Energy Research Knowledge Centre. Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage

Transcription

1 Energy Research Knowledge Centre Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage

2 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e Contents Scope 2 Energy demand, global change and CCS 2 What CCS really means 3 Why CCS is not largely applied yet 5 Policy background 6 Introduction 6 International bodies acting on climate change and CCS: IPCC, IEA, CSLF 7 European targets for European Directive on CCS 9 European targets beyond European Strategic Energy Technology Plan 11 RD&D pathways in CCS 13 Research programmes on CCS 16 Research on CCS in Europe 16 Large-scale integrated CCS projects 20 Large-scale pilot projects and test sites in Europe 21 Key points for technological research and future challenges 24 Research challenges 24 CO 2 capture 25 CO 2 storage 26 CO 2 use and value chain 27 CCS: Benefits and barriers to its full deployment 30 Benefits 30 Barriers 31 Recommendations for future directions 33 References 36 List of Acronyms 38 This publication was produced by the Energy Research Knowledge Centre (ERKC), funded by the European Commission (EC) to support its Strategic Energy Technologies Information System (SETIS). It represents the consortium s views on the subject matter. These views have not been adopted or approved by the European Commission and should not be taken as a statement of the views of the European Commission. The manuscript was produced by Giuseppe Girardi of the ENEA (Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development) and Sotacarbo (Società Tecnologie Avanzate Carbone S.p.A.), and Sergio Persoglia from OGS (National Institute of Oceanography and Experimental Geophysics). The authors would like to extend their grateful thanks to Isabelle Czernichowski-Lauriol (BRGM and president of CO2GeoNet) and Nils Røkke (Sintef) for their review of the manuscript and valuable suggestions. While the information contained in this brochure is correct to the best of our knowledge, neither the consortium nor the European Commission can be held responsible for any inaccuracy or accept responsibility for any use made thereof. Additional information on energy research programmes and related projects, as well as on other technical and policy publications, is available on the Energy Research Knowledge Centre portal at: setis.ec.europa.eu/energy-research European Union 2014 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Cover: GOPACom. Photo credits: istockphoto, CO2GeoNet Printed in Belgium

3 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 1 Key Messages According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), this century s trends in energy demand, the share of fossil fuels and the related CO 2 emissions in the atmosphere could lead to an average increase in global temperatures, with negative impacts on the Earth s ecosystems. CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) techniques help to avoid emitting the carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) produced by human activities into the atmosphere, which contributes to the so-called greenhouse effect and the resulting global warming. CCS implies capturing CO 2 in the processes where it is produced by burning fossil fuels or chemical reactions, and transporting it to sites where suitable deep geological formations can store it in a safe and stable manner. Once the CO 2 is captured, CO 2 capture and utilisation (CCU) is aimed at utilising it as a raw material for other processes. CCS already happens in large-scale projects. Decades of CO 2 injection in geological formations (mainly in the United States of America for enhanced oil recovery), and many research projects in Europe and elsewhere, have demonstrated that the first-generation techniques of capturing, transporting and geologically storing CO 2 are reliable enough to move forward to a new phase where CCS is applied to fully commercial projects. Barriers still exist, because CCS techniques imply high investment, there is a gap in commercial financing, and public awareness, understanding and support are lacking. Many European and international studies regarding the evolution of energy demand and production point out that energy efficiency, renewables and nuclear energy alone will not be able to achieve the reduction of CO 2 emissions required by 2050, if CCS is not applied.

4 2 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e 1. Scope The aim of this brochure is to raise awareness of technologies for CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) and of their actual potential to reduce carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions to the atmosphere. In the transition phase towards a fully low-carbon energy economy, CCS can contribute towards meeting the required reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, in a context of rising energy demand worldwide. The brochure highlights the policy background and the legal framework in Europe for capturing, transporting and storing CO 2. Moreover, an overview is given of the most important international bodies acting on climate change and CCS, and associated research and demonstration programmes. Key challenges and the road ahead, from technological and societal points of view, in terms of overcoming actual barriers and promoting a widespread application of CCS techniques are also described. 1.1 Energy demand, global change and CCS According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), more than 80% of the global primary energy use is currently fossil-based, just as it was 25 years ago (IEA, 2013). Over the last decade, 85% of the increase in the global use of energy was fossil-based. The IEA estimates of future energy consumption, based on current policies and developments, indicate a continuation of this fossil fuel dependence, resulting in a 75% share of the energy mix by 2035, despite the strong rise in renewables. When fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) are burnt to produce energy, each atom of carbon combines with two oxygen atoms in the air to form carbon dioxide, or CO 2. Atmospheric CO 2 is the primary source of carbon in life on Earth, and its concentration in the Earth s pre-industrial atmosphere was regulated by the natural exchange of carbon among the geosphere, the biosphere, the oceans and the atmosphere. It is now accepted that human activities are disturbing the carbon cycle of our planet. Prior to the industrial revolution and extending back some 800,000 years, this finely balanced cycle resulted in a low range of CO 2 concentrations in the atmosphere (around 280 ppm, i.e %). However, over the past 250 years, our prolific burning of fossil fuels for power production, heating, industry and transportation, has incessantly raised the amount of CO 2 emitted into the atmosphere. About half of this human-induced excess has been reabsorbed by vegetation and dissolved in the oceans, the latter causing acidification and its associated potentially negative impacts on marine plants and animals. The remainder has accumulated in the atmosphere, where it contributes to climate change since CO 2 is a greenhouse gas (GHG) that traps part of the sun s heat, causing the Earth s surface to warm. The average concentration in 2013 of about 400 parts per million (ppm) has already caused an increment in the mean global temperature of about 0.8 C above pre-industrial levels, and many climate change impacts have already started to emerge. This century s trends in energy demand, the share of fossil fuels and the related CO 2 emissions in the atmosphere are not consistent with the necessary mitigation of climate change. They could lead to an average increase in global temperatures of 3.6 or 4 C, according to the IEA (IEA, 2012; Schellnhuber et al.) and a report commissioned by the World Bank respectively (World Bank, 2013; Schellnhuber et al.). A global warming of this magnitude may not seem large, but it may be useful to recall that a global mean temperature

5 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 3 increase of 4 C approaches the difference between temperatures today and those of the last ice age, when much of central Europe and the northern United States of America (USA) were covered by kilometres of ice and global mean temperatures were about 4.5 to 7 C lower. And this magnitude of climate change human induced is occurring over a century, not millennia. In the transition to a fully low-carbon economy, CCS technology is one of the key ways (together with more energy efficiency, demand side management, and renewable and nuclear energy) to reconcile the rising demand for fossil fuels with the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. CCS may be vital for meeting the European Union s (EU) greenhouse gas reduction targets and it offers potential for a low-carbon reindustrialisation of Europe s declining industries. However, this depends on whether CCS can be commercially viable and fully accepted to allow for its large-scale deployment. The assessments made in the context of the EU Roadmap for moving to a competitive low-carbon economy in 2050 (2011) and the Energy Roadmap 2050 (2011) see CCS as an important technology contributing to low-carbon transition in the EU, with 7-32% of power generation using CCS by 2050, depending on the scenario considered. Furthermore, in these assessments, by 2035 CCS will start to contribute on a broader scale towards reducing CO 2 emissions from several energy-intensive industries in the EU, for which CCS is the only technology that can deliver the deep emission cuts. 1.2 What CCS really means CCS involves three major steps: capturing CO 2 at coal- or gas-fired power stations and industrial facilities (iron and steel mills, cement plants, refineries, etc.), transporting it by pipeline or ship to a storage location, and injecting it via a well into a suitable geological formation for long-term storage. CCU or CO 2 capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS), moreover, offers the option of using the CO 2 as a raw material in other process (es), immediately after capture or after further transportation. For each step there are currently several technology options, at different levels of performance and maturity, so that numerous scenarios for CCS can be envisaged. Although many of these are proven technologies (separately and/or in the field for which they were originally developed), they need to be adapted for use in the full CCS value chain CO 2 capture Currently there are three main methods for capturing CO 2 in power plants. Post-combustion capture involves removing CO 2 from flue gases after combustion of the fuel. The most widely used process for post-combustion capture is absorption with amines. The solvent most widely used for CO 2 scrubbing is monoethanolamine (MEA) but alternative solvents, which require lower energy for regeneration, are also being developed. The flue gases are washed with the solvent, which separates CO 2 from nitrogen and other impurities. The solvent is reheated in a desorber and the CO 2 is released, then cooled and compressed, ready to be piped istock

