a carbon pollution reduction scheme for australia carbon dioxide reduction carbon pollution
climate cleanup co2 co2 chimney stacks co2 emissions technology co2 destruction co2 elimination co2 emission co2 emissions co2 emission reduction co2 emissions trading co2 emissions co2 emissions industry white paper co2 scrubber co2 solution co2 solutions co2 technology emission reduction technologies free co2 industry white paper neutralizing carbon dioxide reduction of carbon dioxide we can solve it we have solved it
To understand the comparison of our revolutionary technology to existing carbon dioxide Capture and Storage Options ... get your own CO2 Solution : FREE co2 emissions Industry White Paper and access to our revolutionary and universal carbon dioxide reduction technology click here.
Priority Registration - submit your organisation´s details, fields of activities, CO2 pollution source data, custom license request, marketing rights request, territory or other business relationship desired click here
a carbon pollution reduction scheme for australia carbon dioxide reduction carbon pollution
climate cleanup co2 co2 chimney stacks co2 emissions technology co2 destruction co2 elimination co2 emission co2 emissions co2 emission reduction co2 emissions trading co2 emissions co2 emissions industry white paper co2 scrubber co2 solution co2 solutions co2 technology emission reduction technologies free co2 industry white paper neutralizing carbon dioxide reduction of carbon dioxide we can solve it we have solved it
| To understand the comparison of our revolutionary technology to existing carbon dioxide Capture and Storage Options ... get your own CO2 Solution : FREE co2 emissions Industry White Paper and access to our revolutionary and universal carbon dioxide reduction technology click here.
|
WHITE PAPER COMPARISON OF OUR NEW TECHNOLOGY TO EXISTING
TECHNOLOGIES FOR CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE
CONTENTS
- Our Purpose
- Situation Analysis
- Sense of Urgency
- The Advantages of Our CO2 Destruction Technology and Device
- An Optimum Post-Combustion co2 emissions Solution Characteristics
- Comparison Of The Black Box Device With Other CO2 Capture Options
- About Climatecleanup.com
- Mankind Is Searching for A CO2 Solution
Disclaimer:
This document was initially prepared for Climatecleanup.com’s own internal use to clarify the positioning of our CO2 Destruction Device technology and device for our people’s use. Owing to the urgency of the CO2 environmental threat and need for fast action, particularly as the outcomes of this document are stunningly clear and vivid we have decided to make it available to the general public.
This document is merely one resource now available to assist people to put the entire issue of the co2 emissions Industry in a comprehensible format. Do not use this document as a basis for your own choices. We cannot guarantee the complete accuracy of all the data included. We will not be held liable for any economic or other loss claimed to have resulted from your or any other person’s reading of this document.
In conclusion, the single striking datum that emerges from this White Paper is that our own CO2 Destruction technology and device is a great blessing for mankind at this particular time of urgent need to sustain life on his planet.
1. Our Purpose
Our mission is to ensure survival of life on this planet.
According to our research and investigation no other practical universal solution for CO2 Destruction exists that is unique, free of waste bi-products, does not use costly solvents and chemicals , does not require heat to be generated as part of the process, does not use further energy resources, does not require capital expenditure on buildings and treatment plants, and is capable of rapid retrofit.
To achieve our purpose we must gain common acceptance of our Black Box CO2 Destruction Device rapidly around the world.
2. Situation Analysis
The race has started to prevent a collapse of the earth’s atmosphere and life as we know it on this planet. The stakes are high and time is extremely short.
Unlike the Y2K computer conversion deadline at midnight, New Years Eve 1999, there is no target date to have this work accomplished. The risks of not adequately stopping current and growing levels of CO2 pollution entering the atmosphere are of a far greater magnitude and consequence. This is an “all of life” threatening situation.
3. Sense of Urgency
Given our purpose and the situation we have prepared this White Paper to provide environmental decision makers with a clear cut comparison of our own CO2 Destruction Black Box technology and device.
4. The Advantages of Our CO2 Destruction Technology and Device
Our product is capable of rapid deployment, thereby aligning with the sense of urgency, and is universal across all industries being suitable for almost all sources of CO2 pollution including:
- Thermal Power Plants generating electricity.
