Download International cooperation in the field of CCS - Approaches and implementation

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia, lookup

Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia, lookup

Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia, lookup

Public opinion on global warming wikipedia, lookup

Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia, lookup

Climate change feedback wikipedia, lookup

Solar radiation management wikipedia, lookup

Climate change and poverty wikipedia, lookup

Climate change in the United States wikipedia, lookup

Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia, lookup

Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia, lookup

Politics of global warming wikipedia, lookup

Climate engineering wikipedia, lookup

Climate governance wikipedia, lookup

Economics of global warming wikipedia, lookup

Fred Singer wikipedia, lookup

German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia, lookup

Economics of climate change mitigation wikipedia, lookup

Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia, lookup

Business action on climate change wikipedia, lookup

Low-carbon economy wikipedia, lookup

Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia, lookup

Climate change mitigation wikipedia, lookup

Carbon governance in England wikipedia, lookup

Energiewende in Germany wikipedia, lookup

Climate-friendly gardening wikipedia, lookup

Carbon capture and storage (timeline) wikipedia, lookup

Carbon capture and storage wikipedia, lookup

Transcript
Mitglied der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft
International cooperation in the field of
CCS - Approaches and implementation
December 8, 2015 - Perth | Jürgen-Friedrich Hake – Wolfgang Fischer
Assesment of Energy Technologies and Energy Systems
7. Januar 2016
Institute for Energy and Climate Research
System Analysis and Technology Evaluation
Folie 2
Exploring the idea of CCS
Cesare Marchetti publishes „On Geoengineering and the CO2 Problem“
(1976)




“This is not the place to think of each consumer filling
his own
little balloons with CO2 to be
processed by his municipality. The problem has to be
tackled upstream.”
“[…] one of the numerous (a dozen) processes of
stripping CO2 from other gases […] which are
currently used in industry could be employed.”
“CO2 can be easily compressed […]. It can be
transported in pipelines that are essentially the same
as those for methane.”
“[CO2 disposal] could be done in the form of a
permanent underground storage, e.g. by using
exhausted gas fields.”
Source: Marchetti, C. (1976): On Geoengineering
and the CO2 Problem
7. Januar 2016
Institute for Energy and Climate Research
System Analysis and Technology Evaluation
Folie 3
IPCC - Recognition of CCS as a
climate change mitigation option
IPCC - Special Report on CCS (2005)
Technical findings:
For geological storage, 99% of the CO2 is very likely to be retained over 100
years, and 99% of the CO2 is likely to be retained over 1,000 years.
Policy findings:
 CCS is an important option available to reduce the impacts of climate
change.
 There is a need to increase public awareness of CCS.
 There is a need for the development of suitable regulatory frameworks.
CCS as a climate change mitigation option was recognised on many
occasions by scientific & political organizations at national & international
level in in subsequent years. E. g. IPCC mitigation report (2014): particular
relevance for CCS.
7. Januar 2016
Source: IPCC SR on CCS
Folie 4
Deployment of CCS
– Why is there a need for policy and regulation?
Carbon Capture and Storage fulfills:
 primarily climate policy objectives
- reduces carbon emissions from power plants & industries;
- has a potential for “negative emissions” (bio-energy with CCS).
Carbon Capture and Storage requires
 policy support to drive action;
 financial and policy incentives;
 social and political acceptance;
 (high) carbon prices and/or other mitigation incentives/regulations;
 requires (inter)national regulation regarding the technology deployment;
 requires international scientific, technological & political cooperation.
7. Januar 2016
Folie 5
Incentivizing the worldwide deployment of CCS


Inclusion of CCS into the clean development mechanism project activities (CDM) of the Kyoto
Protocol
G8
•
•
•
•
•




