tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca-fr/topics/ccs-23133/articlesCCS – La Conversation2023-12-08T21:14:38Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2193822023-12-08T21:14:38Z2023-12-08T21:14:38ZCOP28: The scientific basis for a rapid fossil fuel phase out<iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" allow="clipboard-read; clipboard-write" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/cop28-the-scientific-basis-for-a-rapid-fossil-fuel-phase-out" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>It was perhaps unavoidable that fossil fuels would take centre stage at this year’s COP28 climate negotiations, held in Dubai and presided over by oil magnate Sultan al-Jaber. </p>
<p>And indeed, it took only days for controversy to erupt in the wake of al-Jaber’s claim that there <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/03/back-into-caves-cop28-president-dismisses-phase-out-of-fossil-fuels">is no science behind the need to phase out fossil fuels to meet the 1.5 C target</a> of the Paris Agreement. He later claimed he was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/04/cop28-president-says-no-science-for-fossil-fuel-phase-out-claim-was-misinterpreted">misinterpreted</a>. </p>
<p>Scientists were quick to respond. A <a href="https://futureearth.org/2023/12/05/sign-the-cop28-statement-the-science-is-clear-we-need-net-zero-carbon-dioxide-emissions-by-2050/">statement signed by more than 100 climate scientists</a> reiterated that the world needs to achieve net zero carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions by 2050 to limit warming, and that all scenarios consistent with the 1.5 C target include an immediate and rapid decline in fossil fuel use. </p>
<p>The key question at play in <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/GST_0.pdf">this year’s negotiations</a> though is whether declining fossil use needs to lead to a phase out of all fossil fuels, or merely a phase down. </p>
<p>And should this language refer to all fossil fuel use, or only <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/07/climate/what-does-unabated-mean-anyway.html">“unabated” fossil fuels</a>: those that continue to be used without carbon capture technology to prevent some of the resulting emissions.</p>
<h2>Branching paths</h2>
<p>There are as <a href="https://iiasa.ac.at/models-tools-data/ar6-scenario-explorer-and-database">many different 1.5 C scenarios</a> as scientists who signed the statement responding to al-Jaber’s claim. All of these 1.5 C scenarios show how we might reach net zero CO₂ emissions, but the technological pathways can differ considerably. </p>
<p>Some use large amounts of <a href="https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/carbon-capture">carbon capture and sequestration (CCS)</a> technology to decrease the emissions resulting from continued fossil fuel use. Virtually all also include <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/outreach/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Factsheet_CDR.pdf">carbon dioxide removal (CDR)</a>: natural or technological strategies to remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. </p>
<p>All 1.5 C scenarios show that our immediate goal must be to achieve a peak and rapid decrease of global use of fossil fuel energy this decade. But without a complete phase out of fossil fuels, limiting warming to 1.5 C would require the widespread use of CCS to limit the CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels, as well as CDR to remove from the atmosphere those emissions that cannot be abated by capture technology. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/laGtd-b0vMY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">An overview of the technologies, and controversies surrounding carbon capture systems, produced by the Financial Times.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/cop28-fossil-fuel-lobbyists-1.7048746">Fossil fuel industry representatives</a> are quick to claim that CCS (and its subtle variant <a href="https://www.iea.org/energy-system/carbon-capture-utilisation-and-storage">CCUS: Carbon Capture <em>Utilization</em> and Storage</a>), is how the fossil fuel industry will bring the world to align with the 1.5 C target. </p>
<p>But after decades of research and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/10/09/carbon-capture-oil-gas/">billions of dollars of government financing</a>, CCS remains an <a href="https://ieefa.org/resources/carbon-capture-remains-risky-investment-achieving-decarbonisation">expensive and inefficient CO₂ abatement</a> technology that has not lived up to expectations. </p>
<p>So while CCS may have a role to play, for now that role seems fairly limited. </p>
<h2>Not practically viable</h2>
<p>A recent study shows that an over-reliance on CCS in 1.5 C pathways leads to <a href="https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-12/Assessing-the-relative-costs-of-high-CCS-and-low-CCS-pathways-to-1-5-degrees.pdf">far higher economic costs</a>, compared with pathways that limit its use to capturing only the most difficult-to-abate CO₂ emissions, such as those from cement manufacture.</p>
<p>Carbon dioxide removal is <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/1304575/global-carbon-capture-cost-by-technology/">even more difficult and expensive</a>. Where CCS captures CO₂ from the high-concentration output of power plants, CDR must capture CO₂ from the much lower ambient levels of CO₂ in the atmosphere itself. </p>
<p>Both processes require the captured CO₂ to be sequestered in permanent reservoirs <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01245-w">to contribute to a durable net-zero CO₂ world</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://netzeroclimate.org/research/carbon-dioxide-removal/">Virtually all current carbon dioxide removal</a> is being achieved by forest-based methods such as afforestation and reforestation. However, these forest-based removals amount to less than a third of the amount of <a href="https://globalcarbonbudget.org">CO₂ emitted globally by deforestation and other land-use changes</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-removal-is-needed-to-achieve-net-zero-but-has-its-own-climate-risks-217355">Carbon removal is needed to achieve net zero but has its own climate risks</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Natural forest regeneration and other nature-based carbon removal methods <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abn9668">have an important role to play</a> in reversing the climate and biodiversity consequences of global deforestation. But their limited capacity and risk of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz7005">impermanence in the face of increasing climate disturbances</a> means that natural carbon storage is not able to offset ongoing fossil fuel emissions.</p>
<p>Technological carbon removal methods could achieve larger removal levels, but these come with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2870">high economic and/or environmental costs</a>. Biomass energy with CCS, or BECCS (which uses harvested biomass to produce energy, combined with technological capture and sequestration of the emissions), would have severe <a href="https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/grantham-institute/public/publications/briefing-papers/BECCS-deployment---a-reality-check.pdf">repercussions for ecological systems and could also negatively impact global food production</a>. </p>
<p>Direct air capture with carbon sequestration (DACCS) could avoid some of these land-use consequences, but comes with an <a href="https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/innovators-trying-bring-down-sky-high-cost-direct-air-capture-2023-10-24/">even higher price tag</a>.</p>
<h2>Choices</h2>
<p>The scientific literature is clear that CCS and CDR methods are difficult, expensive and unable to deliver rapid near-term emissions reductions. And yet, virtually all 1.5 C emissions scenarios include both CCS and CDR methods in their transition to net zero CO₂ emissions.</p>
<p>So the question of whether the science supports the need for an “<a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/GST_0.pdf">orderly and just phase out of fossil fuels</a>” depends on what we believe CCS and/or CDR will be able to deliver between now and 2050. </p>
<p>Will the costs of technological CCS and CDR methods come down fast enough to allow these technologies to expand to the scale that would be needed to counter ongoing fossil fuel use? And if so, will we be able to employ these technologies without causing significant harm to ecological systems, food security and Indigenous and local communities? </p>
<p>And what is the incentive to do so when <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.10.024">renewable energy</a> is so much <a href="https://www.theenergymix.com/ccs-costs-cant-compete-with-renewables-wont-deliver-by-2030-report-finds">easier and cheaper</a>? The track record so far suggests that neither CCS nor CDR is likely to help us overcome these challenges anytime soon.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cop28-why-we-need-to-break-our-addiction-to-combustion-218019">COP28: Why we need to break our addiction to combustion</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This year’s COP28 has become a battle between fossil fuel industry lobbyists trying to carve out room for fossil fuels a in a 1.5 C pathway, and a growing civil society movement calling for a <a href="https://fossilfueltreaty.org">fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty</a>. </p>
<p>Scientific evidence can inform this discussion, but can only take us so far. The world needs to make a choice that is based on the science, and to have this choice reflected in the negotiated outcome of COP28.</p>
<p>As a climate scientist working in this space, I would choose a future that increases equity, restores natural systems, and replaces fossil fuels with non-carbon renewable energy, grounded on a robust fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty.</p>
<p>I would choose to pursue a rapid and just fossil fuel phase out.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/219382/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>H. Damon Matthews receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, from Microsoft and from the Climate Change Action Fund of Environment and Climate Change Canada.</span></em></p>Does the science support the need for a fossil fuel phase out to reach 1.5 C? The answer depends on whether we believe that carbon capture and removal technologies can be deployed safely at scale.H. Damon Matthews, Professor and Climate Scientist, Department of Geography, Planning and Environment, Concordia UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2084562023-06-27T20:06:06Z2023-06-27T20:06:06ZAustralia has introduced a new bill that will allow us to ship carbon emissions overseas. Here’s why that’s not a great idea<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/534243/original/file-20230627-27-vhcnqc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=20%2C31%2C6928%2C4594&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/co2-tanker-froya-passes-on-august-2234680029">MartinLueke, Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Fossil fuel companies in Australia could ship their carbon dioxide (CO₂) waste overseas for disposal, under changes to the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act 1981 <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7052">introduced to parliament</a> late last week. </p>
<p>During her <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22chamber%2Fhansardr%2F26709%2F0011%22">second reading</a> speech, Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Companies would be able to better plan for transboundary projects for carbon capture and storage into sub-seabed geological formations within a clear regulatory framework. Until then, this export activity is not permitted under the sea dumping act.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=LEGISLATION;id=legislation%2Fbills%2Fr7052_first-reps%2F0001;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fbills%2Fr7052_first-reps%2F0000%22;rec=0">Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Amendment (Using New Technologies to Fight Climate Change) Bill 2023</a> will allow export of CO₂ for the purpose of “sequestration”, or storage under the sea. Companies, or research organisations, would need to first apply for an export permit. </p>
<p>The main difficulty with this plan is that offshore
<a href="https://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/energy/resources/carbon-capture-and-storage-ccs">carbon capture and storage</a> has not worked effectively in Australian waters. </p>
