 36
Co 1,030 200
V 1,620 110
Suppose we implement CCS using MOFs, how will this affect the mining of
metals? The first column gives the use of metals for MOFs in CCS as a
percentage of the 2010 global reserves. The second column gives the total
use of the metals until 2050 as a percentage of the estimated global
reserves of each metal. Data from Sathre and Masanet [6.39].

Table 6.6.3 , the different cost components are compared. This table
illustrates that the bulk of the costs are from the capture process; the
transport and storage only account for 10-15% of the total costs. These
numbers translate into an increase in the price of electricity of about 51%
by 2050. Also note that in the initial stages of the implementation the cost
of CCS will be much more expensive; the fi rst CCS operations will be the
most expensive, but by the implementation of the second generation the
costs will go down rapidly.
This table also shows that a process based on Mg-MOF-74 will cost
$76 per tonne of avoided CO 2 emission, compared to $68 for the MEA-
based process. This is a surprising result — we would have expected the
amine process to be much cheaper as MOFs are expected to be more
expensive to synthesize. The details in the study of Sathre and Masanet
show that the costs of absorption/adsorption materials, MEA or MOF, are