2005: Gleneagles Plan of Action – enhancing international cooperation on CCS
2008: Target of launching 10 large-scale CCS demonstration projects globally by 2010
2009 + 2010 Summits: Confirming the objectives
2014 Rome (G 7): promote use of CCS
2015 G7 Energy Ministers: encourage CCS & collaboration for large scale demonstration projects
G20
•
2015: Energy Sustainable Working Group, Turkey: CCS on the agenda
MEF
•
2009 Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate: Technology Action Plan for CCS
CSLF
•
•
•
•
•
•
CCS demonstration project recognition
Early opportunity workshops for stakeholders
CCS Roadmap 2010
IEA/CSLF Report to the Muskoka G8 Leaders’ Summit
CSLF 5th Ministerial meeting 2013: next 7 years critically important for creating positive conditions for CCS
6th meeting 2015 Saudi Arabia: CCS on the agenda
GCCSI
•
Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute: Database of status CCS-Projects, reports …
Other organizations supporting the advancement of CCS: Clean Energy Ministerial (emerged from MEF 2009 and was
transferred to CSLF); Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), UNFCCC (in subsidiary body); European Commission
supports R&D & demonstration of CCS since 20 years; Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM); bilateral agreements.
7. Januar 2016
Folie 6
International networks and organizations
IPCC
UNFCCC
1990~2000
2010
2005
2002: Scoping
meeting, Regina
1992: UNFCCC launched
1997: Kyoto protocol
finalized
G8
2005: Special
report
2006: Inventory
guidelines
2014: CCS part of
mitigation (bio)
2005: „welcomes“
2006: Workshops CCS 2010: CCS
IPCC Special Report and CCS & CDM
eligible in
CDM
2005: Gleneagles 2008: Commitment to 20 largePlan of Action
scale demo projects by 2010
CEM
2010:
CCUS established
2003: Inaugural meeting
GCCSI
IEAGHG
7. Januar 2016
2009: Energy
Ministers pro CCS
2009: 1st CEM
CSLF
2006-07 Early opportunities
workshops
1st GHGT conference
2007: Capture-ready report
2014: CCUS 2015
recommen- CEM 6
dations
2010: CCS
Roadmap
2008: GCCSI
announcement
2011: Durban
Modalities &
Features for
CCS
2015: 6th
Forum, SA
2015: last update on
global status of CCS
GHGT- every 2 years
Source: de Coninck, Bäckstrand 2011, Schenk 2013, Organization`s documents
Folie 7
International collaboration
on CCS R&D and demonstration
CSLF, IEAGHG R&D Programme, IEA Clean Coal Centre
•
•
•
•
7. Januar 2016
Knowledge-sharing (R&D, pilot and demonstration projects)
Networking
Identification of international best practice
Concept definition (e.g. „capture-ready“), development of guidelines
for regulatory purposes
Folie 8
But :gap between expectations/aspirations and reality
“This roadmap includes an ambitious CCS growth path in order to achieve
this GHG mitigation potential, envisioning 100 projects globally by 2020
and over 3000 projects by 2050.”
IEA (2009) Technology Roadmap: Carbon Capture and Storage 2009. Paris, International Energy
Agency, p. 4.
“By 2020, investment worth USD 27 billion will be needed to fund about 60
early large-scale (industrial and fuel transformation sector) projects”.
IEA/UNIDO (2011) Technology Roadmap: Carbon Capture and Storage in Industrial Applications.
Paris, p. 5.
 But reality has not met expectations – announcements but a lack of
implementation
7. Januar 2016
Folie 9
Non-European large scale Power Plant CCS projects
Only one in operation: world's first coal-fired power plant retrofitted with CCS; others with uncertain future
Source: https://sequestration.mit.edu/
Oxy = Oxyfuel Combustion Capture, Pre = Pre Combustion Capture, Post = Post Combustion Capture, EOR = Enhanced Oil Recovery, EGR = Enhanced Gas Recovery, Saline = Saline
Formation, Depleted Gas = Depleted Gas Reservoir, Depleted Oil = Depleted Oil Reservoir, TBD = To Be Decided
7. Januar 2016
Folie 10
CCS power projects in Europe
Source: https://sequestration.mit.edu/
Projects were chosen as the two CCS demonstration projects to progress to the next stage of the Government’s CCS Commercialisation
Competition funding. A final investment decision by the end of 2015 is conceivable, £1 billion capital funding then could be expected in early in 2016;
but no final decision about the future of the projects is made. Will most projects come out from the planning phase?
7. Januar 2016
Institute for Energy and Climate Research
System Analysis and Technology Evaluation
Folie 11
Cancelled and inactive CCS projects in Europe
19 projects are cancelled or on hold in other parts of the world, mostly in the US (13)
Source: https://sequestration.mit.edu/
7. Januar 2016
Folie 12
But: CCS-Projects with focus on R&D and EOR
Source: https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/index_capture.html
Oxy = Oxyfuel Combustion Capture, Pre = Pre Combustion Capture, Post = Post Combustion Capture, EOR = Enhanced Oil Recovery, EGR = Enhanced
Gas Recovery, Saline = Saline Formation, Depleted Gas = Depleted Gas Reservoir, Depleted Oil = Depleted Oil Reservoir, TBD = To Be Decided
7. Januar 2016
Folie 13
Commercial EOR Projects using
Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide
Source: https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/index_capture.html
EOR = Enhanced Oil Recovery
7. Januar 2016
Folie 14
Worldwide: Key large-scale power projects with CCS
7. Januar 2016
Folie 15
world's first coal-fired power plant retrofitted with CCS
Reasons why CCS failed to come up to expectations