6 4 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e istock away. This technique can be applied to both pulverised coal and natural gas power plants, and can be retrofitted to existing plants without significant modifications to the existing infrastructure. Solid adsorbents at high temperature, membrane systems and cryogenic distillation are being investigated as alternatives to MEA systems. Pre-combustion capture involves CO 2 removal prior to the combustion of the fuel. In this technique, solid, liquid or gaseous fuel is first converted into a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide using one of a number of proprietary gasification technologies. In a so-called shift reactor, the carbon monoxide is oxidised to CO 2, which is subsequently separated from the hydrogen. The hydrogen can be then combusted in a gas turbine. The partial pressure of CO 2 in the gas to be treated is much higher than for post-combustion capture and physical solvents for the separation are preferred, which is a wellestablished process in the chemical industry. Other separation processes are based on the use of solid adsorbents. In oxy-fuel combustion, the air is separated prior to combustion in an air separation unit (ASU), often cryogenic, into nitrogen and oxygen. The fuel is then burned in pure oxygen. The main advantage of oxy-fuel is the high concentration of CO 2 in the resulting flue gas (> 80%), so that only relatively simple purification of CO 2 is needed before storage CO2 transport CO 2 is already transported for commercial purposes by road tankers, ships and pipelines. The technologies involved in pipeline transportation vary little from those used extensively for transporting gas or oil. Indeed, in some cases, it may be possible to re-use existing but redundant pipeline infrastructures. Large networks of CO 2 pipelines, mainly associated with flooding oil reservoirs with CO 2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR), have been in use since the early 1980s and are operated commercially with proven safety and reliability records. Most of these are located in the USA, where more than 4,000 km of pipelines already exist. Recently, networks have started to operate in Europe, with the biggest infrastructures in the North Sea, e.g. 160 km of pipeline for the Snohvit liquefied natural gas (LNG) project, and about 80 km of pipeline in the Netherlands from Rotterdam to Amsterdam to transport CO 2 to greenhouses. Transportation by ship has a number of attractive features, including flexibility, potential for transport over longer distances, different economics that allow for servicing smaller sources and sinks, and potentially faster realisation since there are fewer authorisation obstacles CO 2 storage Industrial geological CO 2 storage projects have already been initiated in Europe and throughout the world. Once injected underground into a suitable reservoir rock, CO 2 accumulates in the pores between grains and in fractures, thus displacing and replacing any existing fluids such as gas, water or oil. Suitable host rocks for CO 2 geological storage should therefore have a high porosity and permeability. Such rock formations, the result of the deposition of sediments over millennia, are commonly located in the so-called sedimentary basins. In such places, these permeable formations alternate with impermeable rocks, which can act as an impervious seal.

7 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 5 Many types of formations are suitable for very long-term storage of CO 2. CO 2 can be injected in its supercritical condition (which happens at about 800 m below the surface) into porous formations containing fluids (deep saline aquifers) or into reservoirs where hydrocarbons are running out. The third trapping option involves those coal seams that are otherwise unmineable by classic mining methods. When CO 2 is injected into them, it binds itself to carbon better than methane, which is then released. According to the GeoCapacity project ( ), there is a conservative storage capacity in Europe of 117 Gt, nearly all of which is in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and saline aquifers. Total CO 2 emissions from EU power generation and industry are around 2.2 Gt of CO 2 annually, so this would allow storage of all the captured CO 2 in the EU for decades to come. CO 2 storage in oil and gas reservoirs is less expensive than in saline aquifers, and onshore is less expensive than offshore. However, storage sites will require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) with wide public participation. 1.3 Why CCS is not largely applied yet Financial, regulatory, infrastructure, environmental and social issues can all present barriers to CCS demonstration and deployment. According to the 2011 Technology Map for the SET-Plan, CCS will initially increase the levelised cost of energy (LCOE) by EUR 25/MWh or more compared to a reference power plant. Under the current EU emission unit allowances (EUAs) pricing (less than EUR 6/t of CO 2 in November 2014) a publicly funded incentives are needed to make the investment as commercially attractive as a non-ccs reference plant. Dependence on such incentives entails additional policy risk on top of the uncertainty in the EU Emission Trading System (ETS) pricing. In addition to the research and development (R&D) aimed at lowering costs, financing issues are therefore likely to be addressed by stable and facilitative policy frameworks for capture incentives and storage liabilities. Key regulatory issues are the permit/licencing procedures for storage sites and longterm liability. The CCS Directive (2009/31/EC) provides for an EU framework of minimum requirements for permits covering storage sites and the management of environmental and health issues related to long-term geological storage of CO 2. Large-scale deployment of CCS would also be underpinned by a European CO 2 transport infrastructure, especially for smaller projects or capture plants located far away from the storage sites. This may again depend on policy intervention to stimulate the development of large-scale transport networks. Securing public confidence in the CO 2 emission reduction potential of CCS is a key social and political challenge, as confirmed by a Eurobarometer survey on CCS (Eurobarometer, 2011). While nearly half of the respondents agree that CCS could help to combat climate change, the survey observes that 61% of people would be worried if an underground storage site for CO 2 had to be located within 5 km of their home. Since public perception will have a significant role to play in CCS deployment, education on climate change and communication of the main technical economic and social aspects of CCS could be key to the ultimate success of CCS in reducing CO 2 emissions.

8 6 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e 2. Policy background 2.1 Introduction The critical role of CO 2 capture and storage in decarbonising the economy is now indisputable: in Europe, in the power sector, CCS could account for 19-32% of the EU s total emission reductions by 2050, according to some scenarios of the EU s Energy Roadmap This means that For all fossil fuels, CO 2 capture and storage will have to be applied from around 2030 onwards. Crucially, it will also complement intermittent renewable energy sources with low-carbon, baseload and balancing generation. However, the potential for CCS goes far beyond the power sector, with other industrial applications expected to deliver half of the global emission reductions required by 2050 from CCS. Indeed, in some industries, such as steel and cement, it is the only means of achieving deep emission cuts. Combined with sustainable biomass (Bio-CCS), CCS can even remove CO 2 from the atmosphere already recognised as a significant and attractive abatement solution. There is no doubt that CCS can deliver, as confirmed by international developments where final investment decisions (FIDs) have already been taken on large-scale demonstration projects in Australia, Canada and the USA. The European Technology Platform for Zero Emissions Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP) cost reports (ZEP, 2011) also give confidence that, following a successful demonstration, CCS will be cost-competitive with the full range of low-carbon power options, including onshore and offshore wind, solar power and nuclear. A report published by Carbon Tracker and the London School of Economics (Carbon Tracker and LSE, 2013) also highlights that, since CCS allows fossil fuels to be burned while still reducing emissions, it reduces the risk of unburnable carbon, which threatens the value of fossil-fuel assets worldwide. CCS is on the critical path to delivering the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 However, both the demonstration and deployment of CCS are under threat due to the fall in the price of EUAs, thus not only reducing the amount of funding available for the NER300 (see Chapter 3.3 for information on this funding programme), but also undermining the longterm business case for CCS, which relies on a strong EUA price. In fact, no CCS demonstration project was awarded funding in Phase 1 of the NER300, due to the governments concerned not being able to confirm their level of co-funding, and only one CCS project has been awarded funding in Phase 2 of the NER300. If urgent policy action is taken, CCS can still be commercially viable by and widely deployed by 2030 Urgent action is therefore needed at EU and Member State levels to counteract these developments, so as to keep pace with welladvanced projects. It means implementing economic measures beyond the EU s ETS in order to support first movers, driving down costs through investments in R&D and building public confidence through the demonstration of CO 2 storage, both onshore and offshore. European and international collaboration should also be intensified in order to increase knowledge sharing and accelerate deployment.

9 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 7 Above all, the unique societal benefits of CCS need to be communicated: not only can it deliver substantial emission reductions across a range of industries, but it can also provide the catalyst for economic growth creating and preserving jobs while ensuring a diverse and reliable energy supply. 2.2 International bodies acting on climate change and CCS: IPCC, IEA, CSLF Aware of the importance of promptly addressing climate change, various organisations are heavily involved in promoting research, development and demonstration projects on CCS, as well as in developing international legislation, and encouraging participation and public acceptance. Of these, the following are particularly active: IPCC. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is the international body for assessing the science related to climate change. It was set up in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organisation and the United Nations Environment Programme to provide policy-makers with regular assessments of the scientific basis of climate change, its impacts and future risks, and options for adaptation and mitigation. The Synthesis Report of the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2013) shows that collective and significant global action is needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to keep global warming below 2 C; moreover, the longer we wait, the more expensive and technologically challenging meeting this goal will be. Connie Hedegaard, the EU Commissioner for Climate Action, said on 14 April 2014: The report is clear: there really is no plan B for climate change. There is only plan A: collective action to reduce emissions now. And since we need first movers to set a plan into motion, we in Europe will adopt an ambitious 2030 target later this year. Now the question is: when will YOU, the big emitters, do the same? The more you wait, the more it will cost. The more you wait, the more difficult it will be. In terms of current trends, the report finds that: despite a growing number of climate change mitigation policies, man-made greenhouse gas emissions grew more rapidly from 2000 to 2010 than in each of the previous three decades. The global economic crisis in 2007/08 only temporarily reduced emissions; total emissions from 2000 to 2010 were the highest in human history. In 2010, the total GHG emissions were around 49 gigatonnes of CO 2-equivalent (around 7 tonnes of CO 2- equivalent for every person on the planet); about half of the total CO 2 emissions emitted between 1750 and 2010 has occurred over the last 40 years. IEA. The International Energy Agency was founded in response to the 1973/74 oil crisis, and its initial role was to help countries coordinate a collective response to major disruptions in oil supply through the release of emergency oil stocks to the markets. The IEA s four main areas of focus are: energy security: promoting diversity, efficiency and flexibility within all energy sectors; economic development: ensuring the stable supply of energy to IEA member countries and promoting free markets to foster economic growth and eliminate energy poverty; environmental awareness: enhancing international knowledge of options for tackling climate change; engagement worldwide: working closely with non-member countries, especially major producers and consumers, to find solutions to shared energy and environmental concerns.