<p>If a permit is given for CO₂ waste to be exported to poorer countries, it’s unclear how these countries will acquire the capacity and knowledge to achieve successful carbon storage when wealthy fossil fuel companies operating in Australia could not. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/relying-on-carbon-capture-to-solve-the-climate-crisis-risks-pushing-our-problems-into-the-next-generations-path-175269">Relying on carbon capture to solve the climate crisis risks pushing our problems into the next generation's path</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>No lack of storage capacity here</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fems%2Fr7052_ems_b204759e-31bd-4ae4-ba25-f0dbf4bee175%22">stated objective</a> of the amendment is to: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>support countries without storage capacity to reduce their atmospheric emissions by allowing the export of carbon dioxide streams to countries with available sub-seabed geological storage formations. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>But Australia appears to have a great deal of storage capacity, with conservative estimates putting the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/house_of_representatives_committees?url=scin/geosequestration/chapter3.htm#:%7E:text=Conservative%20estimates%20have%20put%20Australia%27s,14%20000%20million%20tonnes%20CO2.">total at 740 billion tonnes</a>. </p>
<p>In 2021, five areas for <a href="https://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/energy/province-sedimentary-basin-geology/petroleum/acreagerelease/ghg">Offshore Greenhouse Gas Storage</a> in Commonwealth waters were identified off the coast of Western Australia and the Northern Territory.</p>
<p>The real issue is not lack of storage capacity but rather, the fact offshore CO₂ injection is not working. </p>
<h2>World’s biggest carbon capture and storage flop</h2>
<p>In Australia the only operational offshore carbon capture and storage project is Chevron’s <a href="https://australia.chevron.com/our-businesses/gorgon-project/carbon-capture-and-storage">Gorgon Project</a> on Barrow Island in Western Australia. </p>
<p>Onshore, the Santos Moomba carbon capture and storage project in South Australia will become operational in 2024. Like the Gorgon project, the Moomba project has made bold claims, stating it has capacity to store up to <a href="https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/projects/moomba-carbon-capture-and-storage-ccs-project/">1.7 million tonnes of CO₂ annually</a>. </p>
<p>Chevron built the “<a href="https://australia.chevron.com/our-businesses/gorgon-project/carbon-capture-and-storage">world’s largest</a>” system to extract CO₂ in gas from its offshore reservoirs and inject it deep under the island. The A$81 billion gas export plant was approved on the condition it could store CO₂ in offshore reservoirs and, at a minimum, inject <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/16/gas-giant-chevron-falls-further-behind-on-carbon-capture-targets-for-gorgon-gasfield">80% of the CO₂ from the gas produced</a>. </p>
<p>But in the 12 months to June 2022 Chevron <a href="https://australia.chevron.com/-/media/australia/our-businesses/documents/gorgon-gas-development-and-jansz-feed-gas-pipeline-environmental-performance-report-2022.pdf">only injected 1.6 million tonnes</a> of CO₂ into the underground reservoir and vented 3.4 million tonnes to the atmosphere. </p>
<p>In the six years since export of LNG commenced from the Gorgon Project, 20.4 million tonnes of CO₂ has been extracted but only <a href="https://australia.chevron.com/-/media/australia/our-businesses/documents/gorgon-gas-development-and-jansz-feed-gas-pipeline-environmental-performance-report-2022.pdf">6.5 million tonnes</a> has been stored under the island. This significant shortfall adds to global warming and impedes Australia’s ability to reach our legislated 2030 emissions cuts.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-carbon-capture-and-storage-epas-new-power-plant-standards-proposal-gives-it-a-boost-but-ccs-is-not-a-quick-solution-205462">What is carbon capture and storage? EPA’s new power plant standards proposal gives it a boost, but CCS is not a quick solution</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Transferring CO₂ to poorer countries is also bonus for fossil fuel companies like Chevron because from July 1, the reformed <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reporting/national-greenhouse-energy-reporting-scheme/safeguard-mechanism">safeguard mechanism</a> will make carbon capture and storage failures very expensive. </p>
<p>That’s because the new safeguard mechanism does not allow emission baselines to be <a href="https://storage.googleapis.com/files-au-climate/climate-au/p/prj23cd662ff4387d8c254ae/public_assets/Safeguard%20Mechanism%20Reforms%20Position%20Paper.pdf">as readily adjusted</a> as used to be the case. </p>
<p>Fossil fuel companies will have to begin paying a lot more for emissions that are above their allocated baselines. For example, a report estimates Woodside and its partners will be subject to an additional cumulative liability of up to <a href="https://climateenergyfinance.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/The-impact-of-the-Safeguard-Mechanism-on-Woodsides-Burrup-Hub-project-4.pdf">A$63 billion up to 2050</a> at the Burrup Hub LNG export project under the new safeguard mechanism reforms. Exporting CO₂ from failed carbon capture and storage sites will allow fossil fuel companies to avoid these costs. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1649369500868046850"}"></div></p>
<h2>London calling</h2>
<p>The existing anti-dumping legislation and the proposed change stem from international agreement. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/London-Convention-Protocol.aspx">Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter</a>, 1972 (London Convention) was the first international agreement designed to protect the marine environment from sea dumping. </p>
<p>Sea dumping refers to the deliberate disposal of wastes or other matter from vessels, aircraft, platforms or man-made structures into the sea. It does not include material released directly into the sea from a land source or operational discharges from ships. </p>
<p>The London Convention sets up a framework which prohibited sea dumping and which required parties to apply for a special permit for approved materials to be dumped.</p>
<p>The subsequent <a href="https://www.imo.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/ConferencesMeetings/Pages/London-Convention-Protocol.aspx">London Protocol</a> of 2006 took a more restrictive approach. The Protocol prohibited all sea dumping except for identified wastes such as dredged material, sewage sludge, and fish waste. These listed wastes could be dumped if a permit was approved but approval could not be given if it was reasonably likely to cause harm. </p>
<p>Amendments adopted to the London Protocol in 2009 and 2013, yet to be ratified, allowed for the export of CO₂ streams to countries with suitable offshore storage sites, provided an agreement or arrangement has been entered into between the countries concerned. </p>
<p>Australia intends to ratify the 2009 and 2013 amendments, and the amendments to the Sea Dumping Act represent the first stage in this process. The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEW) has indicated Australia will apply a “<a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Climate_Change_Energy_Environment_and_Water/LondonProtocol/Report/Chapter_2_-_The_proposed_amendments">precautionary approach</a>” in the assessment of these permits. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1672210234914512897"}"></div></p>
<h2>Shifting the problem elsewhere</h2>
<p>It’s argued that exporting CO₂ to storage sites overseas will provide significant environmental benefits within a <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/carbon-capture-and-storage-and-the-london-protocol">decarbonising economy</a>. The Australian research and industry collaboration <a href="https://co2crc.com.au/">CO2CRC</a> considers such transboundary exportation “<a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Climate_Change_Energy_Environment_and_Water/LondonProtocol/Report/Chapter_2_-_The_proposed_amendments">safe, reliable, necessary and urgent</a>”. </p>
<p>But this is all premised on the assumption carbon capture and storage is effective and operational. The Australian experience to-date shows it is not. So the only apparent benefit of exporting CO₂ overseas lies in the fact it shifts the problem of escalating emissions out of the country. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/opening-10-new-oil-and-gas-sites-is-a-win-for-fossil-fuel-companies-but-a-staggering-loss-for-the-rest-of-australia-189374">Opening 10 new oil and gas sites is a win for fossil fuel companies – but a staggering loss for the rest of Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Correction: this article originally stated Moomba was in the NT.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208456/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Samantha Hepburn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia wants to allow export of CO₂ for the purpose of “sequestration”, or storage under the sea. Fossil fuel companies, or research organisations, would need to first apply for an export permit.Samantha Hepburn, Professor, Deakin Law School, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2048892023-05-16T12:41:27Z2023-05-16T12:41:27ZEPA’s crackdown on power plant emissions is a big first step – but without strong certification, it will be hard to ensure captured carbon stays put<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/526015/original/file-20230513-80599-50hj2p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=836%2C0%2C2108%2C1350&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Power plants contribute a quarter of the United States' climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/polluted-beauty-royalty-free-image/991612992">Howard C via Getty images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The U.S. government is <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-proposes-new-carbon-pollution-standards-fossil-fuel-fired-power-plants-tackle">planning to crack down</a> on power plants’ greenhouse gas emissions, and, as a result, a lot of money is about to pour into technology that can capture carbon dioxide from smokestacks and lock it away.</p>
<p>That raises an important question: Once carbon dioxide is captured and stored, how do we ensure it stays put?</p>
<p>Power plants that burn fossil fuels, such as coal and natural gas, release a lot of carbon dioxide. As that CO₂ accumulates in the atmosphere, it traps heat near the Earth’s surface, <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide">driving global warming</a>. </p>
<p>But if CO₂ emissions can be captured instead and <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/srccs_wholereport.pdf">locked away for thousands of years</a>, existing fossil fuel power plants could meet the proposed new federal standards and reduce their impact on climate change. </p>
<p>We <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=XO3TyEUAAAAJ&hl=en">work on</a> carbon capture and storage technologies <a href="https://keep.lib.asu.edu/items/172390">and policies</a> as a scientist and an engineer. One of us, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=jOPykuwAAAAJ&hl=en">Klaus Lackner</a>, proposed a tenet more than two decades ago that is echoed in the proposed standards: For all carbon extracted from the ground, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1323-0_3">an equal amount</a> must be disposed of safely and permanently. </p>
<p>To ensure that happens, carbon capture and storage needs an effective certification system. </p>
<h2>EPA’s proposed carbon crackdown</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/greenhouse-gas-standards-and-guidelines-fossil-fuel-fired-power">proposed new power plant rules</a>, announced by the Environmental Protection Agency on May 11, 2023, are based on performance standards for carbon dioxide releases. They aren’t yet finalized, and they <a href="https://theconversation.com/bidens-strategy-for-cutting-carbon-emissions-from-electricity-generation-could-extend-the-lives-of-fossil-fuel-power-plants-204723">likely will face fierce legal challenges</a>, but the industry is paying attention.</p>
<p>Power plant owners could meet the proposed standards in any number of ways, including by shutting down fossil fuel-powered plants and replacing them with renewable energy such as solar or wind.</p>
<p>For those planning to continue to burn natural gas or coal, however, capturing the emissions and storing them long term is the most likely option. </p>