Even if the application of CCS is essential part of climate protection strategies +
risk presented by pipeline transport is roughly comparable to that of natural gas transport +
safety and reliability of on- and off-shore storage has been demonstrated on at least a research
scale
There is still a need to demonstrate CCS feasibility by means of large demonstration plants,
sufficient load flexibility, and commercial availability.
CO2 utilization (Carbon Capture & Use, CCU) does yet not offer sufficient potential as a
replacement for CO2 storage, although it may become significant as part of supply chains of raw
materials for industry.
The electricity generation costs will rise considerably and the CO2 avoidance costs (electricity
sector and industry) are far higher than the current CO2 allowance prices in the EU.
Investment incentives will only be present with a significantly higher long-term allowance price or
with some kind of financial subsidies.
Due to higher fuel requirements and transport, CO2 reduction is frequently implemented at the
expense of other environmental impacts (e.g. eutrophication).
There is hardly acceptance among the public in many European countries for CO2 storage on
land or below the ocean floor, and the perception of CCS as a “risk technology” has taken root in
large parts the population.
Many countries have no CO2 reduction policy, which is a necessary prerequisite for implementing
CCS.
7. Januar 2016
Folie 16
CCS risks and challenges
Source: Tomski, P.: Carbon
Capture & Storage, Global CCS
Institute, October 2015
7. Januar 2016
Folie 17
Example – the case of Germany: No CCS despite a
CCS Act
Potential
strorage areas
Potential pipelines
(cancelled)
CCS power plant
(cancelled)
7. Januar 2016
Local/political resistance successful
Other strorage
areas Local/political
resistance
successful
Demo plant
Jänschwalde by
Vattefall, part of the
EU EEPR funding,
cancelled in 2013
Source image:
http://www.eurosolar.de/de/index.php?option=com_
wrapper&Itemid=289; [01. 07. 2009]
Folie 18
The German CCS Act makes CCS highly unlikely
Legal situation:
 EU Directive on Carbon Capture and Storage was implemented into
German law (2012).
 A controversial political process with different and unusual lines of
conflict - between, but also within parties both at the federal and state
level, between federal States (Länder) and the federal government,
between NGOs and scientific advisory boards: > majority anti-CCS,
CCS act excessively restrictive.
Political/economic situation:
 Local- and NGO-opposition, the anti-storage attitude of most Federal
State governments and State parties +
 anti-coal (in particular lignite phase out) policy, gaining strength +
 Low carbon prices (EU ETS), low electricity prices
 makes it very unlikely that a CO2 onshore storage project could be
realized
 No relevant debate about process-related CCS from industry or
biomass-CCS
 Not a single CCS-demonstration project is realized in Germany
7. Januar 2016
Folie 19
General attitudes to CCS / pipelines / storage in Germany
CO2 transport via pipeline
CO2 onshore storage
CO2 offshore storage
CCS in general
General attitude
Mean1
SD2
3.9
1.6
3.3
1.7
3.6
1.8
3.8
1,7
1
Scale from 1 (= very negative) to 7 (= very positive).
2 SD = Standard deviation.
Data sources: IEK-STE, representative for Germany 2015 (n=1000)
7. Januar 2016
Folie 20
Summary on international cooperation in the field of CCS