10 8 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e The IEA s main goal is to create conditions in which the energy sectors of its member countries economies can make the fullest possible contribution to sustainable economic development and to the wellbeing of their people and of the environment. In formulating energy policies, the establishment of free and open markets is a fundamental point of departure. However, energy security and environmental protection need to be given particular emphasis by governments. IEA countries recognise the significance of increasing global interdependence in energy. They therefore seek to promote the effective operation of international energy markets and encourage dialogue with all participants. According to the IEA, decision-makers should seek to minimise the adverse environmental impacts of energy activities, just as environmental decisions should take account of the energy consequences. Government interventions should respect the polluter-pays-principle where practicable. More environmentally acceptable energy sources need to be encouraged and developed. Clean and efficient use of fossil fuels is essential: to this end the CCS technologies are crucial. CSLF. The Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum is a ministerial-level international climate change initiative focused on the development of improved cost-effective technologies for the separation and capture of CO 2, for its transport and long-term safe geological storage. The mission of the CSLF is to facilitate the development and deployment of such technologies through collaborative efforts that address key technical, economic and environmental obstacles. The CSLF also promotes awareness and champions legal, regulatory, financial and institutional environments that are conducive to such technologies. The CSLF currently has 23 members, comprising 22 countries and the European Commission. CSLF member countries represent over 3.5 billion people, or approximately 60% of the world s population. The CSLF Charter establishes a broad outline for cooperation with the purpose of facilitating the development of cost-effective CCS techniques, while making them available internationally. Since July 2005, the CSLF has been endorsed by the G-8 Summit in its Gleneagles Plan of Action on Climate Change, Clean Energy and Sustainable Development, and identified as a medium of cooperation and collaboration with key developing countries in dealing with greenhouse gases. 2.3 European targets for 2020 The Climate and Energy Package (2008) is a set of binding legislation, which aims to ensure that the European Union meets its ambitious climate and energy targets for These targets, known as the targets, set three key objectives for 2020: a 20% reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels; raising the share of EU energy consumption produced from renewable resources to 20%; a 20% improvement in the EU s energy efficiency. The targets were set by EU leaders in March 2007, when they committed Europe to becoming a highly energy-efficient, low-carbon economy. They were enacted through the Climate and Energy Package in The EU is also offering to increase its emissions reduction to 30% by 2020, if other major economies in the developed and developing worlds commit to undertaking their fair share of a global emissions reduction effort. The European Commission published a Staff Working Document in 2012 analysing the options

11 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 9 for moving beyond a 20% reduction by 2020 and assessing the risk of CO 2 leakage 1. Four measures have been adopted, as part of complementary legislation, which are intended to deliver on the targets: reform of the EU Emissions Trading System; national targets for non-eu ETS emissions; national renewable energy targets; and CO 2 capture and storage. Under the fourth element of the Climate and Energy Package, the so-called CCS Directive (2009) establishes a legal framework 2 for the environmentally safe use of CO 2 capture and storage technologies, with requirements which apply to the entire lifetime of storage sites. 2.4 European Directive on CCS The Directive applies to the geological onshore and offshore storage of CO 2 within the territory of Member States and their exclusive economic zones, and on their continental shelves. Member States retain the right not to allow storage in their territories, in whole or in part, and those choosing to permit storage must carry out an assessment of their region s potential CO 2 storage capacity. The underpinning aim of the Directive is the environmentally safe storage of CO 2, meaning the permanent containment of CO 2 in such a way as to prevent and, where this is not possible, eliminate as far as possible negative effects and any risk to the environment and human health. The EU Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide was definitively adopted by the Council of Ministers on 6 April 2009, and published in the Official Journal on 5 June Member States had to transpose it into their respective national laws by 25 June The Preamble to the Directive describes CCS as a bridging technology, which should not serve as an incentive to increase the share of fossil fuel power plants. While the Directive focuses primarily on the storage aspect of CCS, it does briefly address some capture and transport elements, such as the composition of CO 2 streams and access to the transport networks. Moreover, CCS is removed from the scope of EU waste and water laws to provide certainty as to the legality of CCS activities. The Directive is often described as enabling legislation, opting not to make CCS mandatory but to provide the necessary regulatory framework upon which CCS deployment could move forward. In order to facilitate the transposition of the Directive into national legislations, in 2011 the European Commission published a series of guidance documents on some of the more technically demanding aspects of the CCS regime. These documents cover: CO 2 storage life cycle risk management framework (European Communities, 2011a); characterisation of the storage complex, CO 2 stream composition, monitoring and corrective measures (European Communities, 2011b); criteria for transfer of responsibility to the competent authority (European Communities, 2011c); and financial security and financial mechanisms (European Communities, 2011d). By the end of 2013, the CCS Directive had been fully transposed into national law to the satisfaction of the European Commission in 20 out of the 28 EU Member States. Regarding the other 8 Member States, Poland transposed the Directive in November 2013, and Croatia (the 28th EU Member State) entered the EU on 7 July 2013 and simultaneously transposed the CCS directive. The Commission s evaluation of the national laws in Poland and Croatia is ongoing in

12 10 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e By the end of 2013, other six EU Member States (Ireland, Cyprus, Hungary, Austria, Slovenia and Sweden) had yet to complete transposing measures. In July 2014, the Commission closed infringement procedures against Ireland, Cyprus and Hungary, which have notified the Commission that they have taken measures to incorporate the CCS Directive into national law, and Sweden. This country, which temporarily banned CO 2 storage until the end of 2013, has already made changes in the national legislation and in March 2014 published a new law, permitting CO 2 storage offshore. 2.5 European targets beyond 2020 The communication A policy framework for climate and energy in the period from 2020 to 2030 of January 2014 (European Commission, 2014) highlights the importance of achieving a more competitive, secure and sustainable economic and energy system in Europe. This should translate into continuous efforts to achieve, in the same period, a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below the 1990 level and a 27% share in the use of energy from renewable sources. The first target should correspond to an annual decrease shared equitably among Member States. The second target, however, will not be transformed into national targets, so as to leave Member States free to decide the best options for their energy mixes. This framework is consistent with the current Climate and Energy Package, and also accords with the 2011 Communication A Roadmap for moving to a competitive lowcarbon economy in 2050 from the European Commission, which indicates the need, at EU level, to achieve a greenhouse gas emissions reduction of 80-95% below the 1990 levels by This target, in fact, calls for mid-term emissions reduction targets of 40% and 50% by 2030 and 2040 respectively. Furthermore, this Communication states that R&D, demonstration and early deployment activities are essential to ensure the cost-effectiveness and large-scale penetration of technologies such as CCS. In the same year, another Communication, the Energy Roadmap 2050 (European Commission, 2011), highlighted the fundamental role of CO 2 capture and storage technologies for the transformation of the European energy system into a secure, competitive and decarbonised one by These technologies will have to be applied to the power sector from around 2030 to reach the envisaged decarbonisation targets. In March 2013, the European Commission adopted a Consultative Communication on the future of CCS in Europe, effectively launching a public consultation on the issue. The consultation was based on seven questions, and more than 150 contributions were received; almost half of these came from citizens, while representatives from industry, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), associations, academic and research organisations, multi-stakeholder platforms, as well as public bodies, made up the other 50% (European Commission, 2013a). In the opinion of several stakeholders, achieving a successful demonstration programme should be the key priority for the EU for the near future, and public funding is essential to achieve this goal. Additionally, increased efforts in R&D, especially into storage and transport infrastructure aspects and including CCU and EOR options, should be made. A large number of respondents, especially the NGOs, associations and industry, urged the European Commission to integrate CCS into the 2030 energy and climate policy framework. Complementary to this, the need to consider CCS alongside other low-carbon technologies, in particular renewables, which have been supported since the 2020 targets were agreed, is also seen as essential.

13 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage European Strategic Energy Technology Plan In 2007, the European Commission launched the European Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-Plan) 3, establishing an energy technology policy to help achieve European low-carbon targets and meet challenges related to energy technologies. In particular, the SET-Plan aims, in the short term, to increase research, reduce cost and improve performance of already existing low-carbon technologies and, in the longer term, to support the development of new low-carbon technologies by involving both public and private actors. The SET-Plan indicates that CCS is one of the key technologies to help achieve the ambitious European energy and climate targets, and then move towards a low-carbon Europe. In this framework, seven roadmaps have been proposed to serve as a basis for strategic planning and decision-making, and in particular, for defining the European Industrial Initiatives. The aim of these roadmaps is to raise the maturity of the technologies selected, enabling them to achieve growing market shares by In particular, the CCS roadmap advocates that the CCS technologies become cost-competitive within a carbon-pricing environment by the period European Industrial Initiative on CCS European Industrial Initiatives (EIIs) 4 are strategic research and innovation partnerships aimed at the rapid development of key energy technologies at European level. The goal of EIIs is to focus and align the efforts of industry, the research community, Member States and the European Commission, in order to define and achieve common goals, and to create a critical mass of activities and actors, thereby strengthening industrial energy research and innovation on technologies at Community level and adding more value. Nine different EIIs have already been started within the SET-Plan, and among them is the European Industrial Initiative on CCS (EII-CCS) 5. An Implementation Plan has been developed for all EIIs, which includes the following elements: identifying the priority actions needed to move towards the objective/milestone, taking into account the present technology and projects financed by the EU and Member States; estimating the budgets, the European added-value and the risk involved for the different actions; identifying existing available public and private financial sources; identifying the required actors and potential countries to finance the actions; defining key performance indicators (KPIs); estimating the contribution of the identified priority actions towards the 2020 objectives/ milestones; identifying possible links with joint programmes of the European Energy Research Alliance. istock

