Carbon Capture And Storage Policy Research Articles

Exploring paths and innovation in Norwegian carbon capture and storage policy

AbstractNorway, a significant petroleum producer and exporter, has been a frontrunner within policies for carbon capture and storage (CCS). As CCS is recognized as a key technology for achieving the Paris climate policy targets, there is a clear need for more knowledge about how to design successful projects. Norway's first CCS policy initiative, the ambitious Mongstad project, was the result of a political compromise that was imposed from above, basically with one single company in control. The project was largely seen as a failure and was terminated in 2013. However, instead of dropping ambitions for developing CCS projects, the authorities launched a new policy soon afterwards. This policy evolved with the differently organized Longship CCS project as its core. Using a path‐dependency perspective, we find that established institutional structures from the Mongstad project, combined with national interests and expertise, help to explain the fundamental continuity of CCS policies in Norway. This explanation is supplemented by a policy‐learning perspective, which helps to explain policy changes and differences between the two flagship CCS projects. The Longship project developed gradually ‘from below’; linked project responsibilities close to competences and interests; dealt with key risks separately to reduce the inherent complexity; and organized clear requirements up front. We hold that this way of designing CCS projects is of relevance to other countries considering CCS projects. Furthermore, by placing the Norwegian case in context of the development of EU and international climate policy we contribute a theoretical framework relevant also for subsequent research.

Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US

Motivated by ongoing partisan division in support of climate change policy, this paper investigates whether, among self-identifying liberals and conservatives, the mere presence of a non-transformative climate policy such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), lowers support for a renewable energy (RE) policy. To interrogate this question, we use a survey experiment asking 2374 respondents about their support for a RE policy when presented with the RE policy alone, and when presented alongside a CCS policy whose funding and implementation leverage independent funding sources. We find that among conservatives, the presence of a CCS policy lowers support for RE. Furthermore, despite the lack of apparent political party cues, when presented with the policy-pair, conservatives tend to view the RE policy in more partisan terms, specifically, less supported by Republicans. Additional experimental conditions with explicit party cues reinforce this interpretation. These findings suggest that the triggering of partisan perceptions even without explicit partisan cues—what we call political anchoring—might be a key impediment to bipartisan support of climate solutions in the U.S. context.

The Application of the Environment Act 2021 Principles to Carbon Capture and Storage

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a new technology considered to have the potential to decarbonise economies. However, nationally and internationally the use of CCS has also been raising concerns about its potential global risks and adverse impacts on the environment. CCS was part of the discussions at the fourth United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) in March 2019 and in side-events in the 26th UN Climate Change Conference that took place in Glasgow in November 2021. The UK Government aims to deploy CCS at scale during the 2030s, subject to cost reduction. At the same time, the UK Government has recently enacted the Environment Act 2021, which provides a set of five environmental principles: the integration principle, the principle of preventative action, the precautionary principle, the rectification at source principle and the polluter pays principle. This work seeks to analyse the application of the UK environmental law principles to carbon capture and storage policies in the United Kingdom and its balance with other considerations. Given the concerns surrounding the use of CCS, the debate about its legality may arise in the United Kingdom and in other countries. To this end, this paper initially carries out a systematic review of CCS policy documents to discover the policy considerations that support the development of CCS. It then examines the application of the UK environmental law principles to CCS initiatives and its balance with other considerations, such as reduction of carbon emissions, security of energy supply, economic growth and technological leadership. In doing so, this paper aims at contributing to the debate surrounding recent technological developments that have been utilised to help address climate change and some of the legal challenges emerging through the use of CCS under UK environmental law.

Carbon capture penetration in Mexico's 2050 horizon: A sustainability assessment of Mexican CCS policy

Mexico is expected to become the 6th largest economy in 2050. According to EDGAR database, in 2019 it was the largest polluting country in Latin America and the 13th in the world, regarding Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. Lately, the new Administration has shifted its energy strategy from a renewable path into the reinforcement of conventional energy sources. In this context, new policies have to be deployed to meet the Paris Agreement goals. In such scenario, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology may contribute reducing CO2 emissions as a way to transform Mexico into a low-carbon economy in the long term. However, the construction and operation and maintenance phases will embody environmental impacts that should be considered. This paper assesses the carbon capture investments required for the expected increasing capacity of natural gas power plants up to 2050 and their impact on production, value added, employment, climate change, acidification, water consumption and human health effects. An environmentally extended multi-regional the input-output analysis (EMRIO) is used to address Mexican policies for the period 2020–2050. Results show that the investment in capture technologies in Mexico allows a net reduction of the carbon emissions in Mexico that is pursued at a low cost (33 EUR/tCO2). This mitigation policy has important additional co-benefits in terms of domestic value added and employment creation of medium and high qualification. As for the environmental impacts, most of them are produced in the power plant due to the burning of the natural gas consumed.