- Smoke Stacks in refining, manufacturing and processing industries.
- Automobiles, Trains, Ships and Aircraft used for transport.
5. An Optimum Post-Combustion co2 emissions Solution Characteristics
What are the characteristics desired of an optimum co2 emissions Solution methodology, technology and device? We put our minds to this question and came up with the following list of twenty one desirable characteristics.
| Characteristics | Optimum Post-Combustion co2 emissions Solution Detailed Description |
|
|
|
| The ideal know-how would cut emissions from any co2 source. | |
| Stops co2 gases entering the atmosphere. | |
| 3. Low capture cost per ton | Does not need costly additional chemicals or heat assistance. |
| 4. No capital improvements | No construction of buildings or treatment plants required. |
| 5. Can be demonstrated | Prototype equipment functioning with operational equipment. |
| 6. Observed to work | One can look at the equipment in operation. |
| 7. Effective - results | Observable, measurable and testable actual co2 emissions. |
| 8. No bi-products | There is not waste bi-product needing to be treated. |
| 9. No waste treatment | There is not waste bi-product needing to be removed or destroyed. |
| 10. No heat treatment | Production of heat is not required to aid the process. |
| 11. Scalable to problem | Equipment is identical regardless of the size of the exhaust. |
| 12. Installed by retrofit | Equipment is capable of being fitted to older equipment. |
| 13. Convenient - small | Devices are not heavy equipment. |
| 14. Fast to implement | Time from decision to results is small. |
| 15. Can be mass produced | Automated manufacturing production line techniques can be used. |
| 16. Relatively cheap | Compared to alternative costs of legal compliance and alternatives. |
| 17. No variable cost drivers | The ideal device is self contained and renewable. |
| 18. No Corrosion effect | Does not cause chemical reactions yielding corrosive effects. |
| 19. No chemicals needed | Does not require solvents. |
| 20. Near energy neutral | Uses a small amount of electrical energy. |
| 21. Cuts CO2 emissions | Actually focuses on cutting co2 emissions not futuristic fuel savings. |
6. Comparison Of The Black Box Device With Other CO2 Capture Options
To compile a table comparing the Climatecleanup.com Black Box Device for CO2 Destruction with alternate CO2 Capture options we located a Thesis published on the subject of CO2 Capture Options and tabulated the following data:
Table :
Comparison of Black Box Device for CO2 Destruction and CO2 Capture Options
Note: This table has been filled based on our study of the following Thesis, citation is given at the end. The relevant extract of the Thesis is shown below.
| Optimum Post-Combustion co2 emissions Solution Characteristics* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Black Box | Seques-tration | Biological | ||
| Yes | No | Yes | No | No | |
| Yes | No | Yes | No | No | |
| 3. Low capture cost per ton | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 4. No capital improvements | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 5. Can be demonstrated | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 6. Observed to work | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 7. Effective - results | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 8. No bi-products | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 9. No waste treatment | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 10. No heat treatment | Yes | No | Yes | No | No |
| 11. Scalable to problem | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| 12. Installed by retrofit | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| 13. Convenient - small | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 14. Fast to implement | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 15. Can be mass produced | Yes | No | No | Yes | No |
| 16. Relatively cheap | Yes | No | Yes | No | No |
| 17. No variable cost drivers | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 18. No corrosion effect | Yes | No | Yes | No | No |
| 19. No chemicals needed | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 20. Near energy neutral | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| 21. Cuts CO2 emissions | Yes | No | No | No | No |
| Summary “Yes” Results | 21 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 5 |
* Characteristics are not listed in an implied order of importance.
Introduction to CO2 Capture
CO2 capture from power plants entails the integration of a capture technology into a power plant system.
The primary CO2 capture technologies being considered are:
Adsorption,
Chemical absorption, and
Is refrigeration of the gas stream to reduce the vapor pressure so phase change occurs and the liquid CO2 can be distilled out of the mixture. Significant energy s required to cool the gas especially since the majority of power plant processes occur at high temperature. Without substantial new system integration, cryogenics does not appear either efficient or economically feasible for power plants and will not be included further in this study.