<h2>How CCS works for power plants</h2>
<p>Carbon capture typically starts at the smokestack with <a href="https://www.rff.org/publications/explainers/carbon-capture-and-storage-101">chemical “scrubbers</a>” that can remove more than 90% of carbon dioxide emissions. The captured CO₂ is compressed and sent through pipelines for storage.</p>
<p>At most storage sites, CO₂ is injected <a href="https://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/strategic-program-support/natcarb-atlas">into underground reservoirs</a>, typically in porous rocks more than 3,300 feet (1,000 meters) below the surface. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Cutaway and closeup shows how CO2 is trapped in rock pore spaces." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=359&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525964/original/file-20230512-23-7qw92n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=452&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A cutaway of the Earth shows how impermeable rocks cap CO₂ reservoirs.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/">Global CCS Institute</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Geologists look for sites with multiple layers of protection, including impermeable rock layers above the reservoir that can prevent gas from leaking out. In some sites, CO₂ chemically reacts with minerals and is eventually immobilized as a solid carbonate.</p>
<p>Carbon capture and storage is <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-carbon-capture-and-storage-epas-new-power-plant-standards-proposal-gives-it-a-boost-but-ccs-is-not-a-quick-solution-205462">currently expensive</a>, and developing the pipeline and storage infrastructure will likely take years. But as more CCS projects are built – helped by some <a href="https://www.wri.org/update/45q-enhancements">generous tax credits</a> in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act – costs are likely to drop.</p>
<p>The Sleipner project in the North Sea has been putting away <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610217317174%5d.">roughly 1 million</a> metric tons of CO₂ a year since 1996. In Iceland, CO₂ is injected into volcanic basalt rocks, where it reacts with the stone and rapidly <a href="https://www.carbfix.com/">forms solid mineral carbonates</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A US map shows reservoirs across the Plains, Southeast and Midwest in particular, as well as the coasts." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525958/original/file-20230512-24221-4sjmk9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=583&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Several regions of the U.S. have geological reservoirs with the potential to store captured carbon dioxide.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/climatechange/carbon-dioxide-capture-and-sequestration-overview_.html">Environmental Protection Agency</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the U.S., companies have been injecting CO₂ into underground reservoirs for decades – initially, as a way to force more oil out of the ground. Today, these “enhanced oil recovery” projects can receive tax credits for the CO₂ that remains underground. As a result, some now inject more carbon into the ground than they extract as oil. </p>
<p>While there have been no notable CO₂ releases from geologic storage, <a href="https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M292/K947/292947433.PDF">other gas storage leaks demonstrate</a> that injection has to follow well-defined safety rules. Nothing is guaranteed. </p>
<p>That’s why monitoring and certification are essential.</p>
<h2>How to effectively certify carbon storage</h2>
<p>The EPA has rules for CO₂ storage sites, but they are focused on protecting drinking water rather than the climate. Under <a href="https://www.epa.gov/uic/class-vi-wells-used-geologic-sequestration-carbon-dioxide">those rules</a>, monitoring is required for all phases of the project and for 50 years after closing to check the safety of the groundwater and ensure that material injected underground does not contaminate it.</p>
<p>However, the current <a href="https://netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/faqs/permanence-safety">monitoring techniques</a> don’t measure the amount of carbon stored, and the rules do not require that leaked carbon be replaced. </p>
<p>To provide more direction, we developed a <a href="https://keep.lib.asu.edu/_flysystem/fedora/c160/Conceptual_framework_certification_v2_1.pdf">certification framework</a> designed to ensure that all carbon is stored safely and for the tens of thousands of years necessary to safeguard the climate.</p>
<p>We envision liability for the captured carbon dioxide shifting from the power plant owner to the storage site operator once the carbon dioxide is transferred. That would mean the storage site operator would be held liable for any leaks.</p>
<p>Under <a href="https://keep.lib.asu.edu/_flysystem/fedora/c160/Conceptual_framework_certification_v2_1.pdf">the framework</a>, a certificate authority would vet storage operators and issue certificates of carbon sequestration for stored carbon. These certificates could have market value if, as the EPA suggests, power plant operators are held responsible for the carbon stored. Future regulations could expand this requirement to other emitters, or simply demand that any carbon released is cleared by a corresponding certificate showing the same amount of carbon has been sequestered.</p>
<p>Careful monitoring, paired with certification that requires storage site owners to make up any losses, could help avoid <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/24/shell-ccs-facility-in-canada-emits-more-than-it-captures-study-says.html">greenwashing</a> and ensure that the investments meet the nation’s climate goals. </p>
<p><iframe id="Fsawi" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Fsawi/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Certification can be useful for carbon stored in any quantifiable storage reservoir, including trees, oceans and human infrastructure such as cement. We believe a <a href="https://keep.lib.asu.edu/_flysystem/fedora/c160/Conceptual_framework_certification_v2_1.pdf">universal approach to certification</a> that sets minimum requirements and responsibilities is necessary to assure that carbon is stored safely with a guarantee of permanence, regardless of how it is done.</p>
<p>Climate change will <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2022/04/04/quantifying-risks-to-the-federal-budget-from-climate-change/">cost trillions of dollars</a>, and the federal government is putting <a href="https://www.wri.org/update/carbon-removal-BIL-IRA">billions into research and tax breaks</a> to encourage development of carbon capture and storage sites. To avoid dubious methods, corner-cutting and greenwashing, carbon storage will have to be held to high standards. The U.S. can’t afford to pin a large chunk of <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/climate/">its climate strategy</a> on carbon storage without proof.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/204889/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephanie Arcusa receives funding from Arizona State University.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Klaus Lackner receives funding from Arizona State University and the Kaiteki Institute at ASU.</span></em></p>Fossil fuel power plants can avoid most emissions by capturing carbon dioxide and pumping it underground. But to be a climate solution, that carbon has to stay stored for thousands of years.Stephanie Arcusa, Postdoctoral Researcher in Carbon Sequestration, Arizona State UniversityKlaus Lackner, Professor of Engineering and Director of the Center for Negative Carbon Emissions, Arizona State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2054622023-05-11T14:03:18Z2023-05-11T14:03:18ZWhat is carbon capture and storage? EPA’s new power plant standards proposal gives it a boost, but CCS is not a quick solution<p>The Biden administration proposed new power plant rules on May 11, 2023, that have the potential to be among the most stringent federal policy measures on coal, oil and gas power plants the United States has ever introduced.</p>
<p>The proposal would <a href="https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/greenhouse-gas-standards-and-guidelines-fossil-fuel-fired-power">set new carbon pollution standards</a> for existing power plants, effectively restricting their emissions of carbon dioxide, <a href="https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide">a greenhouse gas</a> that contributes to climate change. Operators of fossil fuel power plants would need to find feasible and innovative ways to avoid excessive carbon dioxide releases.</p>
<p>That’s drawing attention to a relatively mature, but expensive technology: carbon capture and storage, or CCS. </p>
<p>Most CCS <a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Global-CCS-Institute-Fact-Sheet_Capturing-CO2.pdf">chemically separates</a> carbon dioxide generated during fossil fuel combustion, compresses it and transports it through pipelines for storage, typically in <a href="https://netl.doe.gov/carbon-management/carbon-storage/faqs/carbon-storage-faqs">geological formations</a> deep underground. While CCS can be effective, it has some high hurdles on its path to widespread use.</p>
<p>I follow U.S. policies on CCS as a <a href="https://www.climatepolicylab.org/soyoung-oh">climate policy researcher</a>. Here’s why power plant operators considering CCS have faced a tricky balance between the risks and return, and why CCS may be slow to expand.</p>
<h2>CCS’s rocky path</h2>
<p>In the past decade, power plant operators have had a rough time bringing CCS projects online in many parts of the world. Currently, there are only a handful of power plants in the United States with the capacity to capture and transport their carbon emissions, and most of their captured carbon is sent to oil fields <a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44902.pdf">for use in enhanced oil recovery</a>.</p>
<p>Many power plant operators considered the technology too risky. And the high number of projects <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112546">suspended or terminated</a> has prevented economies of scale that could lower the costs.</p>
<p>Compared to capturing carbon dioxide (CO₂) from industrial processes, such as ethanol and ammonia production, where the concentration of CO₂ is high, power generation emissions have <a href="https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/levelised-cost-of-co2-capture-by-sector-and-initial-co2-concentration-2019">relatively lower CO₂ concentrations</a>. This makes CCS deployment at power plants more expensive. The costs associated with compressing, transporting and sequestering the CO₂ are additional hurdles.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="U.S. map showing shaded areas with potential geological storage primarily in the Great Plains and Pennsylvania and Ohio, but the greatest power plant carbon dioxide emissions in the South and East." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525516/original/file-20230511-29-jsfze1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The U.S. has several areas that could store captured carbon dioxide, but many power plants don’t have geologic reservoirs nearby. Emissions are shown in orange and red.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.iea.org/commentaries/the-world-has-vast-capacity-to-store-co2-net-zero-means-we-ll-need-it">International Energy Agency</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The good news is that capturing CO₂ is slowly moving down the cost curve. For instance, the cost of CO₂ capture in the first large-scale CCS power plant facility, Canada’s Boundary Dam coal plant launched in 2014, was US$110 per ton. By the time the second large-scale facility was built, that cost had <a href="https://www.iea.org/commentaries/is-carbon-capture-too-expensive">declined to $65 per ton</a>. </p>
<p>The trend is expected to continue. The expected payoffs for CCS have improved over time, particularly with tax credits included in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. <a href="https://www.iea.org/policies/4986-section-45q-credit-for-carbon-oxide-sequestration">The tax credits</a> provide up to $85 per ton for sequestering CO₂ produced without capped credit until 2033.</p>