Social science for the next decade of carbon capture and storage

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) has been an object of social science research for nearly two decades now. However, CCS has moved beyond coal-fired electricity, and its roles in industrial decarbonization and atmospheric carbon dioxide removal are newly valued. Is the earlier social science research on CCS applicable to the current moment, or has the context and the object of inquiry changed? This paper assesses whether existing findings are fit-for-purpose, arguing that there are some useful insights, but they have not been applied well to CCS policy and development. The early period of social science research also faces topical and methodological limitations. The paper identifies four areas for social science research for this decade of broader CCS applications — researching CCS in the context of decarbonization, tradeoffs, and a just transition; shifting the focus from “whether” to “how” questions around deployment, including benefits and environmental justice dimensions; exploring new approaches to public engagement globally; and researching how understandings of CCS evolve within the current social media and information landscape.

Carbon capture and storage as a strategic reserve against China's CO2 emissions

China has experienced economic boom over the last four decades, along with high greenhouse gas emissions because of the extensive application of fossil fuels, especially coal. To mitigate global warming, China, as one of the fastest developing economies, made decisions of peak carbon emissions by 2030 and become carbon neutral by 2060. These decisions are particularly challenging for China to keep a sustainable economy while reducing carbon emissions by decreasing the use of fossil fuels, where economic growth remains the top priority of society. Energy efficiency, however, is unlikely to improve much due to ceiling effect. Carbon capture and storage (CCS), a technology that prevents CO2 emitted by coal-burning factories from being delivered into the environment, is one of the best options available with large-scale capacity for China to obviously reduce CO2 emissions from factory sectors in short time. This work discussed the potential application of CCS technology to mitigate CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels, particularly coal-fired power plants, in China. We outlined the current CCS technology status, the obstacles and opportunities for application CCS in China, with emphasis on the market mechanisms and possible strategies to promote CCS in China, thus paving the way for China's future CCS policy formulation.

Optimization and analysis of a bioelectricity generation supply chain under routine and disruptive uncertainty and carbon mitigation policies

AbstractIncreasing greenhouse gas emissions and negative environmental consequences have raised worldwide attention to ecological issues. The development of carbon regulations (CRs) beside carbon capture and storage (CCS) systems is part of carbon mitigation policies (CMPs), which are following in recent years to control and manage carbon liberation. Along with environemtal policies, the utilization of renewable energy resources have been promoted significantly. However, the economic opportunities for renewable energy development considering CMPs have not addressed extensively. In this study, a stochastic mathematical programming model has been presented to minimize cost and downside risk (DSR) of the bioelectricity generation supply chain considering the pre‐ and postdisaster conditions. The role of several CMPs on the economic behavior of the system has been analyzed by investigating the potential uncertainties on material availability, material quality, and consumer demand. To consider disruption effects, the postdisaster stage has been classified into several substages including damage, recovery, and back to the sustainability stages. Mississippi State after the Katrina Hurricane is addressed as a case study to examine the performance of the proposed model. The results demonstrated that the occurrence of disruptive uncertainties creates 8,978,502 $, 8,864,335 $ and 8,884,055 $ as the DSR, under carbon tax policy (CTP), carbon offset policy (COP), and CCS, respectively. The effect of disruptive scenario with a 15% reduction of resource has led to the greatest postdisaster supply chain costs in comparison with other scenarios. Although the financial analysis showed CTP has the greatest DSR after the occurrence of disaster, this policy has the most investment attractions, as well as COP, with the internal rate of return (IRR) of 9%. While implementing the CCS policy with the IRR of 2% creates 7% missed opportunity costs compared with other CMPs.

Understanding public support for carbon capture and storage policy: The roles of social capital, stakeholder perceptions, and perceived risk/benefit of technology

As climate change mitigation technologies emerge, there is an increased need to understand public support for the technology and the policies that will shape or thwart its evolution. Of particular importance are the communities most directly impacted. The current study focuses on a random sample of 970 adults in eight counties within the oil and gas industry-reliant region of southeast Texas in order to explore support for carbon capture and storage (CCS), which is a climate change mitigation technology that has seen a great deal of investment in that area. Results of ordinary least squares (OLS) regression analysis and general linear modeling (GLM) suggest that policy support –individual support and perceived community support – is dependent on perceived risks and benefits of CCS, community-focused perceptions (including Bourdieu's social capital), and perceptions about stakeholders (trustworthiness and expected role in CCS policy making). One key takeaway is that social capital was both a predictor and moderator in community-level CCS support and helped explain the hidden effects of risk perception of CCS and CCS knowledge on community-level CCS support. Implications for public policy and stakeholder relations are discussed.