Biological remediation harnesses the natural process that plants undergo to consume CO2 and convert it into biological material. Photosynthesis is the most common
method of biological absorption, but some algae are known to utilize CO2 in the absence
of light. A portion of all CO2 emissions is absorbed biologically by terrestrial plant life.
However given the increased CO2 atmospheric concentration of 0.4 percent per year, the
absorption rate does not keep pace with emissions (U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory
Program, 2002). To increase the rate of biological absorption, bioreactors are being
developed to integrate into power plant systems.
Adsorption
Occurs by passing the flue gas stream through a microporous solid adsorbent stream so that surface forces capture the CO2 on the surface of the adsorbent without chemical reaction. Modifications of this process include pressure swing absorption and temperature swing adsorption, which rely on high pressure and temperature respectively to activate surface forces and then low pressure or temperature to regenerate the adsorbent. Significant process and system development work is underway to implement absorption in power plants for CO2 capture. Specific technologies will be addressed further in this study.
Chemical absorption
Entails passing the flue gas stream through an absorbent stream but in this case the CO2 chemically reacts with the absorbent to reduce the Gibbs free energy of the mixture.
The absorption reaction requires a low temperature of approximately 50oC and the desorption reaction to regenerate the absorbent occurs at approximately 120 oC (ESRU 2006). Chemical absorption is most effective with low CO2 concentrations and is therefore appropriate for flue gas processing where the CO2 is diluted with air and steam.
To further consider CO2 capture technologies, the technology must be placed in
the context of the power plant. Among power plants fueled by natural gas, the current
predominant system is natural gas combined cycle (NGCC).
Among power plants fueled by coal the most common system is a pulverized coal power plant (PC). In both systems, the fuel is combusted without chemical preprocessing except that which is necessary to remove contaminants. However, both coal and natural gas are capable of being chemically reformed through partial oxidation reactions into syngas, a mixture of CO and ?
Subsequently the syngas may be combusted in a combined cycle system for
electricity generation. When coal is the fuel the reforming occurs in a gasifier, this entire
process is called integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC). With natural gas the
reforming can take place with catalytic partial oxidation (CPO) and the process is called
integrated reforming combined cycle (IRCC).
Chemical preprocessing through gasification or catalytic partial oxidation enables the carbon to be separated out of the syngas before the syngas is diluted by air in the combustion process. When capturing carbon pre-combustion, adsorption is typically employed to separate the carbon bearing species from the syngas.
When coal or natural gas is combusted without chemical modification, chemical absorption is well suited to remove CO2 from the flue gas.
The performance of the separation technology is largely dependent on how it is integrated into the power plant system; therefore, for the majority of this study, capture technologies will be considered within the context of the power generation system.
Pre-combustion capture occurs at high total pressure and high CO2 fraction. These
conditions are present because the syngas exiting the reformer is at high pressure and has not yet been diluted with air.
Capture under these conditions is inherently easier because there is a larger driving force so less energy input is required. Post-combustion capture occurs after the syngas has been diluted in the combustion process and expanded in the turbine.
Therefore less driving force is present and separation is more difficult. Nevertheless, post-combustion capture requires less system integration than precombustion capture.
Chemical Absorption
Chemical absorption of CO2 from gas streams is currently utilized in many
industries using monoethanolamine.
Once CO2 is absorbed, the monoethanolamine is thermally regenerated to release
CO2 and H2O, which must be separated through condensing the H2O (Soong 2005). The
ability to absorb and then desorb CO2 for capture and release without degrading the
reactants is the primary factor that makes monoethanolamine commonly used for CO2
capture.
Post-combustion CO2 capture monoethanolamine system. The CO2 rich flue gas flows through an absorption chamber with a counter flow of the lean monoethanolamine solvent. CO2 and the solvent chemically react and are pumped out of the absorber as rich solvent. The thermal regeneration used to strip the CO2 and regenerate the lean solvent occurs at high temperature and is endothermic requiring that approximately 4MJ of heat be added per kg of recovered CO2.
A heat exchanger between rich and lean solvents is commonly utilized to recycle
some of the heat, but the majority is extracted from the low-pressure steam turbine. The
primary cost drivers of the monoethanolamine system are the heat utilized for
regeneration, solvent loss, and CO2 loading.