<p>The tax credits could be a boon for fossil-fuel-based power plants. But the payoff isn’t immediate. Until they successfully sequester CO₂, the power plant operators would need to bear the cost and risk of building a CCS network. Further, a research team at Harvard University estimates that the cost of carbon capture for gas power plants <a href="https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/carbon-capture-utilization-and-storage-technologies-and-costs-us-context">could still be uneconomical</a> even with the tax credit.</p>
<h2>Three big infrastructure challenges</h2>
<p>The Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal might be able to address some of the issues. The proposed emission cap could lower the uncertainty around the need for CCS and catalyze the widespread adoption of CCS, helping lower the cost.</p>
<p>However, questions remain related to CCS infrastructure.</p>
<p>First, the pipelines to transport captured carbon aren’t yet in place. The Department of Energy’s Loan Program Office is <a href="https://www.energy.gov/lpo/carbon-dioxide-transportation-infrastructure">supporting projects</a> to construct CO₂ pipelines or other means of CO₂ transport, but they could take years to come online.</p>
<p>Second, CO₂ storage options are not evenly spread out across the country. Power plants in the Northeast, for example, lack nearby saline aquifers or oil and gas reservoirs. Researchers are exploring offshore reservoirs beneath the seafloor but are <a href="https://netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/storage-infrastructure/offshore-projects">still assessing its potential</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Map showing CO2 pipelines primarily in ending in Texas' oil and gas fields." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/525513/original/file-20230510-21-3vncam.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=505&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A map of carbon dioxide pipelines reflects how development so far has primarily met the needs of the oil and gas industry, which uses CO₂ for enhanced oil recovery.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.energy.gov/fecm/articles/siting-and-regulating-carbon-capture-utilization-and-storage-infrastructure-workshop">National Energy Technology Lab/DOE</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Finally, the permit process has been a big limiting factor in expediting CCS deployment. The Inflation Reduction Act’s updated tax credits spurred a rush of CCS developers, but the EPA has not been able to <a href="https://www.upstreamonline.com/energy-transition/us-permitting-is-key-challenge-for-nation-s-fledgling-carbon-capture-sector/2-1-1287189">process permits</a> in a timely manner.</p>
<p>Despite these hurdles, the EPA is moving quickly. The Biden administration is under mounting pressure to enshrine stricter environmental regulations before the upcoming presidential election in 2024. The proposed rules will require a review process before they can be approved, and they are likely to face political headwinds and legal challenges.</p>
<h2>Transforming the power sector</h2>
<p>Fossil-fueled power plants account for about <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions">25% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions</a>. With the Biden administration’s stringent policy measures in place, the United States would be closer to achieving its climate mitigation targets.</p>
<p>It will be challenging to scale from <a href="https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/carbon-capture-utilization-and-storage-technologies-and-costs-us-context">12 to likely hundreds of CCS facilities</a> needed to reach Biden’s goals of 100% carbon-free electricity by 2035 and net zero emissions by 2050. But while the EPA’s new proposal may not solve all problems for deploying CCS, it could be an important step to accelerate transforming the power sector. </p>
<p>In the absence of federal-level carbon taxes or emission trading systems in the U.S., this could be an effective way to send a clear signal to power sector players that it’s time to change.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/205462/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Soyoung Oh does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Carbon capture and storage could keep fossil fuel power plants running under newly proposed federal emissions standards, but it faces high hurdles.Soyoung Oh, Junior Research Fellow in Climate Policy, The Fletcher School, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2029722023-03-30T15:16:01Z2023-03-30T15:16:01ZDoes carbon capture and storage hype delay emissions cuts? Here’s what research shows<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518472/original/file-20230330-190-qrnb80.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1094%2C1321%2C4940%2C2687&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/drax-coal-fired-power-station-selby-552746056">Daniel Heighton/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Is carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) an important tool for slowing climate change, or merely a way to justify the continued extraction and burning of fossil fuels? I’m a social scientist who studies the politics of environmental technology and I have given this question a lot of thought.</p>
<p>CCS is a technology that can separate out carbon dioxide (CO₂) from industrial facilities, like a coal-fired power plant or a cement factory, and sequester the CO₂ underground so as to keep it out of the atmosphere.</p>
<p>The technology works and has been demonstrated to <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-world-leaders-hope-to-reach-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-and-why-some-experts-are-worried-climate-fight-podcast-part-2-169555">some effect</a> on industrial plants. CO₂ storage underground has been demonstrated in Norway <a href="https://www.earthdoc.org/content/journals/0.3997/1365-2397.26.1115.27807">since the 1990s</a>. A lot of energy and water is used to do this and there is <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-soon-could-carbon-capture-technology-solve-industry-co-shortages-168310">no market</a> for the stored CO₂ in the UK. This means CCS will not be commercially viable without policies such as a legal mandate for companies to use it.</p>
<p>The UK government’s climate policy is defined by the concept of “net zero”. This entails phasing out emissions and scaling up methods of removing CO₂ from the atmosphere to reach a point where sources and sinks of the gas are balanced. Some emissions, such as those from steelmaking, are often expected to be hard to eliminate in the time left to avert catastrophic warming. Governments propose compensating for these by using carbon removal technologies, where CCS is used to capture CO₂ from burning or processing biomass or to extract CO₂ <a href="https://theconversation.com/direct-air-capture-how-advanced-is-technology-to-suck-up-carbon-dioxide-and-could-it-slow-climate-change-189260">directly from the air</a>.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/18/court-orders-uk-government-to-explain-how-net-zero-policies-will-reach-targets">high court ruling</a> in 2022 ordered the government to outline how its policies will meet the legally binding target of reaching net zero by 2050. The government has now released its <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/powering-up-britain">revised plans</a> which will include storing CO₂ below the North Sea using new carbon capture sites in Teesside, funded with £20 billion (US$24.7 billion) over 20 years. The government may also license a large new oilfield in the North Sea called Rosebank.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An industrial scene with chimneys and storage tanks." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518480/original/file-20230330-26-zqm4xv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518480/original/file-20230330-26-zqm4xv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518480/original/file-20230330-26-zqm4xv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518480/original/file-20230330-26-zqm4xv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518480/original/file-20230330-26-zqm4xv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518480/original/file-20230330-26-zqm4xv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518480/original/file-20230330-26-zqm4xv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An oil refinery in Hampshire, England.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/early-morning-light-over-oil-refinery-1335205391">Tony Mills/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Is this an example of CCS being used to delay real cuts in emissions as some have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/mar/30/government-gambles-on-carbon-capture-and-storage-tech-despite-scientists-doubts">alleged</a>? A recent <a href="https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wcc.826">paper</a> published by myself and fellow researchers offers some insight by reviewing decades of research on the topic of delay caused by carbon removal technologies.</p>
<h2>What do studies say?</h2>
<p>So far, critics seem to have a point. CCS has been very slow to get off the ground and successive UK governments have botched attempts to demonstrate the technology at scale.</p>
<p>Our research traced the debate back to the 1990s when economists first modelled how emissions reductions might be substituted with carbon removal technology to reveal the cheapest way to decarbonise. This aroused interest in carbon removal (and solar radiation management, which involves bouncing the sun’s energy back to space) technology, but the results were controversial as even then climate scientists were wary that they could replace vital cuts to emissions.</p>
<p>The problem of whether carbon removal actually deters or delays emission reductions has been conceptualised and studied in multiple ways by academics. Few deny the risk altogether, but conclusions vary as to how serious it is.</p>
<p>Some studies look at integrated assessment models – complex computer models of the climate system which use economics to describe how emissions might change depending on the technologies used to handle them. These studies tend to find that introducing the option of carbon removal into projections of how countries can decarbonise does indeed substitute emissions reductions to some extent. Authors disagree on how relevant these findings are to what happens in the real world. But we know from other studies about the performative effects of modelling studies: their findings tend to shape policy, and so real-world outcomes, meaning results showing substitution effects should not be dismissed.</p>
<p>A large number of studies assess the allure of carbon removal on individuals by, for example, asking policy makers or members of the public about the kinds of decision they would make or would like to see made. These studies are among the most sceptical about the risk of carbon removal acting as a deterrent to cutting emissions, with some even suggesting an opposite effect.</p>
<h2>Political economy matters</h2>
<p>In our review, we argued that it is in these cases where the relevance of experimental results for real-world outcomes must be taken with a pinch of salt. These methodologies tend to assume that individual preferences are what matters in shaping climate policy, and that rational calculations by people concerned with finding the most efficient solution to a problem determine what decisions are made. We argue that any number of social, cultural, political and economic processes make the world much messier than that.</p>
<p>Structural accounts of the role of carbon removal aim to take such processes into account. These studies tend to find stronger support for carbon removal delaying and deterring emissions reductions by considering the context created by political economy – that is, the influence of powerful economic interests on political systems and government policy. Most of these studies are, to date, highly theoretical, and more empirical assessments are needed, including case studies which analyse the processes governing the creation of particular policies.</p>