Getting ready for carbon capture and storage in the iron and steel sector in China: Assessing the value of capture readiness

Abstract China's steel sector, contributing 40% of world steel production, are moving the plants out of highly-populated areas in China. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an important technology to achieve a deep reduction of emissions in steel plants. Given by high cost and lack of policy incentive in deploying the CCS process, there has been a lack of progress in CCS within the steel sector in China. Capture readiness is a design concept to ease future CCS retrofit and avoid the carbon lock-in effect in steel plants. Capture Readiness design requires moderate upfront investment, i.e. less than 0.5% additional capital expenditure, but could easily enable the plant to be retrofitted with CCS technologies in their lifetime. The paper develops a novel linear programming model to assess the economic cost of Capture Readiness design in a generic steel plant in China. The Baowu Steel Zhanjiang project was used as a reference plant to develop the generic steel plant for the model. Through a Monte Carlo simulation, the results show that the economic cost of making new steel plants in capture readiness for 0.5 million tonnes capture is CNY 65 million (USD 9.5 million) in a conservative 5% carbon price growth rate scenario. The paper found the value of flexibility brought by capture readiness design is significant and is equal to approximately 15% of initial capital investment. The economically viable chance of retrofitting steel plants with CCS technologies in the lifetime is 49%. In an uncertainty analysis, for a 6% growth rate of carbon price, the option value could be increased to CNY 145 million while the probability of retrofit increases to 79%. China's CCS policy should consider a requirement for newly built steel plants to adopt capture readiness design to capture the significant economic value and ease emissions reduction in the iron and steel sector in the long term.

Those who care about CCS—Results from a Japanese survey on public understanding of CCS-

In order to assess the present status of the general public’s awareness and opinion on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and to analyze attributes of groups who have different opinions on CCS, a Japanese social survey was conducted in 2015. The results of the survey showed that the majority of the Japanese general public did not know much about CCS but were interested in CCS without any opinion on CCS as a part of climate policy portfolio. In terms of implementation of CCS, the Not in My Backyard (NIMBY) perception on CCS influenced opinions, while about half of the respondents did not have clear opinions on a hypothetical plan of implementing offshore CCS near their home.Respondents were categorized to four groups, who were consistently positive, consistently negative, changeable or fundamentally indifferent to CCS, and the points of communication for each group were discussed to get a consensus on CCS policy and implementation. The survey found that some of the characteristics of indifferent people toward CCS had a low level of consciousness regarding concerns on climate change issues and politically passive on national political issues. Required information to communicate CCS issues for each group were identified by the analysis. The results of our analysis highlighted the importance of informing the Japanese general public about the technological maturity, positive and negative impacts or risks of CCS, and the necessity of climate change mitigation action in communicating the issues surrounding CCS implementation.

Fighting sustainability challenges on two fronts: Material efficiency and the emerging carbon capture and storage technologies

Technological and regulatory responses to large-scale environmental threats, such as depletion of the natural resources and climate change, tend to focus on one issue at time. Emerging carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies that are in different stages of development offer a case that demonstrates this dilemma. This article approximates the implications of two emerging CCS applications on existing steel mill’s CO2 emissions and its use of material resources. The evaluated applications are based on the mineralization method and the comparative case represents two versions of a geological CCS method. The results of the evaluation indicate that if technical bottleneck issues related to CO2 sequestration with mineralization can be solved, it can be possible to achieve a similar CO2 reduction performance with mineralization-based CCS applications as with more conventional CCS applications. If the CO2 capturing potential of mineralization-based applications could be taken into use, it could also enable the significant improvement of material efficiency of industrial operations. Urgent problem hampering the development of mineralization-based CCS applications is that the policy regimes related to CCS especially in the European Union (EU) do not recognize mineralization as a CCS method. Article suggests that the focus in the future evaluations and in policy should not be directed only on CO2 sequestration capacity of CCS applications. Similarly important is to consider their implications on material efficiency. Article also outlines modifications to the EU’s CCS policy in terms of the formal terminology.