Development of power plant post-combustion chemical absorption CO2 capture
technologies has resulted in both chemical and system level advancements that reduce
costs. Praxair, (Chakravarti 2001), Mitsubishi (2002) and FluorDaniel (Chapel 1999) all
attempted to develop low cost products by decreasing the impact of one or more of these cost drivers.
In a review of Praxair’s CO2 capture technology, Chakravarti 2001 notes:
“Chemical absorption with [monoethanolamine] has been generally used in processes
such as natural gas sweetening and hydrogen production for the rejection of carbon
dioxide.” Similar processes using monoethanolamine are not cost effective for postcombustion CO2 capture because of the high operating cost and corrosion rates.
According to Chakravarti, Praxair determined the operating cost and corrosion rates are
worth mitigating with process modifications because of the high loading rates even at low
partial pressure. In order to mitigate the corrosion problems, the CO2 rich monoethanolamine is deoxygenated by depressurization as described by Chakravarti.
Praxair reduced operating costs by employing monoethanolamine blends with
concentrations of up to 50 percent from 30 percent thus reducing the high cost steam
consumption for regeneration.
Similarly, Mitsubishi developed advanced post-combustion CO2 capture technology based on monoethanolamine (Mitsubishi 2002). Unlike the Praxair technology, which utilizes a unique process, Mitsubishi’s technology uses a unique reagent called KS-1, a sterically hindered monoethanolamine with reduced oxidation rates. According to Mitsubishi, KS-1 has improved operating characteristics with respect to monoethanolamines. The reduced oxidation rate decreases the degradation of the solvent and solvent loss enabling operation without a corrosion inhibitor. While the Mitsubishi data offers a relative comparison, no absolute data is provided and no background on the testing used to generate the data is discussed. Based on the data provided, Mitsubishi maintains the total CO2 capture cost to be approximately $ per thousand standard cubic feet (MSCF) or $20 per ton for a coal fired boiler and $1.44 per MSCF or $28 per ton for a natural gas fired gas turbine.
The relatively higher CO2 capture cost per ton in gas turbine systems is due to the low CO2 flue gas concentration of 3 to 5 percent compared to 12 to 14 percent coal fired boiler flue gas. Thus, the gas turbine KS-1 system operates with a lower CO2 loading parameter. Despite the uncertainty of the data source, the low cost of the KS-1 system appears to make the capture process comparable with a current trading value of approximately $20 per ton and, therefore, should be considered further.
A third flue gas CO2 capture technology was developed by FluorDaniel and is
described by Chapel (1999). The FluorDaniel Econamine FG process utilizes an
inhibited 30 percent by mass monoethanolamine solution for CO2 capture.
According to Chapel, the inhibitor reduces corrosion and solvent degradation problems, which ultimately drives down cost. Chapel conducted an economic analysis for a coal-fired plant with a typical 13 percent by mass flue gas CO2 concentration and natural gas fired plant with a typical 3 percent by mass flue gas CO2 concentration.
The resulting capital and operating cost for a 1000 ton per day coal-fired plant was $29.5 per ton and for a 1000 ton per day natural gas fired plant $43.5 per ton. In a conversation with co-author Carl Mariz, Mariz speculated capital cost improvements along with efficiency improvements and economies of scale could reduce the total cost to between $20 per ton and $25 per ton for a 500 MW coal-fired plant (Mariz 2005). Given the potential cost reductions cited by Mariz the Economanie FG process should be considered further because the cost could become comparable with current CO2 credit trading values.
An alternative post-combustion capture technology known as “enhanced photosynthetic CO2 mitigation”. The photosynthetic CO2 mitigation system described passes cooled flue gas through a bioreactor, containing thermophilic organisms that use chlorophyll to produce sugar from CO2.
As the microalgea age, the CO2 uptake is limited. Some of the microalgea must
be periodically removed to provide sufficient space and light available for new
productive microalgea. Light is collected in parabolic solar dishes then transmitted
through fiber optic cables to the bioreactor. According to Bayless, this current light
collection and transmission system is cost prohibitive. With advances in microbial
research and light delivery systems, future developments might make similar
bioremediation technologies feasible, especially since photosynthesis alleviates the need
for CO2 storage. Currently, Bayless does not suggest photosynthetic CO2 mitigation is a
near term solution and consequently it will not be considered further in this study.