14 12 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e The plans outline the actions that should be launched in the first phase of the Technology Roadmap, and provide an indication of relevant KPIs and an analysis of the EU added value for each project, as well as an indication of relevant budgets and available funding schemes (EU or national). The The EII-CCS, launched in November 2010, has a twofold strategic objective: to help CCS become cost-competitive after 2020 and to allow the application of CCS technologies in all carbon-intensive industrial sectors Technology Platform ZEP Founded in 2005, the European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP) 6 is a unique coalition of stakeholders, which intends to support CCS as a key technology for combating climate change. ZEP serves as advisor to the European Commission on CCS research, demonstration and deployment. The European utilities, petroleum companies, equipment suppliers, scientists, academics and environmental NGOs, which together form ZEP, have three main goals, which are to: enable CCS as a key technology for combating climate change; make CCS technology commercially viable by 2020 via an EU-backed demonstration programme; accelerate R&D into next-generation CCS technology and its wide deployment post ZEP was born out of the EU s recognition of CCS as a key component of any future sustainable energy system. Its mission is to identify and remove the barriers in order to create highly efficient power plants, with near-zero emissions. As the EU moves closer towards the deployment of CCS, ZEP will continue to serve as a: CCS Advisor and Facilitator, giving expert advice on all technical, policy, commercial and other related issues; CCS Technology Contributor, providing input on all technology issues, including recommendations for next-generation CCS technologies, taking into account the experience gained from the EU CCS Demonstration Programme; CCS Communicator, as educator and source of information, including engaging internationally European Energy Research Alliance The European Energy Research Alliance (EERA) is an alliance of leading organisations in the field of energy research. 7 EERA aims to strengthen, expand and optimise EU energy research capabilities by sharing world-class national facilities in Europe and the joint realisation of pan-european research programmes (EERA Joint Programmes). The primary focus of EERA is to accelerate the development of energy technologies to the point where they can be embedded in industry-driven research. The EERA Joint Programmes (JPs) constitute strategic, permanent collaborations between major research organisations and institutes, forming a virtual centre of excellence. In response to the EU SET-Plan, the Joint Programmes implement the need for better coordination among Member States, maximising synergies and identifying priorities for future funding. In order to contribute towards achieving the SET-Plan s objectives and strengthen the research base in the EU, EERA aims to:

15 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 13 accelerate the development of new energy technologies by conceiving and implementing Joint Programmes of research in support of the SET-Plan priorities, pooling and integrating activities and resources, combining national and Community sources of funding and maximising complementarities and synergies, including international partners; work towards a long-term, durable integration of excellent but dispersed research capacities across the EU, overcoming fragmentation, optimising the use of resources, building additional research capacity and developing a comprehensive range of world class, pan-european energy research infrastructures; develop links and sustained partnerships with industry to strengthen the interplay between research outcomes and innovation. The first four EERA JPs were prepared in 2009 after their approval by the EERA Executive Committee and launched on the occasion of the SET-Plan Event, held in Madrid in June These were Photovoltaic, Wind, Geothermal and Smart Grids. On the occasion of the SET-Plan Event held in Brussels in November 2010, three other JPs were launched: Bio-energy, CCS 8, and Materials for Nuclear. Others have followed: Advanced Materials and Processes for Energy Application (AMPEA); Concentrated Solar Power; Energy Storage; Fuel Cells and Hydrogen; Ocean Energy; Smart Cities; Economical, Environment and Social Impacts; and Shale Gas. The EERA-CCS Joint Programme is split into two sub-programmes dealing with CO 2 capture and the geological storage of CO 2 respectively, and involves over 30 members from more than 12 countries who have committed more than 270 personnel per annum to carry out joint R&D activities. 2.7 RD&D pathways in CCS The use of renewable energy sources and advanced transport systems, including hydrogen and fuel cells, the re-launch of nuclear power with new designs and, above all, energy efficiency, are the main aims of policies dealing with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. It is now widely accepted that CCS is one of the options available today, which needs to be used, if there is to be a significant reduction in emissions in the short and medium term. In the power sector, first-generation technologies for all three capture pathways (post-combustion, pre-combustion and oxy-fuel) have already been tested at large pilot-scale facilities and are now ready for the demonstration phase. However, CO 2 capture is an emerging technology. Historical experience with comparable processes suggests that significant improvements are achievable through further well-targeted R&D. The optimisation of current and next-generation technologies is therefore essential to drive costs down further, enable rapid deployment post and deliver EU climate targets. To this end, it is essential to recognise the need for large-scale pilots, which are risky and costly to carry out and therefore a limiting factor for new developments (see ZEP s report published in ). R&D is also needed to validate capture technologies for use in heavy industries in addition to power, which are expected to deliver half of the global emissions reductions required by 2050 from CCS (see ZEP s report, ) ZEP, Recommendations for research to support the deployment of CCS in Europe beyond 2020, 2010 ( 10 ZEP (2013), CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS) in energy-intensive industries, June 2013 (

16 14 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e Photo Global CCS Institute, Indeed, in some industries, such as iron, steel, and cement, CCS is the only means of achieving extensive emissions cuts. As several have almost pure CO 2 streams, this also dramatically reduces the cost of CO 2 capture. Clustering different CO 2 sources to a transport network will result in significant economies of scale for both industrial and power projects. Combined with sustainable biomass, CCS can even remove CO 2 from the atmosphere (ZEP s report, ), resulting in the only largescale technology that can potentially deliver net negative emissions (in addition to any emissions reductions achieved by replacing fossil fuels with biomass). As far as capturing CO 2 is concerned, working towards a double temporal horizon is vital: on the one hand there is the need to implement demonstrative installations by the year 2020, so that the possibility of a quick transition to the commercial stage can be verified. On the other hand, there is the need to pursue research activities that lead to further developments post-2020, aiming at significant cost reductions (especially for capture) and at an increase in overall efficiency. Looking at CO 2 transport via pressurised pipelines, technologies are mostly those used for transporting natural gas, also in terms of the pressure levels (around 80 bar). In the USA, where CO 2 transport is typically intended for EOR use and happens in sparsely populated areas, transportation is largely considered to be fully developed. In the European context, which may involve densely populated areas and a transport network connecting various CO 2 sources to a series of geological storage sites, research is needed to assess the relevant variations in CO 2-rich mixtures, purity and flow rate, to integrate flexible pipelines and ship transport, and to demonstrate safe operating conditions. 11 ZEP (2012), Biomass with CO2 Capture and Storage (Bio-CCS), June 2012 (

17 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 15 With regard to CO 2 storage, research and several demonstration projects have established that the geological storage of CO 2 can be achieved safely and permanently, if the storage sites are adequately identified, characterised, monitored and managed. A wider deployment of this technology still requires some key issues to be overcome, which may result in showstoppers, if not adequately improved and/or solutions demonstrated in a geater number of real-life situations. There are two main issues. Characterisation of storage sites, monitoring and verification of site performance. These have to be demonstrated in pilot and demonstration storage projects oonshore and offshore, not only in depleted oil/gas fields but also (chiefly) in saline aquifers. Social acceptance. This is a crucial issue for CO 2 storage, but some experiences show that the public remains to be convinced. Direct involvement with the local population and the public at large has to be one of the goals of any new pilot and demonstration programme. Social concerns, now the most important barrier for many geological storage projects, may be turned into social awareness of the benefits of storage, for reducing CO 2 emissions, for creating job opportunities and contributing towards a more efficient and less costly integrated energy system.

18 16 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e 3. Research programmes on CCS In June 2013, the CO 2GeoNet association and the members of the CGS Europe project the pan-european coordination action on CO 2 geological storage published the State of play on CO 2 geological storage in 28 European countries (Rutters et al., 2013), which also addresses the research activities at European and regional levels, the current pilot, demonstration and test sites, and the national research funding for CCS projects. In February 2014, the Global CCS Institute published its updated report on the Global Status of CCS. 3.1 Research on CCS in Europe The role of CCS in a future low-carbon energy mix is at the root of the European Union s commitment to take the vital step of advancing CCS from laboratory and pilot-scale research projects to commercial demonstrations, which can reduce costs, demonstrate the safe geological storage of CO 2, generate transferrable knowledge and de-risk technologies for investors. In particular, a CCS demonstration project has to implement the full chain of technologies for CO 2 capture, transport and storage on an industrial scale of several Mt of CO 2, as a stepping stone to commercial deployment, e.g. on a power plant or a steel plant EU-funded research projects Europe has been funding CCS projects since 1993, the first being the Third Framework Programme (FP3) Joule II project The underground disposal of carbon dioxide, which concluded that the concept of capturing CO 2 at industrial plants and storing it in deep geological formations was feasible. Over the following years, activities under FP4, FP5 and FP6 demonstrated the technological viability of CCS in research and pilot projects. Under FP7-Energy, research was focused on preparing the demonstration scales and on novel technologies to prepare for the second and third generations of CCS technologies, and more than 40 projects have been or still are supported (Table 1). In addition, the projects ECCSEL and ECO2 are funded under FP7-Infrastructure and FP7-Environment, respectively. FP7-People funded the so-called European Reintegration Grants CO2SHALESTORE and CO2TRAP, the Intra-European Fellowship MUIGECCOS and the International Outgoing Fellowship CO 2- MATE. The CARBOLAB project is funded by the Research Fund for Coal and Steel.