The Evolution of European CCS Policy

The European Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) industry is still grasping for an effective policy structure which will support deployment of commercial CCS projects. This paper will consider the current context of CCS policy given three significant developments: (a) the agreement in 2014 for a technology neutral 2030 EU emissions reduction target; (b) a binding commitment at COP21 in Paris, Dec 2015, for a global emissions reduction target; (c) the collapse of the UK's CCS Commercialisation Programme in Nov 2015.The period 2010-2015 saw continued stagnation in the European CCS industry, with a series of projects proposed but then subsequently cancelled. This hints as three problems (1) an industry which is weak in communicating why CCS is important, and failed to engage a wider stakeholder base; (2) incumbent governments which are not willing to fund the initially high costs of the first CCS projects; (3) weak market based structures which force industrial consortia to rely on government subsidy, thus leaving projects vulnerable to political forces.The tension within the UK's Commercialisation Programme could still offer lessons for other potential CCS projects in Europe; and inform policy developments at the UK and European level. Namely (i) payment flows between the emitter / capture plant to the transport & storage provider, and the risk apportionment between those partners; (ii) the cost-benefit of oversized infrastructure and the challenges of a first project to finance the bulk of these costs.A recent report to the UK government on CCS recommended state-owned companies delivering all aspects of CCS, but such a recommendation makes it all too easy for a centre-right party focussed on smaller government and tight expenditure to dismiss CCS as “too difficult”. An alternative would be normal commercial and market arrangements for the power & capture section; and a regulated monopoly for the transport & storage infrastructure, backed by the state for risk and liabilities.

How the global and national levels interrelate in climate policymaking: Foreign Policy Analysis and the case of Carbon Capture Storage in Norway's foreign policy

States struggle to develop adequate climate change mitigation policies, especially when national energy interests conflict with collective environmental concerns. It is therefore crucial to understand how viable solutions may find political support on these terms. As one such case, this paper examines Norway's explicit foreign policy to promote Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as a mitigation measure. I suggest that a Foreign Policy Analysis framework with a norm-centered constructivist focus allows for new insights into how climate policies function as balancing strategies between external normative pressures and important domestic concerns. It reveals how Norway's CCS policy represents an extraordinary effort to bridge seemingly contradictory agendas. The Norwegian CCS case highlights how a state may engage in innovative foreign political engineering to promote solutions to its international climate commitments on terms that fit national energy needs. It shows that climate political success may depend on successfully linking the international and domestic levels by simultaneously appealing to established norms within each system.

A large national survey of public perceptions of CCS technology in China

The success of a new technology (like carbon capture and storage (CCS)) not only depends on sound technical and engineering practice but also involves societal, political and economic factors. High public acceptance is viewed as one of the critical factors. To date, there has been little systematic research into public communication and engagement in regard to CCS in China. A national survey on public perception (but biased towards the views of the educated elite of the Chinese population) of CCS technology was conducted from July 2013 to December 2013. The objectives of the survey were to assess the following issues: public understanding of the climate sciences, society’s knowledge and acceptance of low emission technologies (especially of CCS technology), public interests and concerns about the positive and negative impacts of CCS technology, and public attitudes towards CCS policies supported by the government. Finally, high-level suggestions for mechanisms to raise public understanding and frame the social acceptance on CCS technology in China are proposed based on a SWOT analysis.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) policy for China: Implications from Some Representative Countries and Regions

In recent years carbon capture and storage (CCS) emerged as a promising low-carbon technology to tackle climate change by storing the captured CO2 underground. Varied countries and regions have promulgated or proposed specific CCS policies to accommodate with CCS development in their jurisdictions. However, CCS policies seem to be in a vacancy in China. Presented in this paper is a general overview for CCS policies in some representative countries and regions including the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and Australia that are making substantial contributions to the establishment of CCS policy framework in their own jurisdictions as well as their implications for construction of CCS policy framework in China. CCS policies in China are also reviewed and compared with those of the typical economic entities in detail. The result demonstrates that prescriptive standards and regulations, economic incentives as well as supportive measures are not sufficient to smooth CCS deployment in China. Policy recommendations are thus raised to guide CCS progress in China, with a suggested policy package including enactment of CCS regulatory framework, multi-source funding mechanism, elaborated measures to raise public awareness of CCS. The outcome has essential policy implications supportive to a further expansion of CCS deployment in China.