<p>While the new government plan was billed as an “energy security strategy”, it contains no significant proposals to insulate leaky houses, which experts have <a href="https://theconversation.com/energy-discounts-are-a-sticking-plaster-heres-a-long-term-solution-to-soaring-household-bills-176402">consistently argued</a> would reduce demand for foreign sources of energy, cut household emissions and alleviate bills. This would have been a reasonable priority during a so-called cost-of-living crisis. But home insulation does nothing to shield the profits of fossil fuel companies or landlords in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-private-rental-sector-created-a-homelessness-crisis-in-ireland-and-england-201734">large and growing</a> private rental sector.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An aerial view of rows of terraced housing." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518489/original/file-20230330-1159-2psjf4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518489/original/file-20230330-1159-2psjf4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518489/original/file-20230330-1159-2psjf4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518489/original/file-20230330-1159-2psjf4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518489/original/file-20230330-1159-2psjf4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518489/original/file-20230330-1159-2psjf4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518489/original/file-20230330-1159-2psjf4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The UK has some of the least insulated housing in Europe.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/aerial-view-old-terraced-houses-on-2217577647">Clare Louise Jackson/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>When the political economy in which climate policy making happens is considered, the repeated role of CCS, be it on fossil fuelled plants or in carbon removal, is revealed: a handy excuse to delay reform and protect the profitability of powerful sectors of the economy.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 10,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202972/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nils Markusson receives funding from the Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development (FORMAS). The paper was co-authored with Inge-Merete Hougaard, Wim Carton and Jens Friis Lund.</span></em></p>CCS remains a ‘handy excuse’ for extracting more fossil fuels, our review indicates.Nils Markusson, Lecturer in Environmental Politics, Lancaster UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1885912022-08-12T06:09:14Z2022-08-12T06:09:14ZBiden signs Inflation Reduction Act: Its climate promise relies heavily on carbon capture, meaning thousands of miles of pipeline<p>President Joe Biden signed a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/08/07/us/climate-tax-deal-vote">sweeping climate, energy and health care bill</a> on Aug. 16, 2022, that contains about US$370 billion to foster clean energy development and combat climate change, constituting the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/08/07/us/climate-tax-deal-vote">largest federal climate investment in history</a>. </p>
<p>Several studies project that its climate and energy provisions could enable the United States to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions <a href="https://rhg.com/research/inflation-reduction-act/">by around</a> <a href="https://repeatproject.org/docs/REPEAT_IRA_Prelminary_Report_2022-08-04.pdf">40% below 2005</a> levels by 2030. That would be a significant improvement over the <a href="https://repeatproject.org/docs/REPEAT_IRA_Prelminary_Report_2022-08-04.pdf">current projections of around 27%</a>, and it could put the U.S. within hailing range of its pledge under the Paris Agreement to reduce emissions <a href="https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2022-06/United%20States%20NDC%20April%2021%202021%20Final.pdf">by at least 50% by 2030</a>. </p>
<p>Notably, one linchpin of the new climate provisions is a set of incentives to substantially expand technologies that capture carbon dioxide and either store it underground or ship it for reuse.</p>
<p>So far, the uptake of carbon capture technologies has been slow. The costs are high, and these technologies can require miles of pipeline and vast amounts of underground storage, both of which can trigger local backlash. A recent study projected that the U.S. would have to construct <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-carbon-pipeline-proposals-trigger-backlash-over-potential-land-seizures-2022-02-07/">65,000 miles of carbon dioxide pipelines</a> to achieve net-zero emissions in 2050, a whopping 13 times the current capacity.</p>
<p>I’m the former founding co-director of the <a href="https://www.american.edu/sis/centers/carbon-removal/">Institute for Carbon Removal Law & Policy at American University</a>. While the new law, known as the <a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22128080/inflation-reduction-act-of-2022.pdf">Inflation Reduction Act</a>, has many provisions designed to jump-start the carbon removal sector, it’s far from certain that the industry will be able to move quickly.</p>
<h2>One-sixth of all emissions cuts</h2>
<p>The Inflation Reduction Act includes two primary types of carbon capture.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rff.org/publications/explainers/carbon-capture-and-storage-101/">Carbon capture and storage</a> entails capturing carbon dioxide generated during power generation and industrial processes, such as steel and concrete production, and transporting it for storage or use. The most common use to date has been for enhanced oil recovery – injecting the gas into oil and gas reservoirs <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/10/2/20838646/climate-change-carbon-capture-enhanced-oil-recovery-eor">to extract more fossil fuels</a>.</p>
<p>It also seeks to drive deployment of <a href="https://www.wri.org/insights/direct-air-capture-resource-considerations-and-costs-carbon-removal">direct air capture technologies</a>, which can pull carbon dioxide out of the air. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://repeatproject.org/docs/REPEAT_IRA_Prelminary_Report_2022-08-04.pdf">Princeton University analysis</a> estimated that pertinent provisions of the legislation “would increase the use of carbon capture <a href="https://repeatproject.org/docs/REPEAT_IRA_Prelminary_Report_2022-08-04.pdf">13-fold by 2030 relative to current policy</a>,” with only a modest amount projected to come from carbon dioxide removal. This could translate into about one-sixth to one-fifth of its <a href="https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-generate-90a5dde8-7916-4c69-967c-fe1f9d1665f8.html?chunk=0&utm_term=emshare">projected carbon dioxide emissions reductions</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XxjNhLZCae0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Consistent with most of its other energy and climate provisions, the Inflation Reduction Act seeks to drive widespread deployment of carbon removal technologies through incentives. Most importantly, it substantially amends a provision of the U.S. tax code <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/45Q">referred to as 45Q</a>, which is designed to <a href="https://www.battelle.org/insights/white-papers/monetizing-carbon-emissions?creative=586800114917&keyword=45q%20tax%20credits&matchtype=p&source=google&medium=cpc&term=45q%20tax%20credits&creative=586800114917&campaign=Energy-Blogs-Carbon-Capture-45Q&gclid=Cj0KCQjwxb2XBhDBARIsAOjDZ34hZpFEvMpB1rsb83XMh0WnEf4m4AXCWUa18G_Hfh3GjF5ZZLGqyzUaAj9qEALw_wcB">drive corporate investments in carbon capture</a>.</p>
<p>Under its provisions, tax credits for capturing carbon dioxide at industrial facilities and power plants would increase from $50 per ton today to up to $85 per ton if the carbon is stored. If the carbon is used instead for oil drilling, the credit would go from $30 today to $60 per ton.</p>
<p>Credits for capturing carbon from air via direct air capture would also dramatically jump, from $50 to $180 per ton if the carbon dioxide is stored, and from $35 currently to $130 per ton if it is used.</p>
<p>The new law also moves back the deadline for starting construction of carbon capture facilities that qualify from 2026 to 2033, reduce the minimum capture requirements for obtaining credits, and permit direct payments for the full value of credits for the first five years of a project’s operation in lieu of tax credits.</p>
<h2>Missing pieces</h2>
<p>Currently there are <a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021-Global-Status-of-CCS-Global-CCS-Institute-Oct-21.pdf">only a dozen carbon capture and storage facilities</a> in the U.S. and <a href="https://climatechampions.unfccc.int/companies-are-sucking-carbon-from-the-atmosphere-using-direct-air-capture-how-does-it-work/">a couple of direct air capture facilities</a> removing a small amount of carbon from the air.</p>
<p>There’s a reason the uptake of carbon capture, particularly direct air capture, has been slow. Direct air capture cost estimates vary from <a href="https://www.wri.org/insights/direct-air-capture-resource-considerations-and-costs-carbon-removal">$250 to $600 per ton</a>, according to one analysis, while experts have estimated that a price <a href="https://theconversation.com/these-machines-scrub-greenhouse-gases-from-the-air-an-inventor-of-direct-air-capture-technology-shows-how-it-works-172306">under $100 and closer to $50</a> could create a market.</p>
<p><a href="https://payneinstitute.mines.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/149/2022/08/Payne-Institute-Commentary-CCUS-in-the-new-Inflation-Reduction-Act.pdf">Some experts believe</a> that the Inflation Reduction Act <a href="https://www.energyintel.com/00000182-85e1-d4e0-abc6-d5e130210000">sufficiently ratchets up 45Q credits</a> to start driving widespread construction of carbon capture and storage facilities in the power and industrial sectors. Others believe that the direct pay provision is “<a href="https://www.mwe.com/insights/carbon-capture-utilization-and-sequestration-tax-benefits-under-the-proposed-inflation-reduction-act/">the fundamental missing piece</a>” for carbon capture and storage because project developers and sponsors can avoid the often onerous and costly process of raising tax equity to qualify to use the credits.</p>
<p>There’s hope that the increase in credit values for direct air capture will help to foster “<a href="https://www.mwe.com/insights/carbon-capture-utilization-and-sequestration-tax-benefits-under-the-proposed-inflation-reduction-act/">synthetic economics</a>” for this nascent market, infusing sufficient capital to develop technologies at scales that are profitable. </p>
<p><iframe id="0QJIj" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0QJIj/6/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Pipeline challenges ahead</h2>
<p>However, while the Inflation Reduction Act may appear helpful <a href="https://www.eenews.net/articles/how-the-climate-bill-could-strengthen-epa-regulations/">on a theoretical basis</a>, both carbon capture and storage and direct air capture could face some serious headwinds over the course of the next decade and beyond.</p>
<p>One major challenge could be resistance to the construction of pipelines to transport carbon dioxide to storage sites. In recent years, counties and private landowners in Iowa <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-carbon-pipeline-proposals-trigger-backlash-over-potential-land-seizures-2022-02-07/">have voiced opposition</a> to such projects, particularly the idea that the state might allow pipeline builders to seize private land for their projects.</p>
<p>Pipeline construction is also a point of contention for environmental groups, especially environmental justice organizations, and could lead to protracted litigation. This stems in part from a <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/bidens-pipeline-rules-target-key-link-of-carbon-capture-buildout">carbon dioxide pipeline rupture</a> in Satartia, Mississippi, in 2020, which hospitalized 45 people.</p>
<p>If public opposition delays construction, projects could be pushed past the window for the incentives, leaving developers with expensive projects. While <a href="https://www.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/CATF_Factsheet_CO2_EOR_LifeCycleAnalysis.pdf">some studies</a> argue that enhanced oil recovery results in a net reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, this may ultimately be a hard political sell for local communities.</p>
<p>The Inflation Reduction Act may ultimately brighten the prospects for carbon removal in America, but this is by no means assured, especially in the optimistic time frame of the next decade.</p>