The key actors of international cooperation are governments, industry and academia
that cooperate in the framework of international organizations, scientific
organizations, and R&D networks.

CCS was recognized as a climate change mitigation option after the release of the
IPCC SR on CCS and is still recognized as an important option by the IPCC.

The international organizations address the deployment of CCS by means of goalsetting, roadmapping activities, and inclusion of CCS in the existing mechanisms of
international climate change mitigation.

The international R&D networks focus on knowledge sharing and contribute to
technical concepts‘ definition for regulatory purposes.
But - limited outreach ? - Local/political resistance against CCS, in particular storage;
CCS high costs and other challenges.


But - better prospects for CCS ahead?
7. Januar 2016
Folie 21
1. National & international activities continue
Countries with a focus on CCS technologies & policies:
•
•
USA, United Kingdom, Canada
China, Saudi Arabia, Australia … ?
IEA CCS Roadmap 2013 stresses:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) will be a critical component in a portfolio of low-carbon
energy technologies if governments undertake ambitious measures to combat climate
change.
The individual component technologies required for capture, transport and storage are
generally well understood and, in some cases, technologically mature.
Governments and industry must ensure that the incentive and regulatory frameworks are
in place to deliver upwards of 30 operating CCS projects by 2020 across a range of
processes and industrial sectors.
CCS is not only about electricity generation. Almost half (45%) of the CO2 captured
between 2015 and 2050 is from industrial applications.
Given their rapid growth in energy demand, the largest deployment of CCS will need to
occur in non-Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
countries.
This decade is critical for moving deployment of CCS beyond the demonstration phase.
7. Januar 2016
Institute for Energy and Climate Research
System Analysis and Technology EvaluationFolie
22
2. Industrial applications and CCS are an issue
• Energy‐intensive industries account for a
significant part of global carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions.
• CCS is the only option to decarbonize
many industrial sectors.
• CCS in industrial applications requires
more attention from policy makers.
• Demonstration of CCS in industrial
applications is not happening fast enough.
• Policies must consider the global
competitiveness of industrial sectors.
7. Januar 2016
Folie 23
IEA CCS 2014 - key actions for CCS success
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduce financial support mechanisms for demonstration and early
deployment of CCS to drive private financing of projects.
Implement policies that encourage storage exploration, characterization and
development for CCS projects.
Develop national laws and regulations as well as provisions for multilateral
finance that effectively require new-build, base-load, fossil-fuel power
generation capacity to be CCS-ready.
Prove capture systems at pilot scale in industrial applications where CO2
capture has not yet been demonstrated.
Significantly increase efforts to improve understanding among the public and
stakeholders of CCS technology and the importance of its deployment.
Reduce the cost of electricity from power plants equipped with capture through
continued technology development and use of highest possible efficiency power
generation cycles.
• Encourage efficient development of CO2 transport infrastructure by anticipating
locations of future demand centres and future volumes of CO2.
7. Januar 2016
Folie 24
Selected References
IPCC:
IPCC, Carbon Capture and Storage, SR 2005, https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srccs/srccs_wholereport.pdf.
IPCC, Fifth Assessment Report Report, Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change, http://mitigation2014.org/.
Roadmaps:
IEA (2009) Technology Roadmap. Carbon capture and Storage. http://www.iea.org/papers/2009/CCS_Roadmap.pdf.