The Role of Carbon Capture and Sequestration Policies for Climate Change Mitigation

This paper takes the ‘policy failure’ in establishing a global carbon price for efficient emissions reduction as a starting point and analyzes to what extent technology policies can be a reasonable second-best approach. From a supply-side perspective, carbon capture and storage (CCS) policies differ substantially from renewable energy policies: they increase fossil resource demand and simultaneously lower emissions. We analyze CCS and renewable energy policies in a numerical dynamic general equilibrium model for settings of imperfect or missing carbon prices. We find that in contrast to renewable energy policies, CCS policies are not always capable of reducing emissions in the long run. If feasible, CCS policies can carry lower social costs compared to renewable energy policies, in particular when second-best policies are only employed temporally. In case fossil resources are abundant and renewable energy costs low, renewable energy policies perform better. Our results indicate that a pure CCS policy or a pure renewable energy policy carry their own specific risks of missing the environmental target. A smart combination of both, however, can be a robust and low-cost temporary second-best policy.

The foreign policy of carbon sinks: Carbon capture and storage as foreign policy in Norway

Abstract Norway is among a handful of countries with an explicit policy to promote carbon capture and storage (CCS) at both national and international levels. This paper investigates the internal and external driving forces behind Norway's efforts to advance CCS as a global climate change mitigation option. The ambition is twofold: First, a mapping of Norway's public CCS policy with emphasis on the externally directed efforts is offered based on interviews and document studies. Second, it is explained how CCS foreign policy was chosen as a prioritized means of climate change mitigation policy in Norway. The study is conducted with the application of Foreign Policy Analysis. From the outside-in perspective, the international climate regime is emphasized. From the inside-out perspective, bureaucratic politics is in focus. It is found that the winning coalition behind the domestic CCS agenda also directed CCS foreign policy design and implementation. The CCS foreign policy offers a means to fulfil Norway's regime obligations on terms that harmonize the potential conflict of maintaining a political economy reliant on petroleum exports with a credible climate change mitigation policy. It is shown how technology R&D for global use has been a key ingredient in this context. It is also explored how the CCS foreign policy was materialized with the means of official development assistance and other funding mechanisms.

UK media representations of Carbon Capture and Storage

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a climate change mitigation technology which has had a rather chequered history in British policy making and in the British public sphere. This article deals with the neglected topic of representations of CCS in the British media and their possible impact on public perceptions and public policy. Public perception of CCS is shaped in part by the media which provide tools for making sense of complex technological and political issues such as CCS. This article compares articles on CCS in two UK newspapers, one national (“The Times”) and one regional (“The Aberdeen Press and Journal”) in 2011, a year during which some of the last battles over CCS demonstration projects were fought. It applies frame and metaphor analysis to a corpus of 150 articles. Findings reveal that during 2011 CCS coverage moved through a cycle of hype and disillusionment, with both newspapers reaching a trough of disappointment at the end of 2011. It will be difficult to reignite interest in CCS in this context, both in terms of media and public attention, and in terms of policy and investment. Regional confidence in national CCS policy in particular will be difficult to recover.

Modelling the investment in carbon capture retrofits of pulverized coal-fired plants

This paper focuses on the investment decision to retrofit an existing supercritical pulverized coal (SCPC) unit with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. We establish a valuation model with discrete sequential investment decision-making based on real options theory, and we consider the following uncertainty factors: electricity price, carbon price, CCS investment cost and CO2 additional O&M cost. We also take CCS operation flexibility into account. We solve the model using the least squares Monte Carlo (LSM) method. We employ four indicators—cost saving value, investment risk, emission abatement amount and average capture rate—to evaluate the investment decision to retrofit China's existing SCPC unit with CCS. The results illustrate the following: (1) CO2 capture (additional O&M) cost can be the most significant factor that will affect CCS retrofit investment; (2) the existing level of CCS technology and policy framework cannot support the plant owner to retrofit the existing SCPC unit with CCS; and (3) the carbon price or capture subsidy must be at a high level to control the CCS retrofit investment risk such that it is less than 5%. Our proposed model is most suitable for plant owners' CCS retrofit decisions.

Analysing Uncertainties for CCS: From Historical Analogues to Future Deployment Pathways in the UK

Whilst carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies are now in the demonstration phase, they are still characterised by a range of technical, economic, policy, social and legal uncertainties. This paper presents the results of an interdisciplinary research project funded by the UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC). The aim of the project was to analyse the main uncertainties facing potential investors in CCS and policy makers wishing to support these technologies through demonstration to commercial deployment. The paper presents a framework for the analysis of these uncertainties, and applies this framework to nine analogue case studies of CCS. These case studies have focused on historical developments in technologies and/or policy frameworks where one or more of these uncertainties has been prominent – and have, in most cases, been partly resolved. The paper also shows applies the insights from these historical case studies to develop three potential pathways for CCS deployment in the UK over the period to 2030. Finally, the paper concludes with some implications for CCS policies and strategies.