19 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 17 Table 1: CCS projects supported through FP7-Energy Year Topic description Projects CO 2 capture: Advanced pre-combustion capture techniques CO 2 capture: Advanced separation techniques CO 2 capture: Separation techniques in gaseous fuel power generation Cross-cutting: Extending the value chain for GHG emissions other than CO 2 associated with coal production and use Cross-cutting: Initiating a CO 2 value chain in the energy sector using early opportunities Cross-cutting: Support to regulatory activities for CO 2 capture and storage CO 2 capture and storage public acceptance CO 2 storage: COv transport and storage infrastructure development CO 2 storage: Development of a suitable methodology for the qualification of deep saline aquifers for CO 2 storage CO 2 capture: Innovative capture techniques CO 2 storage: Safe and reliable geological storage of CO 2 CO 2 storage: Towards an infrastructure for CO 2 transport and storage Cross-cutting: Support to the coordination of stakeholders' activities in the field of zero emission energy production CO 2 storage: CCS site abandonment CO 2 storage: CCS storage site characterisation CO 2 storage: Transnational cooperation and networking in the field of geological storage of CO 2 Cross-cutting: Extending the value chain for GHG emissions CO 2 capture: High-efficiency post-combustion solvent-based capture processes CO 2 storage: Understanding the long-term fate of geologically stored CO 2 Cross-cutting: Optimising the integration of CO 2 capture into power plants Cross-cutting: Support to the European CCS Demonstration Project Network CO 2 storage: Sizeable pilot tests for CO 2 geological storage CO 2 storage: Impact of the quality of CO 2 on transport and storage CO 2 capture: Scale-up of advanced high-efficiency capture processes CO 2 capture: New generation high-efficiency capture processes DECARBIT CESAR CAESAR COMETH ECCO STRACO2 NEARCO2 CO2EUROPIPE MUSTANG CACHET II CAOLING DEMOYS ICAP INNOCUOUS RISCS CO2PIPEHAZ COCATE COMET ZEPPOS CO2CARE SITECHAR CGS EUROPE GHG2E CAPSOL IOLICAP CARBFIX ULTIMATECO2 PANACEA O2GEN OCTAVIUS CCS-PNS TRUST IMPACTS CO2QUEST M4CO2 INTERACT SCARLET SUCCESS ASCENT GREEN-CC HiPerCap MATESA CO 2 storage: Mitigation and remediation of leakage from geological storage MIRECOL

20 18 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e National research funding of projects In most of the 28 countries covered by CGS Europe, research on CO 2 capture and storage is funded by government or by the National Research Foundations/National Agencies (Rutters et al., 2013). Dedicated research programmes addressing CO 2 capture and geological storage have been established in France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Italy.. In France, two funding agencies are supporting research related to CCS: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) and Agence De l Environnement et de la Maitrise de l Energie (ADEME). Since 2005, ANR and ADEME have funded more than 70 projects on CCS. In Germany, over the same period, more than 40 research projects on CCS have been funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, together with the German Research Foundation, in their joint programme GEOTECHNOLOGIEN 12, and by the Federal Ministry of Economy and Technology as part of the CO 2 reduction technologies for fossilfired power plants (COORETEC) programme 13. CCS research in the Netherlands is aligned with the national programme CATO This five-year programme is funded by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, by industrial partners and through funds provided by research institutes. The programme consists of five sub-projects (plus a coordination component), covering the complete CCS chain: 1. capture; 2. transport and chain integration; 3. storage and monitoring; 4. regulation and safety; 5. public perception. In Norway, the R&D programme CLIMIT 15 is concerned with research into capture, transport and storage of CO 2 from fossil fuel power plants and industrial sources. The programme is administered by Gassnova and the Research Council of Norway. It started in 2005 and has funded about 200 projects. The overall objectives of CLIMIT are to: 1. accelerate the commercialisation of CCS technology; 2. establish new knowledge essential to building full-scale demonstration plants in Norway; 3. support international cooperation. In order to focus competence, centres for environmentally friendly energy research have been established in Norway. Two of the 11 centres deal with CCS: BIGCCS 16 and FME-SUCCESS 17. The vision of the BIGCCS Centre is to enable sustainable power generation from fossil fuels based on cost-effective CCS, with the following goals: 90% CO 2 capture rate; 50% cost reduction; and less than 6% fuel-to-electricity penalty compared to state-of-the-art fossil fuel power generation. The SUCCESS centre addresses several important areas for underground CO 2 storage: storage performance; sealing properties; injection; monitoring and consequences for the marine environment. In Italy, the Ministry of Economic Development and the Government of Sardinia Region have launched a multiannual programme of activities for developing and demonstrating CCS technologies in the Sulcis area, where research and industrial infrastructures already exist and real opportunities for the geological storage of CO 2 have been proven. This initiative is focused on two main programmes: the first one concerns both R&D and large-scale pilot tests; the second aims at the realisation of an industrial power plant for demonstrating CCS

21 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 19 The first programme will support the Sulcis Center of Excellence for R&D activities on clean coal and a large-scale pilot plant (with a capacity of 48 MWth) will test advanced oxycombustion capture technology. The financial resources are EUR 48 million of public funding, with additional private funds for the Oxycombustion large-scale pilot project. The second programme will support the construction of a new 300 MWe coal-fired power plant with CO 2 capture and storage, located in the Sulcis area, close to the coal seam. Public funds are aimed at covering the extra costs related to the adoption of CO 2 capture, transport and storage technologies, with a maximum of EUR 1,200 million over 20 years. The resources will be levied on the electricity tariff, in compliance with the rules of the European Commission Regional activities In Europe, some CCS research activities are being carried out within the context of regional projects (Rutters et al., 2013). Irish Sea: the Geological Survey of Ireland and the British Geological Survey are currently jointly assessing the storage potential in saline aquifers in the Irish Sea and developing a transnational Irish-British Geographic Information System (GIS) containing spatial and geological data, which will form a major repository for project data and results. Nordic countries: the Nordic CCS Competence Centre NORDICCS 18 is a Nordic virtual CCS research and innovation platform, which involves the major CCS stakeholders in the five Nordic countries. The overall objective is to boost the deployment of CCS by creating a durable network of excellence, integrating R&D capacities and relevant industry. In addition, feasibility studies of industrial CCS cases will be undertaken, taking account of industrial sources (cement, metal, oil refineries), power generation based on fossil fuels and Bio-CCS. Baltic Sea: in most of the countries in the Baltic Sea region (Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Finland, Sweden and Norway), onshore storage has fewer prospects for success than offshore storage due to the absence or insufficiency of onshore storage capacities and/or problems with public acceptance. Against this background, the Baltic Sea regional initiative has been launched, creating the network CO 2 Free Energy Technologies Baltic CO2FetBaltic, with the participation of industry, academia, legal authorities and all other interested parties. The aims of the network are to increase public awareness about, and acceptance of, the industrial use of CCS and CO 2, so as to increase political and industrial support for the implementation of CCS, and to plan and develop transboundary demonstration and industrial projects in the Baltic Sea Region. Western European countries: although not a regional project, an interesting example of an FP7 project with a strong regional focus is COMET 19, which is investigating the techno-economic feasibility of integrating CO 2 transport and storage infrastructures in the West Mediterranean (Iberia and Morocco). A harmonised inventory of present and future CO 2 sources and storage capacities was set up in the project and a least-cost model of national and regional energy systems was generated, optimising source-sink matches and related transport infrastructure CO2GeoNet pan-european activities CO2GeoNet, the European Network of Excellence on CO 2 geological storage, is the European scientific body tasked with bringing together over 300 researchers with the multidisciplinary expertise needed to address all aspects of CO 2 storage

22 20 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e CO2GeoNet was founded in 2004 as a Network of Excellence and financed for five years under FP6. In 2008, CO2GeoNet became a non-profit association under French law and in 2010 initiated the CGS Europe project, a transnational coordination action on CO 2 geological storage, gathering together 34 research institutes across 28 countries. The CO2GeoNet Association recently expanded from 13 members in seven European countries to 25 members from 17 countries, bringing together key research institutes, all with a strong experience on CO 2 storage research. With activities encompassing joint research, training, scientific advice, information and communication, CO2GeoNet has a valuable and independent role to play in enabling the efficient and safe geological storage of CO 2, by tackling not only the technological barriers but also many of the others mentioned in this document; for example, lack of awareness regarding CO 2 geological storage and distrust. 3.2 Large-scale integrated CCS projects Large-scale integrated projects (LSIPs) are defined by the GCCSI as those involving capture, transport and storage of CO 2 on a scale of at least 800,000 tonnes of CO 2 per year for a coal-based power plant, or at least 400,000 tonnes of CO 2 per year for industrial facilities, including natural gas-based power generation. The GCCSI report (Global CCS Institute, 2014) identified 21 active large-scale CCS projects worldwide, either in operation or under construction, with a total capture capacity of almost 40 million tonnes of CO 2 per annum. There are currently 12 large-scale projects operational in markets around the world, with two more (the Boundary Dam integrated CO 2 capture and sequestration demonstration project and the Kemper County IGCC project) expected to begin operations by the end of These two CCS projects, located in North America, mark a particularly important development as they are the first CCS projects to be developed on a large scale in the power sector. Another significant development is that a large-scale CCS project in the iron and steel sectors - the Abu Dhabi CCS project (formerly the Emirates Steel Industries (ESI) CCS project) has progressed to the construction stage. Moreover, there are indications that the steady progress of large-scale CCS projects towards construction will continue. Six projects in advanced stages of development planning, with a combined capture capacity of over 10 million tonnes of CO 2 per annum, may be subject to final investment decisions during These are the Lake Charles CCS project, the NRG Energy Parish CCS project and the Texas clean energy project in the USA; the Yanchang integrated CO 2 capture and storage demonstration project and the Sinopec Qilu Petrochemical CCS project in China; and the ROAD project in the Netherlands. With regard to Europe, 11 large-scale integrated CCS projects have been identified (Global CCS Institute, 2014); however, the CO 2 injections from natural gas processing at Sleipner and Snøhvit (Norway) are the only active ones. The majority of these planned projects will involve CO 2 capture from power plants. Post-combustion capture is the preferred option for most of these projects. Geological storage is planned in saline aquifers (either onshore or offshore), in depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs (only offshore), and as part of enhanced oil recovery activities. In the United Kingdom, the White Rose CCS project has advanced into front-end engineering design and the Peterhead Gas CCS project may do so shortly. In continental Europe, four projects (the OXY- CFB 300 Compostilla project in Spain, Porto Tolle project in Italy, Getica CCS demonstration project in Romania and the Full-scale CO 2 capture Mongstad CCM project in

