Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) has been recognized as an important means of mitigating global climate change, but apart from several pilots, it has not yet been successfully implemented on the large scale needed to live up to the expectations as a mitigation method. In Netherlands, the option of CCS has been the subject of debate for a long time, as three unsuccessful projects – two onshore in Barendrecht and the Northern regions, and one offshore near the Port of Rotterdam – demonstrate. Nevertheless, CCS has been accorded an important place in the current Dutch climate policies, being expected to contribute up to 7 Megaton of CO2 reduction. This is reflected in a fresh crop of CCS project plans. For the most, these plans have a long way to go from the drawing board to actual operations due to the technical, economic, legal and societal challenges ahead. In this article we review the status and possibilities of CCS in Netherlands based on an analysis of existing literature in the relevant disciplines. First, a brief overview of the technology options for carbon capture and storage or utilization is given. This is followed by a detailed analysis of the governmental support for CCS, given the vital role that fit-for-purpose legal frameworks and policy instruments will play in CCS deployment. Technical, legal and policy uncertainties translates into factors inhibiting CCS investment and so the paper then presents a CCS investment project to illustrate how such risks affect the business case for CCS. Finally, bearing in mind that societal acceptance has proved to be a major barrier for CCS, both in Netherlands and elsewhere, the conditions that enhance public acceptance of CCS are examined. Our work shows that while CCS is technically a straightforward proposition, its deployment has historically been hindered by the lack of a sound business case and a compelling and stable socio-technical narrative. The main argument in favor of CCS today is that it offers a transition pathway for rapidly and massively reducing CO2 emissions beyond what could be accomplished by alternative methods like electrification and renewable fuels in near future. The introduction of new financial instruments, increased government support and an improvement in social engagement appear to have enhanced the prospects of CCS in Netherlands, but we feel it is premature to assume that this time everything is different.
The IPCC has assessed a variety of pathways that could still lead to achievement of the ambitious climate targets set in the Paris Agreement. However, the longer time that climate action is delayed, the more the achievement of this goal will depend on Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) technologies and practices. In the models behind these pathways, the main CDR technology is Bioenergy combined with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). We review the role that BECCS could play in reaching net-zero targets based on the existing 1.5°C scenarios. Such scenarios presented in the literature typically have BECCS at a GtCO2 per year scale. We also assess the potentials and obstacles for BECCS implementation at the national level, applying Sweden as a case study. Given that BECCS deployment has scarcely started and, thus, is far from capturing 1 GtCO2 per year, with lead times on the scale of multiple years, we conclude that there will be a large implementation gap unless BECCS development is immediately intensified, emissions are reduced at a much faster pace or removals realized through other CDR measures. In the national case study, we show that Sweden has favorable conditions for BECCS in that it has large point sources of biogenic emissions, and that BECCS has been identified as one potential “supplementary measure” for reaching the Swedish target of net-zero emissions in 2045. Yet, work on planning for BECCS implementation has started only recently and would need to be accelerated to close the implementation gap between the present advancement and the targets for BECCS proposed in a recent public inquiry on the roles of supplementary measures. An assessment of two ramp-up scenarios for BECCS demonstrates that it should in principle be possible to reach the currently envisaged deployment scales, but this will require prompt introduction of political and economic incentives. The main barriers are thus not due to technological immaturity, but are rather of a socio-economic, political and institutional nature.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is expected to play a key role to achieve deep emission cuts in the energy intensive industry sector. The implementation of carbon capture comes with a considerable investment cost and a significant effect on the plants operating cost, which both depend on site conditions, mainly due to differences in flue gas flow and composition and depending on the availability of excess heat that can be utilized to power the capture unit. In this study we map the costs required to install and operate amine-based post-combustion CO2 capture at all manufacturing plants in Sweden with annual emissions of 500 kt CO2 or more, of both fossil and of biogenic origin, of which there are 28 plants (including a petrochemical site, refineries, iron and steel plants, cement plants and pulp and paper mills). The work considers differences in the investment required as well as differences in potential for using excess heat to cover the steam demand of the capture process. We present the resulting total CO2 capture costs in the form of a marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) for the emission sources investigated. Cost estimations for a transport and storage system are also indicated. The MACC shows that CO2 capture applied to 28 industrial units capture CO2 emissions corresponding to more than 50% of Swedish total CO2 emissions (from all sectors) at a cost ranging from around 40 €/t CO2 to 110 €/t CO2, depending on emission source. Partial capture from the most suited sites may reduce capture cost and, thus, may serve as a low-cost option for introducing CCS. The cost for transport and storage will add some 25 to 40 €/t CO2, depending on location and type of transportation infrastructure.
Frontiers in Energy Research
Efficient Building Energy Systems: Simulation, Optimization and Renewable Energy Integration