CSLF (2013) Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum Technology roadmap. http://www.cslforum.org/publications/index.html?cid=nav_publications.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2013) Comunication on the Future of Carbon Capture and Storage in Europe. Brussels, EU-Commission, 27.3.2013, COM(2013) 180 final.
IEA (2013) Technology Roadmap: Carbon Capture and Storage 2013, Paris, International Energy Agency.
IEA/UNIDO (2011) Technology Roadmap: Carbon Capture and Storage in Industrial Applications. Paris.
Policy & regulation, acceptance:
IEA (2012): Carbon capture and storage - Legal and Regulatory Review, Edition 3. OECD/IEA, Paris.
IEA (2012) Policy Strategy for Carbon Capture and Storage. Paris, OECD/IEA
KHESHGI, H., DE CONINCK, H. & KESSELS, J. (2012) Carbon dioxide capture and storage: Seven years after the IPCC special report. Mitigation and Adaptation
Strategies for Global Change, 17:6, 563-567.
KUCKSHINRICHS, W.; HAKE, J.-F. (Eds.) Cabon Capture, Storage and Use - Technical, Economic, Environmental and Societal Perspectives. Springer International
Publishing, Cham, 2014 (German case study).
L‫׳‬ORANGE SEIGO, S., DOHLE, S. & SIEGRIST, M. (2014) Public perception of CCS: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 38:0, 848-863.
DIXON, T., McCOY, S. T. & HAVERCROFT, I. (2015) Legal and Regulatory Developments on CCS. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 40, 431-448.
VAN EGMOND, S. & HEKKERT, M. P. (2015) Analysis of a prominent carbon storage project failure – The role of the national government as initiator and decision maker
in the Barendrecht case. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 34, 1-11.
KEMPER, J. (2015) Biomass and carbon dioxide capture and storage: A review. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 40, 401-430.
ASHWORTH, P., WADE, S., REINER, D. & LIANG, X. (2015) Developments in public communications on CCS. Intern. Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 40, 449-458.
CCS and “negative emissions”:
KRIEGLER, E., EDENHOFER, O., REUSTER, L., LUDERER, G. & KLEIN, D. (2013) Is atmospheric carbon dioxide removal a game changer for climate change mitigation?
Climatic Change, 1-13.
CCS in CDM:
DECISION 7/CMP.6 (2010) Carbon dioxide capture and storage in geological formations as clean development mechanism project activities & following decisions,
https://cdm.unfccc.int/about/ccs/index.html.
CCS global status updates:
IEA/CSLF (2010) IEA/CSLF report to the Muskoka 2010 G8 summit - Carbon capture and storage - Progress and next steps. OECD/IEA, CSLF, prepared with the cooperation of the Global CCS Institute, http://www.iea.org/papers/2010/ccs_g8.pdf.
IEA (2014) CCS 2014: What lies in store for CCS? Paris, OECD/IEA.
GCCSI (2015) The global status of CCS: 2015 summary report, Canberra, Global CCS Institute.
International cooperation in the field of CCS:
BÄCKSTRAND, K. (2008) Accountability of networked climate governance: The rise of transnational climate partnerships. Global Environmental Politics, 8:3.
DE CONINCK, H. & BÄCKSTRAND, K. (2011) An International Relations perspective on the global politics of carbon dioxide capture and storage. Global Environmental
Change, 21:2, 368-378.
DE CONINCK, H., FISCHER, C., NEWELL, R. G. & UENO, T. (2008) International technology-oriented agreements to address climate change. Energy Policy, 36, 335-356.
SCHENK, O. (2013) Interest Mediation and Policy Formulation in the European Union. Influence of Transnational Technology-Oriented Agreements on European Policy in
the Field of Carbon Capture and Storage. Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Jülich.
Hake, J.-Fr., Schenk, O. (2014) International Cooperation in Support of CCS, in: KUCKSHINRICHS, W.; HAKE, J.-F. (Eds.) Cabon Capture, Storage and Use, pp. 311-327.
7. Januar 2016
Institute for Energy and Climate Research
System Analysis and Technology Evaluation
Folie 25
Thank you for the attention!
Questions?
[email protected]
7. Januar 2016
Institute for Energy and Climate Research
System Analysis and Technology Evaluation
Folie 26