With fossil fuels expected to provide the bulk of the world’s primary energy needs for the foreseeable future – despite the rapid rise of renewables – carbon capture and storage (CCS) is seen by many as an essential technology if we are to keep global warming within the 2°C limit that scientists recommend. “For many industrial processes, it’s the only thing we have.”
Few energy issues divide opinion as strongly as carbon capture and storage. The believers see CCS as an essential – and credible – technology for the mitigation of climate change; the sceptics remain unconvinced that it will ever be commercially viable and caution that the money and effort being devoted to CCS would be better spent elsewhere. What is certain is that progress in deployment of CCS has been much slower than many had hoped.
In its 2008 World Energy Outlook, the International Energy Agency for the first time described a scenario in which long-term atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentration was limited to 450 parts per million (ppm) of CO2 equivalent, consistent with a 2°C increase in global warming. This is the level that scientists have told us would give us a reasonable chance of averting catastrophic impacts from climate change. In that 450 Policy Scenario, the IEA envisaged 350 GW of global CCS capacity by 2030.
More than six years on, the reality is that only one commercial-scale facility has begun operating at a power station – a coal-fired plant in Canada with an output of 110 MW that came on stream last October. At that rate of progress, the trajectory of CCS deployment is much closer to what the IEA projected in its 2008 Reference Scenario – which was “negligible” CCS capacity by 2030.
This slow rate of progress is a big worry, for three reasons.
- Firstly, despite the rise of renewables, long-term energy outlooks published by the World Energy Council, the IEA, BP, ExxonMobil and others all agree that humankind will still be relying on fossil fuels – coal, oil and natural gas – for most of its energy supply decades from now.
- Secondly, these organisations, along with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), agree that limiting GHG emissions will be much more expensive without CCS.
- Thirdly, some go as far as to argue that, without CCS, limiting global warming to 2°C will be impossible.
No end in sight
One of them is says Andrew Purvis, General Manager for Europe, the Middle East and Africa at the Global CCS Institute (GCCSI). “Global fossil fuel consumption is continuing to increase – despite massive investment in low carbon-solutions,” notes Purvis. “In 1990 fossil fuels contributed 81% of our primary energy demand, according to the IEA. Between 1990 and 2010 we had 20 years of really strong effort in decarbonisation, strong investment in renewables. Yet in 2010 fossil fuels still contributed 81% of primary energy demand.”
In the US another two large-scale CCS power projects are due to start up. Another nine large-scale power projects are close to reaching a final investment decision
Purvis adds that current projections offer little respite from fossil fuel dependency. In its latest World Energy Outlook, the IEA projects a fossil-fuel share of primary energy of 74% by 2040 in its central scenario. Even in the latest 450 Scenario the share is 59%. He also points to the progress that has been made in getting CCS into the operation and construction phases, as detailed in a GCCSI report published towards the end of last year.
According to the report, as of last October there were 13 large-scale CCS projects in operation around the world and another nine under construction. Of the projects that are operating, most are in sectors where CO2 is routinely separated from other gases, such as natural gas processing, or is produced in a relatively pure stream, such as in fertiliser or ethanol production. So far the only large-scale project in sectors where CO2 capture is more challenging – such as electricity generation and process industries such as iron, steel and cement – is the Boundary Dam Unit 3 coal-fired power plant started up by Canada’s SaskPower last October.
More on the way
In the US another two large-scale power projects are due to start up: the Kemper County Energy Facility in Mississippi in 2015, and the Petra Nova Carbon Capture project in Texas in 2016. Another nine large-scale power projects are close to reaching a final investment decision. “Given the right conditions,” says the report, “all of these projects could be in operation by around the 2020 timeframe.”
Also under construction is the world’s first iron and steel project with large-scale CCS, the Abu Dhabi CCS project at the Emirates Steel project in the United Arab Emirates. However, it remains the only large-scale project planned for the iron and steel industry and none are yet planned in the cement industry.
“There are many industrial processes for which we don’t have alternatives for mitigation”
The issue of applying CCS to process industries is a crucial one. “There are many processes for which we don’t have alternatives for mitigation,” says Joan MacNaughton, Executive Chair of the World Energy Council’s World Energy Trilemma work. “So unless we capture the CO2 we’re still going to be emitting those greenhouse gases.” Industrial applications account for around a quarter of energy-related CO2 emissions, according to the IEA.
In the UK, the Green Alliance, an independent think tank, published a report at the end of March which makes exactly this point: it says hat CCS is the only technology available to decarbonise heavy industry (i.e. chemical plants, refineries, cement factories, steel plants, etc.) The report makes the case for setting up “industrial CCS clusters” in which factories would combine their CCS efforts. In the power sector, the UK government has recently committed funding to two CCS demonstration projects: the White Rose coal plant in Yorkshire and the Peterhead gas plant in Aberdeenshire.
Existing coal
So what about the argument that CCS is an unfortunate distraction?
“People need to look at the evidence,” says MacNaughton. “Over many years we’ve had proponents of one suite of technologies criticising another as a distraction. Classically that was what happened with renewables versus nuclear, and now renewables and nuclear both criticise CCS. We need all of them, because they have different roles to play.”
“CCS is the only technology that can deal with existing coal”Â
Both Purvis and MacNaughton are adamant that CCS has proved its technical feasibility and that what is now needed is short-term and long-term government support so that engineers can learn-by-doing and bring down costs.
Also vital is the creation of a market for CCS. “Governments could do that in two ways,” says MacNaughton. “One is to have a carbon price that would make CCS competitive, and that price is not as high as people think and not as high as the implied price for a lot of renewables, but it’s a long way from where carbon is priced at the moment. The second thing governments could do is regulate to require CCS.”
It is important to look at CCS in a broad context, adds Karl Rose, the World Energy Council’s senior director for policy and scenarios. “A sustainable energy strategy starts with a coal strategy. Making an energy transition to a sustainable world is not just about building renewable supply. We need to deal with existing fossil supply, meaning coal mainly. That realisation could change the picture for CCS tremendously – because it’s the only technology that can deal with existing coal.”
Editor’s Note
This article was first published by World Energy Focus, the free monthly digital magazine of the World Energy Council, produced by Energy Post. To register to get your monthly copy, click here.
[adrotate group=”9″]
S. Herb says
There is considerable ill will here. A major problem is the justified impression that many in the fossil fuel industry have been using the possibility of CCS as an excuse for continuing with business as usual and for reducing the urgency of renewable alternatives.
Sid Abma says
There is an option to CCS and that is CCU, Carbon Capture Utilization.
Our technology Transforms the CO2 into useful – saleable products.
It works!