<p><em>This article was updated Aug. 16, 2022, with President Biden signing the legislation.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188591/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wil Burns does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>One estimate suggests at least a sixth of all emissions cuts expected from the Inflation Reduction Act would come from carbon capture.Wil Burns, Professor of Research in Environmental Policy, American University School of International ServiceLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1752692022-05-04T12:57:50Z2022-05-04T12:57:50ZRelying on carbon capture to solve the climate crisis risks pushing our problems into the next generation’s path<p>As the latest report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) <a href="https://theconversation.com/five-key-points-in-the-ipcc-report-on-climate-change-impacts-and-adaptation-178195">makes clear</a> makes clear, the 2020s must be a <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/">decade of transformation</a> if we are to stand any chance of achieving the goals of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/paris-agreement-aiming-for-1-5-c-target-could-slow-global-warming-within-next-two-decades-151710">Paris Agreement</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-capture-and-storage-where-should-the-world-store-co-its-a-moral-dilemma-167453">Carbon capture and storage</a> (CCS) is widely anticipated to play a key role in this transformation by helping to cut carbon emissions worldwide. But relying on CCS may overshadow <a href="https://drawdown.org">solutions</a> that focus on reducing our energy demand and making <a href="https://www.iea.org/articles/do-we-need-to-change-our-behaviour-to-reach-net-zero-by-2050?">behavioural changes</a> that put sustainability first.</p>
<p>Over the coming years, global greenhouse gas emissions need to fall rapidly in accordance with the <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aah3443">Carbon Law</a>, a relatively simple equation developed by scientists to achieve decarbonisation: halving emissions by 2030, then continuing to halve them every decade until 2050 to reach a level that can be stored by “<a href="http://naturalclimatesolutions.org/">natural carbon sinks</a>” such as forests, pastures and peatlands.</p>
<p>Current strategies to rapidly cut emissions have proved <a href="https://unfccc.int/news/greater-climate-ambition-urged-as-initial-ndc-synthesis-report-is-published">inadequate</a>. Many governments are now looking to CCS technologies that capture and store carbon dioxide (CO₂) released by burning fossil fuels and other industrial processes. CCS also includes systems that <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-carbon-capture-and-storage-is-key-to-avoiding-the-worst-effects-of-the-climate-emergency-171454">capture CO₂</a> from burning organic matter (BECCS) or directly from the atmosphere.</p>
<p>CCS may be a critical technology to cut emissions in some sectors. For example, cement production is currently responsible for <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-cement-emissions-matter-for-climate-change">8%</a> of global CO₂ emissions. Of this, 60% are “process emissions”, meaning they can’t be avoided, even if fossil fuels stop being used in the cement manufacturing process entirely. This is where CCS can step in to capture that carbon.</p>
<p>Yet CCS has been <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/abd19e/meta">struggling</a> to get off the ground, with more than 80% of projects ending in failure thanks to complicated infrastructure and a lack of policy support. Relying on CCS too much could therefore be risky. </p>
<h2>Model evidence</h2>
<p>Along with the <a href="https://exponentialroadmap.org">Exponential Roadmap Initiative</a> team, author Avit Bhowmik has <a href="https://exponentialroadmap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/ExponentialRoadmap_1.5.1_216x279_08_AW_Download_Singles_Small.pdf">modelled</a> different ways in which we might be able to limit global warming to 1.5°C by 2100. </p>
<p>Together, we’ve mapped greenhouse gas emissions across six sectors – energy, industry, buildings, transport, food, and agriculture and forestry – to assess whether existing <a href="https://materialeconomics.com/latest-updates/industrial-transformation-2050">solutions</a>, including <a href="https://www.sitra.fi/app/uploads/2018/06/the-circular-economy-a-powerful-force-for-climate-mitigation.pdf">circular business models</a>, <a href="https://drawdown.org/solutions/distributed-solar-photovoltaics">renewable energy</a> tech, and <a href="https://drawdown.org/solutions/district-heating">low-carbon heating and cooling systems</a>, can eliminate emissions without using CCS.</p>
<p>We found that if solutions that don’t rely on CCS were implemented within Carbon Law guidelines, global emissions could be cut from 54 billion metric tonnes in 2020 to 34 billion metric tonnes in 2030. </p>
<p>With the <a href="https://www.iea.org/news/renewable-electricity-growth-is-accelerating-faster-than-ever-worldwide-supporting-the-emergence-of-the-new-global-energy-economy">accelerating development</a> of renewable energy, energy sector emissions could be reduced by three billion metric tonnes by 2030. In the <a href="https://theconversation.com/radical-overhaul-of-construction-industry-needed-if-uk-to-have-any-chance-of-net-zero-by-2050-new-research-171280">buildings sector</a>, automating energy usage and retrofitting buildings could cut emissions by five billion metric tonnes by 2030. And electric vehicles, digital carpooling services and <a href="https://drawdown.org/solutions/telepresence">remote meeting</a> platforms could cut another 3.5 billion metric tonnes from the transport sector.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A labelled image of plants in a forest" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461257/original/file-20220504-26-pdv4fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461257/original/file-20220504-26-pdv4fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461257/original/file-20220504-26-pdv4fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461257/original/file-20220504-26-pdv4fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461257/original/file-20220504-26-pdv4fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461257/original/file-20220504-26-pdv4fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461257/original/file-20220504-26-pdv4fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Food forests can help trap and store more carbon.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/noiseprofessor/17018036788">Zack Dowell/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What’s more, adding nature-based solutions such as managing <a href="https://drawdown.org/solutions/managed-grazing">cattle grazing</a> and <a href="https://drawdown.org/solutions/multistrata-agroforestry">rebuilding forests</a> could not only rapidly reduce emissions by preventing land degradation, but could also add 9.1 billion metric tonnes of capacity to carbon sinks. For example, creating “<a href="https://www.crcresearch.org/crc-blog/seven-layers-food-forest">food forests</a>” – layered forests with crops built in – could sequester up to one billion metric tonnes of greenhouse gases annually. </p>
<p>If we manage to put these plans into practice, we’d be able to achieve <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-quick-guide-to-climate-change-jargon-what-experts-mean-by-mitigation-carbon-neutral-and-6-other-key-terms-167172">net zero emissions</a> in the next two decades and significantly reduce our reliance on CCS. But that’s only half of the story.</p>
<h2>Renewable power</h2>
<p>The cost of renewables has plummeted over the past decade. Wind and solar power are now the cheapest forms of electricity in most parts of the world. But economic models have struggled to keep pace, sometimes using overly pessimistic renewables costs. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2590332221006102">New research</a> by author Neil Grant and colleagues explores what happens when these cost assumptions are updated to reflect the amazing progress of the past decade.</p>
<p>We found that cheap renewables reduce the need for technologies such as CCS, with the economic value of CCS falling by 15-96% by 2050. However, this effect varies strongly across sectors. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two people install solar panels" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461262/original/file-20220504-17-k9rvsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461262/original/file-20220504-17-k9rvsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461262/original/file-20220504-17-k9rvsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461262/original/file-20220504-17-k9rvsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461262/original/file-20220504-17-k9rvsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461262/original/file-20220504-17-k9rvsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461262/original/file-20220504-17-k9rvsk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Renewables continue to drop in price.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/iip-photo-archive/22344569354">GPA Photo Archive/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For example, while cheap renewables slash the value of CCS in electricity and hydrogen production by 61-96%, CCS remains valuable in cement production and CO₂ removal, where its value only falls 15-36%. It seems like targeting CCS where it’s most needed could be a better strategy: less “spray and pray”, more “select and perfect”.</p>
<h2>Discounting climate</h2>
<p>Models of a <a href="https://green-alliance.org.uk/theme/low-carbon-future/">low-carbon future</a> need to decide how to spread the effort of tackling climate change over the next century. They often use “<a href="https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-are-social-discount-rates/">discount rates</a>” to achieve this. Discount rates determine how a dollar’s worth of action today – for example, a dollar spent installing a wind turbine – compares to a dollar’s worth of action in the future. </p>
<p>A higher discount rate means it’s cheaper to spend the dollar in the future, creating an incentive to delay that action. The problem is that many models still use relatively high discount rates of 4-5%. This leads to a tendency to do less now – and compensate for it later.</p>
<p>Neil’s <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2590332221006102">research</a> shows that when lower discount rates of 1% are used – to reflect the importance of future generations’ wellbeing – the value of CCS plummets across sectors. In particular, the value of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/beccs-the-story-of-climate-changes-saviour-technology">BECCS</a> is cut by more than half. Avoiding this means BECCS, while still a useful tool, becomes much less valuable.</p>
<p>While capturing carbon will be essential in tackling the climate crisis, it shouldn’t be used to delay action now. We should update our models to better consider the needs of future generations when designing climate policy, since large-scale reliance on carbon capture might be a dangerous game to play.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/175269/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Neil Grant receives funding from NERC under the Science and Solutions for a Changing Planet DTP.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Avit K Bhowmik does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Research shows large-scale reliance on carbon capture risks postponing climate action too far into the future.Avit K Bhowmik, Assistant Professor of Risk and Environmental Studies, Karlstad University and Researcher at Planetary Boundaries Group, Stockholm UniversityNeil Grant, PhD Candidate, Imperial College LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1809012022-04-11T14:45:07Z2022-04-11T14:45:07ZOceans and their largest inhabitants could be the key to storing our carbon emissions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457421/original/file-20220411-16-gnv37m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C7%2C4890%2C3248&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Whales help circulate nutrients around oceans, contributing to better carbon storage.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://pxhere.com/en/photo/1533919">Rudolf Kirchner/Pxhere</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>While global governments have agreed to work towards limiting global temperature increase to 1.5°C, little in their behaviour suggests they are taking the challenge seriously, as emissions continue to rise year after year. The most recent <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/">climate analysis report</a> by the IPCC, published on April 4, warns that this pattern is set to continue – with a projected global rise of 3.2°C or more by 2100 – if emissions aren’t drastically reduced and excess CO₂ removed from the atmosphere.</p>
<hr>
<iframe id="noa-web-audio-player" style="border: none" src="https://embed-player.newsoveraudio.com/v4?key=x84olp&id=https://theconversation.com/oceans-and-their-largest-inhabitants-could-be-the-key-to-storing-our-carbon-emissions-180901&bgColor=F5F5F5&color=D8352A&playColor=D8352A" width="100%" height="110px"></iframe>