Pre-Combustion Capture Pre-combustion capture has the potential to occur under high CO2 partial pressure and high fuel stream total pressure. In order to utilize pre-combustion capture, both coal and natural gas must be partially oxidized into syngas, a mixture of predominately CO, CO2 and H2. Partial oxidation or reforming can be implemented with coal in an integrated gasification combined cycle power plant and with natural gas in an integrated reforming combined cycle power plant. A discussion of both technologies follows.
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
In the case of coal, the coal and either oxygen or air, flow into the gasifier, where
under elevated pressure and temperature, the coal undergoes partial oxidation to produce
syngas. The actual composition of syngas can vary by site in the amount and type of
constituents. Table 3 provides a sample of gasification sites and their respective syngas
constituents from 11 different power plants or chemical plants that gasify coal (Brdar,
2000). The integrated gasification combined cycle power plant subsystems, which
potentially include a CO2 capture system, must be robust for the range of constituents and concentrations.
In an integrated gasification combined cycle power plant without CO2 capture, as
shown in Figure 4, the syngas is scrubbed to remove SO2 and combusted in a gas turbine
to produce about 60 percent of the electricity.
The hot exhaust is delivered to a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) to produce steam, which is sent to a steam turbine that produces the remaining 40 percent of the plant’s electricity. The thermal efficiency of advanced integrated gasification combined cycle power plants and sub critical coal fired boiler power plants are 46 percent higher heating value and 34 percent higher heating value respectively (Hughes, 2000).
Consequently integrated gasification combined cycle power plants convert coal to electricity 35 percent more efficiently than pulverized coal power plants so they can use 35 percent less coal to produce the same amount of electricity. In terms of CO2 emissions, the 35 percent less fuel utilized per kWh translates into a 35 percent co2 emissions on a tons/kWh basis.
Other advanced coal technologies such as super-critical coal boilers and fluidized
bed combustors are capable of achieving comparable efficiencies. Nordjyllands, the ultra
super-critical coal fired power plant in Denmark, operates at 4200 PSI and 47 percent lower heating value (Bendixen 2003). The formation of syngas, however, provides
integrated gasification combined cycle power plants with an opportunity to employ precombustion capture, a significant competitive advantage in a carbon constrained market.
An integrated gasification combined cycle power plant with precombustion CO2 capture, syngas leaves the gasifier and is processed in a shift reactor, which reacts the CO with H2O to form CO2 .
The shift reaction is performed in a series of two reactors. Upon leaving the gasifier at
approximately 1400oF, the syngas is cooled in a steam generator to approximately 700 oF, then mixed with steam in a high temperature shift reactor to react 80 to 95 percent of the CO. Next, the mixture is cooled to approximately 400oF and sent to the low temperature shifter, which will exhaust up to 99 percent CO free syngas.
After SO2 scrubbing, adsorption can be employed using UOP’s proprietary
product Selexol, a mixture of polyethylene glycol derivatives. The solubility of CO2 in
Selexol is 15 times greater than in syngas, therefore, almost 95 percent of CO2 can be
captured from the syngas. Moreover, the low vapor pressure of Selexol enables the CO2
to be flashed out to regenerate the Selexol solution and isolate the CO2. Additional
benefits of integrated gasification combined cycle beyond the ability to utilize precombustion capture include a reduction in emissions of criteria pollutants, a reduction in water contamination, and a reduction in solid waste.
Integrated Reformer Combined Cycle (IRCC)
Similar to coal, natural gas can be reformed into a syngas and processed to
separate CO2 from the exhaust stream before combustion. Two technologies capable of
natural gas reforming in combined cycle applications are auto-thermal reactor (ATR) and
catalytic partial oxidation (CPO). While the auto-thermal reactor is a more mature
technology, with further development catalytic partial oxidation has potential to be the
lower cost solution. In either case, the syngas may be cleaned to remove constituents that
lead to hardware degradation or pollutant formation. Steam is then added in a shift
reactor to transform the syngas equilibrium to primarily H2 and CO2. Nagl (2003),
describes the reactions that occur during the gasification process and the various
technologies employed for cleaning syngas.