23 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 21 Norway) have been cancelled or put on hold since the production of The Global Status of CCS: 2013 report. The decline in projects in continental Europe was almost entirely responsible for reducing to 60 the number of large-scale CCS projects worldwide being monitored by the Global CSS Institute as of February 2014, compared to those considered in the previous year. Figure 1: Large-scale pilot and test sites for CGS in European countries 3.3 Large-scale pilot projects and test sites in Europe Six European large-scale projects have received funding within the framework of the European Energy Programme for Recovery (EEPR) 20 : Jänschwalde (Germany); Compostilla (Spain); Porto-Tolle (Italy); Rotterdam (The Netherlands); Belchatow (Poland); Hatfield (now known as Don Valley, United Kingdom). Five of them have been terminated by the promoters, for various reasons: Jänschwalde, due to the lack of a regulatory framework for CO 2 storage as well as public acceptance issues; Belchatow, due to the absence of a realistic plan to fill the gap in the financial structure of the project and failure of the Member State to transpose the CCS Directive in a timely manner; Compostilla, for the decision not to proceed to full-scale demonstration, which was taken after completing the work that it had committed to carry out under the terms of its EEPR grant; Hatfield, for failing to win government backing; Porto Tolle, due to insurmountable delays in the project execution following the decision of the Italian State Council Source: CO2GeoNet/CGS Europe, Note that the country colouring only reflects the projects at a more advanced stage to annul the environmental permit for Porto Tolle s power plant, and with no prospects for putting in place the financial structure of the project. However, the Italian project promoter is not going to stop all activities regarding CCS and will continue to work on different CCS aspects in the pilot plant in Brindisi. The European Commission is strongly committed to supporting the successful implementation of at least the remaining project in Rotterdam, although the final investment decision has not yet been adopted. Candidates in the first call for proposals for the so-called NER300 funding programme 21 were the following CCS projects: ULCOS-BF (France); Zero Emission Porto Tolle (Italy); Green Hydrogen (Netherlands); Bełchatów CCS project (Poland);

24 22 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h Don Valley project (the former Hatfield project, United Kingdom); The Teeside CCS project (United Kingdom); UK Oxy CCS demo (United Kingdom);.GEN North Killingholme power station C (United Kingdom). In this funding programme, the projects selected are co-financed with revenue obtained from the sale of 200 million emission allowances from the new entrants reserve (NER) of the EU ETS. Unfortunately, no CCS project was awarded funds under the first call, as announced in December Moreover, only one CCS project has been submitted to the second round of NER300, launched in April 2013: the White Rose project. In this project, the proposed 426 MW (gross) CCS power plant near Selby in North Yorkshire will co-combust coal and biomass. Fully equipped with CCS technology from the outset, 90% of all the CO2 produced by the plant will be captured and transported by K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e pipeline for permanent storage deep beneath the seabed of the North Sea. In July 2014, this project was awarded up to EUR 300 million under the European NER300 programme. It has to be noted that, although CO2 geological storage (CGS) is well advanced from a technological point of view, research undertaken in real sites in the field is now urgently needed in order to maximise the efficiency of these technologies, so as to optimise the tools needed for monitoring and verification, and to be able to adapt to the specific nature of local geological conditions. Pilot projects are therefore of great relevance and can benefit from investment decisions regarding the deployment of CCS in the foreseeable future. Smaller-scale demonstration or pilot sites for geological CO2 storage have been set up in Europe, but some of them are not in operation. These include the industry-operated demonstration projects in depleted gas reservoirs K12-B in The Netherlands22 and Lacq in France23, which has concluded its storage programme. Photo Global CCS Institute

25 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 23 Other two research pilots no longer in operation are in a saline aquifer at Ketzin, Germany 24, and in coalbeds at Kaniów, Poland 25. In Spain, the Hontomín injection test site is in preparation as part of the OXYCFB300 Compostilla Project. 26 Enhanced oil recovery operations using CO 2 are continuing in the Ivanic Oil Field in Croatia, the Batı Raman oil field in Turkey and the Szank Oil Field in Hungary

26 24 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e 4. Key Points for Technological Research And Future Challenges 4.1 Research challenges To have an impact on reducing climate change, CCS has to be applied on a very large scale and this implies overcoming the barriers that still exist, many of which are not of a technical nature (see also Chapter 5). CCS research has to progress, reduce the overall costs of the CCS chain, and increase the number of suitable storage sites where CO 2 can be stored in large quantities forever in a safe and controlled manner. Many of the European and international initiatives, such as ZEP, CSLF, GCCSI, EII-CCS and IEA have published and updated technology roadmaps to identify the leading research into CCS, pave the way for progress in this field and call for a joint research community effort, organised in Europe mainly around EERA-CCS, CO2GeoNet and ECCSEL the latter being a pan-european research laboratories network. On 2 May 2013, the European Commission adopted a Communication on Energy Technologies and Innovation (European Commission, 2013b). As part of the key measures mentioned in this communication, there is a proposal to develop an Integrated Roadmap under the guidance of the SET-Plan Steering Group, based on inputs provided by experts. The objective of the Integrated Roadmap is to prioritise the development of innovative holistic solutions, which will respond to the needs of the European energy system by 2020, 2030 and beyond. In this framework, the roadmap will address the entire energy system in an integrated way and put forward key research and innovation actions to be undertaken over the next six years. Key actions for delivering the global reductions required by 2050 from CCS are: accelerate the application of CCS in industries beyond power (e.g. iron and steel, cement, refining); exploit the full potential of Bio-CCS, by combining CCS with renewable energy and fuel production using biomass feedstock, the only large-scale technology that can remove CO 2 from the atmosphere; optimise first-generation capture technologies and advance to next-generation ones; accelerate the development of transport infrastructures for CO 2; develop a comprehensive European Storage Atlas;

27 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 25 better characterise potential storage sites; better monitor storage sites, with enhanced leakage detection and measurement; combine and improve operational practices for safe and efficient storage exploitation; study the potential of CO 2 utilisation processes. The priorities in terms of R&D are summarised in the following section. 4.2 CO 2 capture For post-combustion CO 2 capture, most of the research so far has been directed towards development of more efficient solvent systems and processes. Several solvents have been identified and tested in industrial pilot-scale plants plus some process modifications generating a significant amount of fundamental knowledge on solvents, solvent degradation, solvent emissions, solid sorbents and polymeric membranes. There has also been substantial progress in the development and pilot-scale demonstration of post-combustion calcium looping technologies, confirming the potential of this technology option. Although a substantial reduction in energy penalty has been achieved, further reductions are needed and expected: current solvent systems operate with an energy demand that is approximately twice the theoretical minimum. Basic research is still needed on: robust, non-toxic and environmentallyfriendly liquid solvents, with energy requirement < 1.5 GJ/tonne of CO 2 for power and industrial sectors; high-temperature solid sorbents other than natural CaO/CaCO 3; low-temperature solid sorbents; cheaper and more robust membrane modules with high permeability and selectivity; gas turbines for CO 2 (exhaust gas recycling) and/or O 2 enrichment; membrane-supported liquid solvents. For pre-combustion capture, most R&D activities have centred on novel CO 2 / hydrogen separation systems. Several are now ready for large-scale pilots, not only in power generation but also in other industries (e.g. steel, refineries). Basic research is still needed on: a sour shift catalyst with higher activity, improved stability and low steam demand; high-capacity adsorbents for co-separation of CO 2 and H 2S; hydrate-based CO 2 separation; membrane-based CO 2 separation; membrane-based H 2 separation; increasing conversion by combining reaction and separation in single units; chemical looping reforming; scaling up and reducing the costs of membrane water-gas-shift reactors; stable hydrogen membrane reformers for operation at higher than 500 ºC and high pressure with high flux; improving oxygen transport membrane reactors using membrane integration by increasing the surface/volume ratio, increasing lifetime and addressing scaling-up issues, while reducing costs. For coal oxy-combustion, research has now progressed from laboratory-scale to full-scale single burner tests. The next step is the largescale demonstration of oxy-fired coal boilers. Significant progress has also been made in the breakthrough technology of chemical looping combustion (CLC). Basic research is still needed on:

28 26 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e improved membrane and adsorbent material stability for sour conditions; improved operation with multiple/dirty fuels/ biomass in oxy-fuel; basic investigation of oxy-fuel gas turbine combustor design in order to enable the complete and stable combustion of the fuel under altered (compared to air) heat transfer conditions; gas turbine designs for both air-firing and oxy-fuel mode; O 2 carriers for variable fuels (coal, gas, biomass, multiple fuels); CLC pressurised reactors, for both coal and gas turbine operation; new O 2-separation technologies (i.e. membranes and/or adsorbent processes) for integration with oxy-fuel boilers. 4.3 CO 2 storage A storage pilot involves an injection of CO 2 into a geological formation of usually less than 0.1 Mt, typically over a few years, in order to perform research experiments on geological CO 2 storage. Although CO 2 geological storage is well advanced from a technological point of view, research based on real field sites is now urgently needed in order to maximise the efficiency of these technologies, to optimise the tools needed for monitoring and verification, and to be able to adapt to the specific nature of local geological conditions. Pilot projects could therefore benefit from investment decisions to deploy CO 2 capture and storage in the foreseeable future. With regard to CO 2 storage, the highest priority is for the development of large-scale storage pilots in order to build public confidence and finalise regulatory issues. Several sites are required in order to cover different geologies and storage options, including onshore and offshore, deep saline aquifers, depleted oil and gas fields, and EOR. Storage pilots have a dual purpose: 1) to prove that CO 2 storage is feasible for the purposes of storage and transport permits, assessment of storage capacity, cost-effective engineering solutions, storage operation, monitoring, injectivity and storage containment, liability transfer and public awareness; 2) to explore and qualify common parameters, which project developers can then use to improve the development of industrialscale sites. In addition, there is a need for a Europeanwide CO 2 Storage Atlas, which will be vital in advancing the development of a CO 2 transport infrastructure over an appropriate timescale. The EU GeoCapacity project (2009), involving 25 European partners, has already provided GIS maps of the location of potential geological storage capacity in deep saline formations, hydrocarbon reservoirs and coalfields. As a follow-up, the European Commission initiated the project CO2StoP in 2011 to establish an aggregated database, held at the Joint Research Centre, of publicly available and harmonised data on CO 2 storage potential in Europe. The CO2StoP database may be the first step towards a European Storage Atlas. Regarding technical issues, basic research activities have been carried out into many of these. They now need to be applied in real conditions and then demonstrated on a larger scale or in early commercial plants. In terms of site characterisation, progress can be achieved through: a better understanding and improved coupling of multi-phase flow, thermodynamics, geochemistry and, in particular, geomechanics (including in faults and fractures);