<p><em>You can listen to more articles from The Conversation, narrated by Noa, <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/audio-narrated-99682">here</a>.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>It’s time to turn to our <a href="https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/a-research-strategy-for-ocean-carbon-dioxide-removal-and-sequestration">oceans</a> for help, an approach consistent with the IPCC’s climate objectives, yet which remains relatively overlooked. Current research at the <a href="https://www.climaterepair.cam.ac.uk/">Centre for Climate Repair</a> at Cambridge University tackles how we can reinvigorate the world’s largest potential carbon sinks, which cover <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oceanwater.html">more than 70%</a> of our planet’s surface, and have already been working to remove CO₂ from our atmosphere for millions of years.</p>
<p>At just <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/05/when-will-world-reach-global-heating-limit-ipcc-climate-crisis">1.3°C</a> above pre-industrial levels, the world is currently struggling to cope. Unprecedented droughts, wildfire, floods, storms and heatwaves batter the planet. <a href="https://www.swissre.com/institute/research/sigma-research/sigma-2021-01.html">SwissRe</a>, one of the world’s largest insurance companies, has estimated that natural disasters cost the world US$190 billion (£146 billion) in 2020. </p>
<p>Each incremental temperature rise brings more unpredictable conditions. By 2050, coastal cities such as Jakarta and Kolkata could be <a href="https://www.climatecentral.org/news/report-flooded-future-global-vulnerability-to-sea-level-rise-worse-than-previously-understood">unliveable</a> due to rising sea levels causing floods and storm surges. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-ocean-is-essential-to-tackling-climate-change-so-why-has-it-been-neglected-in-global-climate-talks-171309">The ocean is essential to tackling climate change. So why has it been neglected in global climate talks?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The IPCC report makes clear that cutting down on the use of fossil fuels is <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/">crucial</a> to reducing emissions. Technical innovations to help us make this transition – alongside wind, solar and tidal power – include using methane from landfill sites to <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214629617301263?via%3Dihub">heat buildings</a> (something already successfully implemented in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/21/climate/sweden-garbage-used-for-fuel.html">Sweden</a>) and building clean mass transportation systems that free up pavements and public spaces (as demonstrated in <a href="https://impakter.com/bogota-sustainable-transportation/">Bogota</a>). Wealthy nations must step up to make these changes, at the same time funding poorer nations’ plans to sidestep fossil fuel reliance.</p>
<p>But although this is clearly a necessary plan of action, politics and policy are still responding slowly, with governments failing to align their efforts with the required scale and urgency of solutions.</p>
<h2>Capturing carbon</h2>
<p>An equally key part of bringing CO₂ levels down is putting atmospheric carbon back where it came from. <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-carbon-capture-and-storage-is-key-to-avoiding-the-worst-effects-of-the-climate-emergency-171454">Carbon capture and storage</a> technology is a vital tool in sectors where CO₂ emissions are essentially unavoidable, such as in heavy industrial processes like steel works. But its high costs and energy usage make it an <a href="https://theclimateconnection.org/disadvantages-of-carbon-capture/">imperfect</a> solution. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A flooded city street" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457422/original/file-20220411-10836-8h4zq9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457422/original/file-20220411-10836-8h4zq9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457422/original/file-20220411-10836-8h4zq9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457422/original/file-20220411-10836-8h4zq9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457422/original/file-20220411-10836-8h4zq9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457422/original/file-20220411-10836-8h4zq9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457422/original/file-20220411-10836-8h4zq9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Flooding and heavy rain, like in Sri Lanka, is driven by warming global temperatures.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/66770481@N02/6741178547">Mohri United Nations University/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/george-monbiot-q-a-how-rejuvenating-nature-could-help-fight-climate-change-115313">Using nature</a> to store carbon on a large scale is more promising. The IPCC report puts faith in the <a href="https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/62458">farming industry</a> unrolling dramatic changes to help <a href="https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/regnererative_agriculture_in_africa_report_2021.pdf">sequester</a> more carbon in soil over the next decade. Yet although methods of doing this have been successfully trialled across the world, policy hasn’t caught up, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/world/europe/eu-farm-subsidy-hungary.html">vested interests</a> in current farming methods also create inertia. </p>
<p>Extensive <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/04/planting-billions-trees-best-tackle-climate-crisis-scientists-canopy-emissions">tree planting</a> also offers scope for increasing carbon sinks, as do peatland preservation, mangrove reforestation and <a href="https://theconversation.com/four-ways-to-tackle-the-climate-and-biodiversity-crises-simultaneously-162631">rewilding</a>. But using land alone won’t be enough to sufficiently reduce greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. This is where oceans come in.</p>
<h2>Storing carbon in the sea</h2>
<p>Much of the deep ocean that’s now <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/chapter/chapter-5/">desertified</a> thanks to human activity was once a thriving aquatic ecosystem. Our current <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/mar/06/the-squit-and-the-whale-can-artificial-faeces-revive-the-ocean-ecosystem">research</a> explores how <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/60ccae658553d102459d11ed/t/6253ff0eb27d617aac93cde0/1649671961939/CCAG_PositionPaper_CriticalPathway.pdf">whales</a> form an important part of rebuilding that system, acting as “<a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0012444">biological pumps</a>” that circulate nutrients from the depths of the ocean to its surface through their feeding and excreting behaviours. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/oceans-are-better-at-storing-carbon-than-trees-in-a-warmer-future-ocean-carbon-sinks-could-help-stabilise-our-planet-176154">Oceans are better at storing carbon than trees. In a warmer future, ocean carbon sinks could help stabilise our planet</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>What’s more, CCRC experiments are exploring the potential for regenerating <a href="https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/44381">ocean biomass</a> as a way to store more carbon. Ocean biomass refers to communities of plants, fish and mammals that thrive near the surface, but send their shells, bones and decomposing vegetation permanently to the deep ocean, locking huge amounts of carbon into the seabed. Expanding their numbers could bolster biodiversity, shore up fish stocks and provide <a href="https://www.oceanpanel.org/ocean-action/files/full-report-ocean-solutions-eng.pdf">income opportunities</a> for marginalised communities across the world – as well as capturing tens of billions of tons of CO₂ from the atmosphere.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A whale beneath the water's surface" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457423/original/file-20220411-18-1n40b5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/457423/original/file-20220411-18-1n40b5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457423/original/file-20220411-18-1n40b5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457423/original/file-20220411-18-1n40b5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=369&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457423/original/file-20220411-18-1n40b5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457423/original/file-20220411-18-1n40b5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/457423/original/file-20220411-18-1n40b5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=464&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Whales play a crucial part in regenerating damaged ocean ecosystems.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Humpback_Whales_-_Flickr_-_Christopher.Michel_(38).jpg">Christopher Michel/Wikimedia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A third aspect of tackling the climate crisis involves fixing parts of the climate system that have already passed their “tipping point”: starting by refreezing the Arctic. <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/60ccae658553d102459d11ed/t/6102596bc768697d04731d55/1627543921216/CCAG+Extreme+Weather.pdf">Rapid Arctic melting</a> has already caused many of the extreme weather events we’ve seen recently, from snow in Texas to floods in China, thanks to its distorting effects on the polar jet stream. <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/60ccae658553d102459d11ed/t/6253ff0eb27d617aac93cde0/1649671961939/CCAG_PositionPaper_CriticalPathway.pdf">Reversing this process</a> – for example by artificially increasing cloud cover over the region to reflect more sunlight away from Arctic ice – would allow the jet stream to return to normal, buying us more time to work on reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas levels.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/heres-what-it-would-take-to-end-emissions-from-fossil-fuels-170815">challenges</a> of reducing emissions by switching away from fossil fuels are largely political, not technical. The almost-immediate <a href="http://www.ilo.org/global/research/global-reports/weso/greening-with-jobs/WCMS_628708/lang--en/index.htm">benefits</a> of cleaner air, better health and new <a href="https://c40.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#36000001Enhz/a/1Q0000001mIk/Sb6HyccJdHHRziZ32Gto5UlsLpIXCH.BxguVpIGC3v8">jobs for millions</a> in the alternative energy sector should outweigh short-term fears. Meanwhile, we must also use our greatest natural resource to remove the excess carbon already released into the atmosphere if we are to create a manageable future for humanity.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 10,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/180901/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Prior to retirement in 2012, David King received funding from various Research Councils for research in which he was involved.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jane Lichtenstein works for the Climate Crisis Advisory Group (CCAG).</span></em></p>Using our oceans as carbon sinks could help achieve climate goals set in the most recent IPCC report.David King, Founder of Centre for Climate Repair at Cambridge and Chair of Climate Crisis Advisory Group (CCAG), University of CambridgeJane Lichtenstein, Associate Researcher, Climate Crisis Advisory Group (CCAG), University of CambridgeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1806632022-04-06T04:17:20Z2022-04-06T04:17:20ZOn top of drastic emissions cuts, IPCC finds large-scale CO₂ removal from air will be “essential” to meeting targets<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/456513/original/file-20220406-18-eau0by.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=20%2C5%2C977%2C660&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> </figcaption></figure><p>Large-scale deployment of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) methods is now “unavoidable” if the world is to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, according to this week’s <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-working-group-3/">report</a> by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). </p>
<p>The report, released on Monday, finds that in addition to rapid and deep reductions in greenhouse emissions, CO₂ removal is “an essential element of scenarios that limit warming to 1.5°C or likely below 2°C by 2100”.</p>