Audus (2003) reviews technical and economic aspects of ATR and air blown
catalytic partial oxidation (CAPO) systems. Auto thermal reforming consists of
combustion of gas turbine exhaust gas and hydrogen-rich fuel gas in a reformer furnace
in order to convert natural gas into syngas (Audus, 2005). Alternatively, air blown
catalytic partial oxidation requires air, steam, and natural gas mixed in a conical
combustion zone at the top of the refractory lined reactor. In this zone both partial
oxidation and steam reforming reactions take place. In the downstream catalyst zone the steam-methane reaction is brought to near equilibrium (Audus, 2005).
One of the primary benefits of air blown catalytic partial oxidation over auto thermal reforming is a shorter resonance time, which reduces the reactor size, real estate requirement, and capital cost, all of which are closely related.
Through an energy balance and economic analysis, Audus, 2005, estimates the
co2 emissions cost of air blown catalytic partial oxidation and auto thermal reforming
CO2 capture systems to be $27 per ton and $37 per ton respectively. Audus’ CO2
reduction cost calculation is based on the results shown in Table 4. Results generated by
Audus are based on a natural gas price of $2 per MMBTU. Since natural gas prices are
currently much higher, one must consider the effect of fuel price on the co2 emissions
cost.
A fuel price sensitivity study on the cost of electricity for both air blown catalytic
partial oxidation and natural gas combined cycle power plants is shown in Figure 6. Over
a wide range of natural gas prices, the difference in cost of electricity remains relatively
constant as the fuel price changes.
Moreover, the co2 emissions cost is based on the difference in the cost of electricity between the two technologies. Since the difference remains relatively constant over a wide range of fuel prices, so does the co2 emissions cost. Air blown catalytic partial oxidation incurs an efficiency penalty that increases fuel consumption per MWe.
The increase in fuel price is small enough that the change is negligible in the low fidelity co2 emissions calculation.
Audus, 2005, notes future developments, such as CO2 capture membranes to replace the current amine systems will likely drive down cost.
Significant technological barriers remain, however, including the development of a gas turbine that can operate on syngas with 50 percent H2 and meet NOx regulations. Figure 8 illustrates a detailed plant schematic with integrated auto thermal reactor, gas turbine, heat recovery steam generator, and CO2 capture system.
In an effort to reduce mankind’s impact on climate change, multiple technologies will be tested, implemented and deemed successful or not. No one technology independently will likely remedy global warming?
The purpose of this study is to compare technologies on a common technical and economic basis. The metric utilized for comparison is the co2 emissions cost measured in dollars per ton.
The co2 emissions cost metric captures the economic impact through the change in cost of electricity and the environmental impact through the change in CO2 emissions. Some efficiency improvements enable a power producer to reduce CO2 emissions for a low co2 emissions cost, but reductions are at most 15 percent. More substantial reductions, on the order of 90 percent, may be achieved with a variety of
commercially available and near-term CO2 capture solutions.
Author : Goodman, Joseph - Economic and technical study of carbon dioxide reduction technologies – Thesis Extract – 27 10 2006 source: http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/14033
7. About Climate Cleanup.com http://climatecleanup.com
Climatecleanup.com promotes and markets a new and unique Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Reduction Technology. In contrast to the options above which concentrate solely on the economics of Power Plant operations, our technology and device was created to fix the environmental problem created by the inefficiency of the described CO2 capture methods. Our technology and device is able to rapid and cheaply cut CO2 emissions from as many sources as possible world wide.
8. Mankind is searching for a CO2 Solution.
We are faced with an environmental disaster of epic proportions - did you know it so grave that China is commissioning one new CO2 emitting Power Plant each and every week. Together, we can do something about saving life on this planet. The ClimateCleanup.com Group has a revolutionary CO2 Solution and you are invited to help us get it into wide spread use on the planet. If you want to help us, you are welcome.
ClimateCleanup - 220708
To enquire about our revolutionary and universal CO2 carbon dioxide reduction solutions please use the online Enquiry Form
CARBON SOLUTIONS REDUCTION SCHEME Australia
CARBON SOLUTIONS REDUCTION SCHEME Australia
CARBON SOLUTIONS REDUCTION SCHEME Australia