29 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 27 quantifying the effects of scaling up static and dynamic modelling on the predictions of storage performance; validation of models (calibration, verification and sensitivity analysis of large-scale simulations); benchmarking exercises to compare the capabilities of various modelling tools and define more clearly the extent to which it is appropriate to apply them to specific storage issues; improving knowledge and predictions of the hydraulic properties of faults. For monitoring, progress can be achieved in: CO 2 plume tracking, leakage detection and quantification at the surface (especially offshore); remote sensing, e.g. interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR), electromagnetic (EM), etc., for leakage detection and geomechanical stability; biological monitoring for environmental impact assessment; long-term, low-cost monitoring (passive and active) and cost-effective monitoring strategies; improved reservoir and over-seal monitoring (resolution/sensitivity); monitoring borehole design and down-hole sensors; automated statistical procedures to define deviation thresholds in monitoring datasets compared to baseline (data mining). For safe and efficient storage exploitation, progress can be achieved in: defining and managing key factors (spatial constraints) that affect the interaction of other resources with CO 2 storage; low-cost wells for exploration and observation, and durable long-life monitoring sensors; improved drilling to reduce formation damage and costs; pressure management, especially for deep saline aquifers, to maximise the storage resource; spatial management of the CO 2 plume: steering, control mechanisms, saturation distribution and re-production of CO 2; the fate of the CO 2: dissolution, residual trapping and associated time-scales, processes at pore-scale, residual saturation of CO 2 in the pore network, saturation fronts, processes at grain surfaces, impact of wetability and subsequent change; technologies for remediation and mitigation of significant irregularities and leakage; ecosystem recovery; well closure and abandonment procedures; storage development strategies for early (post-demonstration) deployment. 4.4 CO 2 use and value chain An area of emerging interest and great potential in terms of research and technological development is the use of CO 2. This is the reason why CCS is often referred to as CCUS (CO 2 capture, utilisation and storage). CO 2 can be utilised in three major ways: 1) for energy storage, 2) as a feedstock for various chemicals, and 3) as a solvent or working fluid (Figure 2). The various utilisation technologies together have the potential to reduce CO 2 emissions by at least 3.7 gigatons/year (Gt/y) (approximately 10% of the total current annual CO 2 emissions), both directly and by reducing the

30 28 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e Figure 2: Different pathways for utilising CO 2 Source: DNV, Position Paper (2011). use of fossil fuels. However, much greater reductions are possible through future research and a wider adoption of these technologies. The use of CO 2 to convert solar energy into biomass and, from there, to various renewable fuels, is now widely supported by industry and governments as a means to secure future energy supplies and to decrease net CO 2 emissions to the atmosphere. While the use of food crops, such as corn, as a source for biomass fuels will probably decrease in the future, second and third-generation biofuels based on grasses and algae will increase in supply. In addition to generating biomass, CO 2 can be converted via chemical and electrochemical processes to other energy storage chemicals, such as syngas, formic acid, methane, ethylene, methanol, and dimethyl ether (DME). Although directly using the electrical energy derived from renewable power sources is more efficient, their variability poses a problem for many industries. In fact, there is a growing interest in looking for methods that are able somehow to store the extra energy produced by renewable sources, such as windmills and solar cells, when it is not immediately consumed by the demand. The conversion of CO 2 may also contribute to that because the distribution infrastructure for hydrocarbon fuel is well established. Finally, chemicals such as formic acid may be a useful storage medium for hydrogen produced as a result of the excess energy from renewables that could be used in fuel cells or burned directly. An alternative pathway is to convert CO 2 into chemical feedstock. The entire portfolio of commodity chemicals is currently manufactured from a few primary building blocks or platform chemicals in the fossil-based chemical industry. CO 2 can be used as a source material and, by utilising renewable energy sources and water, can be converted into a similar suite of building block chemicals. Insertion of CO 2 into epoxides to manufacture various polymeric materials is an exciting technology, as it not only utilises CO 2, but also avoids the use of fossil feedstock and the creation of new CO 2 emissions. Some companies are pursuing the conversion of CO 2 into inorganic minerals that could be used in building materials. This involves a

31 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 29 combination of electrochemical reactions to generate the alkaline reactant and the necessary mineralisation reactions. CO 2 can also be used in various processes without first converting it into other chemical forms. These non-conversion utilisation methods constitute a significant fraction of the total CO 2 emissions. The injection of supercritical CO 2 into depleted oil wells to enhance the further recovery of oil is well established. Indeed, this is presently the only commercially viable technology for CO 2 capture and storage. CO 2 injection can increase oil recovery from a depleting well by about 10 to 20% of the original oil in situ, and it has been estimated that, in the U.S. alone, 89 billion barrels of oil could technically be recovered using CO 2, resulting in storage of 16 Gt of CO 2 in the depleted oil reservoirs. Similarly, CO 2 can be used to recover methane from unmineable coal seams. When injected into a bituminous coal bed, carbon dioxide occupies pore space and also adsorbs onto the carbon in the coal at approximately twice the rate of methane. If methane is present in the coal seam, it is displaced by the CO 2 and may be recovered. The use of supercritical CO 2 as a solvent in processing many chemicals (e.g. flavour extraction) is also well established. New uses of supercritical CO 2 in chemical processing are emerging, which have the added benefit of reducing water usage. Supercritical CO 2 is also being explored for enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), a new type of geothermal technology, in which underground reservoirs that are not naturally suitable for geothermal energy extraction can be made so, using economically viable engineering procedures. Supercritical CO 2 is circulated as the heat exchange fluid (or working fluid) instead of water or brine in order to recover the geothermal heat from the reservoir and either (a) transfer heat to a power cycle fluid or (b) generate power directly through a supercritical CO 2 turbine before being sent back to the reservoir. Supercritical CO 2 holds certain thermodynamic advantages over water in EGS applications and would achieve geological storage of CO 2 as an ancillary benefit. This new concept is expected to increase cycle efficiency significantly and have a favourable effect on the financial viability of an EGS project. Photo Global CCS Institute

32 30 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e 5. CCS: Benefits and barriers to its full deployment 5.1 Benefits In coming years the EU will benefit greatly from the creation of green jobs. The ZEP study CO 2 Capture and Storage (CCS): Recommendations for transnational measures to drive deployment in Europe (ZEP, 2013b) notes that the renewable energy sector generates many jobs, and stresses that it is essential to promote this low-carbon transition. The ZEP study states that, however, policies aimed at greening the economy will have an impact on employment in many carbonintensive sectors, and require the adaptation of skills and working methods. In order to reap the full employment benefits, it is therefore necessary both to support emerging green sectors and promote emissions reductions in traditional industries. Here CCS will play a critical role: rather than dividing societies into low-carbon winners and losers, it will make the low-carbon transition much more socially inclusive by creating and securing hundreds of thousands of jobs in power and other energy-intensive industries. For example, studies have shown that CCS demonstration projects, such as White Rose, will directly contribute to the creation of 2,500 jobs for three to five years during construction and 91 jobs during operation. More significantly, as the EUA price increases, CCS will also help to preserve very many jobs in mining, electricity generation and the energy-intensive industries included in the ETS. Just to give one example, the modelling shows that without CCS, electricity generation from lignite will be drastically reduced in the EU by 2030 due to the rising cost of CO 2 emissions. Since lignite power plants rely on local mining, phasing them out completely could cost 25,000 jobs directly and a further 63,000 indirect jobs in Germany alone. If this is extrapolated to include all EU lignite mining and electricity generation, this totals as many as 182,000 direct and indirect jobs (Energy Environment Forecast Analysis, 2011).. CCS can also be applied to energy-intensive sectors (e.g. iron, steel, cement, refining etc.), which the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has specifically identified as facing significant challenges as a result of rising CO 2 prices. Together, these industries represent ~1.3 million jobs in the EU, further highlighting the crucial role that CCS plays in an overall policy framework, thus enabling the EU to reconcile its reindustrialisation targets with the steep emissions reductions necessary to tackle climate change. The study also notes that, furthermore, the European Commission s Communication on CCS in reaffirms its critical role in meeting Europe s energy, climate and societal goals.

33 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage 31 CCS clusters will create thousands of skilled jobs, distributed throughout the entire economy, from engineering and manufacturing to operations management and many other specialist roles. CCS clusters could also generate, both directly and indirectly, an economic impact totalling billions of euros as early as 2030, along with the potential to export this know-how worldwide. CCS will also preserve thousands of jobs in industries beyond power, such as iron, steel, cement and refining. Indeed, in some sectors, CCS is the only means of achieving deep emission cuts. Energy-intensive industries are the backbone of manufacturing value chains for both traditional and emerging technologies, including renewable energy. CCS will also complement the large-scale deployment of intermittent renewable energy with low-carbon baseload and balancing generation, ensuring a reliable energy supply. Bio-CCS is the only large-scale technology that can remove CO 2 from the atmosphere in both the power and industrial sectors. When combined with sustainably sourced biomass, it means that CCS can move beyond zero emissions to deliver net negative emissions (in addition to any CO 2 reductions achieved by replacing fossil fuels with biomass). Certain biofuel production routes could provide low-hanging fruits for early, low-cost CCS deployment. Europe cannot be decarbonised cost-effectively without CCS: for example, a 10-year delay in CCS deployment will increase the global costs of decarbonising the power sector alone by EUR 750 billion. CCS must therefore account for ~20-30% of the EU s total CO 2 reductions by 2050 in the power sector, while industrial applications are expected to account for half of the global emissions cuts required by 2050 from CCS. To put this into perspective, one average 900 MW CCS coal-fired power plant (when operated in baseload) can reduce CO 2 emissions by ~5 million tonnes per annum equivalent to 1,000 wind turbines. The ZEP study concludes that, with annual investments worth billions of euros, CCS will therefore create and preserve jobs, boost industry and fuel economic growth, enabling Europe to compete on the world stage as a leader in low-carbon energy technologies. However, while it has all the skills, technology and expertise required, it is currently falling behind countries such as Canada, Australia, China and the USA in the demonstration and deployment of CCS. 5.2 Barriers While great progress has been made, significant barriers to CCS (or CCUS) remain, involving mainly liability, authorisation, public acceptance, business case and costs. Such barriers have also created challenges for small-scale R&D projects that involve little risk, are in the public interest, and are essential to advancing our understanding of CCS, if it is to contribute to mitigating climate change on a meaningful scale. To overcome these barriers, policies which provide a legal framework that supports CCS research have to be adopted, specifically to form a shield from property-related and longterm liabilities associated with sequestration for research organisations and other organisations supporting research. Government indemnity is also required to protect property rights holders, parties granting consent to projects, and third parties who may be affected by CCS research. The CSLF (CSLF, 2011) has outlined 14 different barriers in more detail, which are summarised in Table 2. Barriers 1-5 are policy-related, 27

34 32 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e while barriers 6-14 are technical; nearly all have economic aspects. This table is very general and the barriers, especially the policy barriers, vary by country. More work is required to address each of these but international collaboration can help tackle these barriers and speed up the process of overcoming them. Table 2: Barriers to development and deployment of CCUS Barrier Progress to date Current situation 1. Inadequate legal/ regulatory frameworks Various jurisdictions have enacted legislation and regulations for CCS. Not all jurisdictions have enacted frameworks. Gaps in legal/regulatory frameworks remain. 2. Gap in commercial financing Financial incentives have been enacted for demonstration projects in some jurisdictions. Commercial financing is unavailable except in certain niche markets or for demonstrations with large government incentives. 3. Need for human and Initial efforts are being made in both industrialised Longer-term, more extensive efforts are needed. institutional capacity and developing countries. Capacity building in developing countries relies building on international collaboration. 4. Lack of public awareness, understanding and support Some efforts have been undertaken to create public awareness of CCS, but many fewer than for other greenhouse gas-abatement measures Public awareness of the need for CCS, how it works, and its safety remains limited. Misconceptions abound. 5. Inadequate international frameworks CCS is included in the London Convention and Protocol The London Protocol has not been ratified so cross-border CO2 shipments are not yet legal. CCS is not included in international carbon trading mechanisms, but progress is now more likely. 6. Few industrial-scale integrated projects Only a few in operation, none in power generation. Many projects are in various stages of development. 7. High capture cost R&D and pilot projects have made some progress. Capture costs are still too high. Cost escalation is a concern. Only some capture options are being addressed. Industrial-scale projects are needed. 8. High energy penalty Various options are being explored. Energy penalty is still too high. Industrial scale projects are needed. 9. Limited work on capture Efforts in this area are limited. Significant work is just beginning. from industrial sources 10. Limited work on CO2 Efforts in this area are limited. Significant work is just beginning. utilisation, other than EOR 11. Lack of CO2 transport infrastructure Transport from sources to storage is mandatory. CO2 pipelines are commercial for EOR, but not for geologic storage. Plans for networks are being developed. Ocean transport is not yet developed. 12. Limited geologic storage experience 13. Need to estimate storage capacity and demonstrate storage integrity 14. Storage assurance and risk management tools need further development Source: CSLF Strategic Plan Second Update Many smaller-scale injections have been conducted. Enhanced oil recovery is widely used in some regions. Various regional and national storage capacity estimates have been made. CSLF has developed storage capacity estimate standards. Some project experience has been gained Measurement, monitoring and accounting practices and protocols have been developed. Risk analysis techniques have been developed. Multiple large-scale injections in diverse formations are beginning. Considerable progress has been made but regional and national numbers could be improved. More and more widely disseminated diverse project experience would enable widespread deployment.

35 Research and industrial development challenges for CO 2 capture and storage Recommendations for future direction The critical role of CCS in meeting EU and global climate targets is now indisputable: the EU Energy Roadmap 2050 (European Commission, 2011) confirms that for all fossil fuels, CO 2 Capture and Storage will have to be applied from around 2030 onwards in the power sector in order to reach decarbonisation targets, while the IEA (IEA, 2013) estimates that the global costs of achieving climate objectives without CCS would be 40% higher. Moreover, CCS is the only means in some industries of achieving deep emission cuts, and when combined with sustainable biomass (Bio-CCS) can even remove CO 2 from the atmosphere. It will also complement intermittent renewable energy sources with low-carbon, base-load and balancing generation. In short, CCS can provide the catalyst for economic growth creating and preserving jobs while ensuring a diverse and reliable energy supply. Some years ago hopes were high that the EU was set to become the world leader in CCS deployment. In fact, the Commission Directive aims to provide the necessary regulatory framework within which CCS deployment can move forward. Moreover, the stimulus given to CCS research by the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Framework Programmes and Horizon 2020, supporting actions like EEPR and NER300 and initiatives such as ZEP, the SET-Plan, EII-CCS, EERA-CCS, and CO2GeoNet, have all contributed towards aligning the efforts of industrial stakeholders, creating deep and long-term relationships between research centres and academia, and accelerating more intense sharing of knowledge on CCS techniques. However, the fall in the price of emission unit allowances and economic difficulties in many European countries have had a severe impact on the large CCS projects that should have helped to assess and reduce the full-chain costs and demonstrate that the geological storage of CO 2 can be undertaken in a safe and permanent way. ZEP has performed an analysis of the most important actions required to accelerate the demonstration of CO 2 geological storage in Europe (ZEP, 2013c), arriving at key recommendations, which are summarised below. Urgently establish new CO 2 storage pilots, EU-wide In order to address the full range of geographical and geological issues, new CO 2 storage pilots must be operational across different European countries, where the geology is considered representative of structures suitable for industrial-scale storage and where further R&D can be addressed. Data obtained can then be used to improve regulations, identify options for cost reduction, assess business cases and contribute to the design of the full CCS value chain. Focus on deep saline aquifers onshore and offshore Storage pilots are needed both onshore and offshore: offshore storage is the focus of many proposed CCS demonstration projects, while onshore storage is more cost-effective and pilots will help to resolve any outstanding issues related to regulatory compliance and to address public acceptance issues. Both

36 34 E n e r g y R e s e a r c h K n o w l e d g e C e n t r e onshore and offshore options, however, offer opportunities to investigate generic storage and operational characteristics. Whilst pilots should cover all representative storage scenarios, the emphasis should be on saline aquifers, as they hold the greatest storage potential for continental Europe, despite havig been generally poorly investigated. In order to maintain project momentum, it is obviously easier if pilot sites are selected where surveys have been conducted and exploration consents are already in place, e.g. as part of EEPR/NER300 projects or national programmes. Data may also be available from gas and oil extraction sites where saline aquifers lie adjacent, above or below the petroleum, and have been characterised as part of the overall assessment of the region. Select storage sites that will enable meaningful, scientific R&D Pilot storage sites must be large enough to enable meaningful, scientific R&D on a range of issues that can be extrapolated at industrial scales from representative geological structures, which may contribute significantly istock to Europe s storage capacity. In certain cases, the storage pilot may also be used to explore industrial-scale storage in the same reservoir. Sedimentary basins host fossil fuel, groundwater and geothermal energy resources, as well as providing options for gas storage and the permanent disposal of fluids. Storage pilots can therefore also provide the basis for defining key factors that affect the interaction of such resources with CO 2 storage, guiding policy-makers and regulators on the allocation of pore space and resource interaction management, and clarifying the potential impact of interaction on storage capacity and availability. Support the deployment of Europe s CO 2 transport infrastructure Increasing knowledge of the characteristics of geological storage, operational conditions and restrictions will ensure potentially suitable storage. This will not only facilitate the planning of a European CO 2 transport infrastructure, but also significantly reduce technical and financial risks. Maximise the benefits of CCS for local communities While a few CO 2 storage projects have been taking place successfully in Europe over the past 15 years, they are not widely known to the general public. Most CCS activities in Europe to date have been carried out by utilities, which, in the case of onshore storage projects at least, have experienced some difficulties in convincing the public and local authorities of the vital necessity of CCS for combating climate change. However, this has proved easier when working in partnership with other CCS stakeholders and experts, e.g. research institutes to guarantee credibility and transparency; other industrial actors (cement, steel, chemical, refining, etc.) to highlight the importance of job preservation and synergies in CO 2 transport and storage; and policy-makers and regulators to demon-