<p>CDR refers to a suite of activities that lower the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere. This is done by removing CO₂ molecules and storing the carbon in plants, trees, soil, geological reservoirs, ocean reservoirs or products derived from CO₂. </p>
<p>As the IPCC notes, each mechanism is complex, and has advantages and pitfalls. Much work is needed to ensure CDR projects are rolled out responsibly.</p>
<h2>How does CDR work?</h2>
<p>CDR is distinct from “carbon capture”, which involves catching CO₂ at the source, such as a coal-fired power plant or steel mill, before it reaches the atmosphere. </p>
<p>There are <a href="https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/25259/chapter/1">several ways</a> to remove CO₂ from the air. They include:</p>
<ul>
<li><p><strong>terrestrial solutions</strong>, such as planting trees and adopting regenerative soil practices, such as low or no-till agriculture and cover cropping, which limit soil disturbances that can <a href="https://theconversation.com/farming-without-disturbing-soil-could-cut-agricultures-climate-impact-by-30-new-research-157153">oxidise soil carbon</a> and release CO₂.</p></li>
<li><p><strong>geochemical approaches</strong> that store CO₂ as a solid mineral carbonate in rocks. In a process known as “enhanced mineral weathering”, rocks such as limestone and olivine can be finely ground to increase their surface area and enhance a naturally occurring process whereby minerals rich in calcium and magnesium react with CO₂ to form a stable mineral carbonate.</p></li>
<li><p><strong>chemical solutions</strong> such as direct air capture that use <a href="https://theconversation.com/these-machines-scrub-greenhouse-gases-from-the-air-an-inventor-of-direct-air-capture-technology-shows-how-it-works-172306">engineered filters</a> to remove CO₂ molecules from air. The captured CO₂ can then be injected deep underground into saline aquifers and basaltic rock formations for durable sequestration.</p></li>
<li><p><strong><a href="https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/26278/chapter/1">ocean-based</a> solutions</strong>, such as enhanced alkalinity. This involves directly adding alkaline materials to the environment, or electrochemically processing seawater. But these methods need to be further researched before being deployed.</p></li>
</ul>
<h2>Where is it being used right now?</h2>
<p>To date, US-based company Charm Industrial has <a href="https://charmindustrial.com/blog/largest-permanent-carbon-removal-delivery-of-all-time">delivered</a> 5,000 tonnes of CDR, which is the the largest volume thus far. This is equivalent to the emissions produced by about <a href="https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator#results">1,000 cars</a> in a year. </p>
<p>There are also several plans for larger-scale direct air capture facilities. In September, 2021, Climeworks <a href="https://climeworks.com/news/climeworks-launches-orca">opened</a> a facility in Iceland with a 4,000 tonne per annum capacity for CO₂ removal. And in the US, the Biden Administration has <a href="https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021-12/FECM%20Infrastructure%20Factsheet.pdf">allocated</a> US$3.5 billion to build four separate direct air capture hubs, each with the capacity to remove at least one million tonnes of CO₂ per year. </p>
<p>However, a previous IPCC <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/download/#full">report</a> estimated that to limit global warming to 1.5°C, between 100 billion and one trillion tonnes of CO₂ must be removed from the atmosphere this century. So while these projects represent a massive scale-up, they are still a drop in the ocean compared with what is required.</p>
<p>In Australia, <a href="https://www.southerngreengas.com.au/">Southern Green Gas</a> and <a href="https://www.corporatecarbon.com.au/southern-green-gas-and-corporate-carbon-sign-mou-to-progress-dac">Corporate Carbon</a> are developing one of the country’s first direct air capture projects. This is being done in conjunction with University of Sydney researchers, ourselves included.</p>
<p>In this system, fans push atmospheric air over finely tuned filters made from molecular adsorbents, which can remove CO₂ molecules from the air. The captured CO₂ can then be injected deep underground, where it can remain for thousands of <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12182-019-0340-8">years</a>.</p>
<h2>Opportunities</h2>
<p>It is important to stress CDR is not a replacement for emissions reductions. However, it can supplement these efforts. The IPCC has outlined three ways this might be done.</p>
<p>In the short term, CDR could help reduce net CO₂ emissions. This is crucial if we are to limit warming below critical temperature thresholds. </p>
<p>In the medium term, it could help balance out emissions from sectors such as agriculture, aviation, shipping and industrial manufacturing, where straightforward zero-emission alternatives don’t yet exist.</p>
<p>In the long term, CDR could potentially remove large amounts of historical emissions, stabilising atmospheric CO₂ and eventually bringing it back down to pre-industrial levels. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-earth-needs-multiple-methods-for-removing-co2-from-the-air-to-avert-worst-of-climate-change-121479">The Earth needs multiple methods for removing CO2 from the air to avert worst of climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The IPCC’s latest report has estimated the technological readiness levels, costs, scale-up potential, risk and impacts, co-benefits and trade-offs for 12 different forms of CDR. This provides an updated perspective on several forms of CDR that were lesser explored in previous reports. </p>
<p>It estimates each tonne of CO₂ retrieved through direct air capture will cost US$84–386, and that there is the feasible potential to remove between 5 billion and 40 billion tonnes annually.</p>
<h2>Concerns and challenges</h2>
<p>Each CDR method is complex and unique, and no solution is perfect. As deployment grows, a number of concerns must be addressed. </p>
<p>First, the IPCC notes scaling up CDR must not detract from efforts to dramatically reduce emissions. They <a href="https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg3/pdf/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FinalDraft_FullReport.pdf">write that</a> “CDR cannot serve as a substitute for deep emissions reductions but can fulfil multiple complementary roles”.</p>
<p>If not done properly, CDR projects could potentially compete with agriculture for land or introduce non-native plants and trees. As the IPCC notes, care must be taken to ensure the technology does not negatively affect biodiversity, land-use or food security.</p>
<p>The IPCC also notes some CDR methods are energy-intensive, or could consume renewable energy needed to decarbonise other activities.</p>
<p>It expressed concern CDR might also exacerbate water scarcity and make Earth <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00122-z">reflect less sunlight</a>, such as in cases of large-scale reforestation.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="An established forest is seen in the background, with smaller newly-planted trees in the front" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/456500/original/file-20220406-18-7zqyor.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Forestry projects at high latitudes or in regions with high reflectivity can cover light-colored surfaces, and increase infrared radiation and warming.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/solar-panels-in-sahara-could-boost-renewable-energy-but-damage-the-global-climate-heres-why-153992">Solar panels in Sahara could boost renewable energy but damage the global climate – here's why</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Given the portfolio of required solutions, each form of CDR might work best in different locations. So being thoughtful about placement can ensure crops and trees are planted where they won’t dramatically alter the Earth’s reflectivity, or use too much water. </p>
<p>Direct air capture systems can be placed in remote locations that have easy access to off-grid renewable energy, and where they won’t compete with agriculture or forests. </p>
<p>Finally, deploying long-duration CDR solutions can be quite expensive – far more so than short-duration solutions such as planting trees and altering soil. This has hampered CDR’s commercial viability thus far. </p>
<p>But costs are likely to decline, as they have for many other technologies including solar, wind and lithium-ion batteries. The trajectory at which CDR costs decline will vary between the technologies.</p>
<h2>Future efforts</h2>
<p>Looking forward, the IPCC recommends accelerated research, development and demonstration, and targeted incentives to increase the scale of CDR projects. It also emphasises the need for improved measurement, reporting and verification methods for carbon storage.</p>
<p>More work is needed to ensure CDR projects are deployed responsibly. CDR deployment must involve communities, policymakers, scientists and entrepreneurs to ensure it’s done in an environmentally, ethically and socially responsible way.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/180663/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sam Wenger receives funding from the University of Sydney for his research on Direct Air Capture.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Deanna D'Alessandro receives funding from Southern Green Gas Ltd. as part of a government-funded ARENA grant on Renewable Methane Generation with pipeline utility APA group and the University of Newcastle.</span></em></p>While carbon dioxide removal from the air is not a replacement for emissions reductions, it can supplement these efforts. Experts are continually researching the best ways to do this.Sam Wenger, PhD Student, University of SydneyDeanna D'Alessandro, Professor & ARC Future Fellow, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1732082022-01-25T13:26:44Z2022-01-25T13:26:44ZOffshore wind farms could help capture carbon from air and store it long-term – using energy that would otherwise go to waste<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440938/original/file-20220114-21-1wvrxt3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C16%2C5480%2C3697&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The U.S. had seven operating offshore wind turbines with 42 megawatts of capacity in 2021. The Biden administration's goal is 30,000 megawatts by 2030.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/OffshoreWind/933c4adb5d06417c8d42f69986bae5d6/photo">AP Photo/Michael Dwyer</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Off the Massachusetts and New York coasts, developers are preparing to build the United States’ <a href="https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/state-activities/south-fork">first federally approved</a> <a href="https://www.boem.gov/vineyard-wind">utility-scale offshore wind farms</a> – 74 turbines in all that could power 470,000 homes. More than a dozen other offshore wind projects are <a href="https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/mapping-and-data/renewable-energy-gis-data">awaiting approval</a> along the Eastern Seaboard.</p>
<p>By 2030, the Biden administration’s goal is to have <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/29/fact-sheet-biden-administration-jumpstarts-offshore-wind-energy-projects-to-create-jobs/">30 gigawatts of offshore wind energy</a> flowing, enough to power more than 10 million homes. </p>
<p>Replacing fossil fuel-based energy with clean energy like wind power <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">is essential to holding off the worsening effects of climate change</a>. But that transition <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/faq/faq-chapter-4/">isn’t happening fast enough</a> to stop global warming. Human activities have pumped so much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that we <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10842-5">will also have to remove carbon dioxide from the air</a> and lock it away permanently.</p>
<p>Offshore wind farms are uniquely positioned to do both – and save money.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Map of coasts showing lease areas offshore" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=652&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=652&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=652&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=819&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=819&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440937/original/file-20220114-16-u7vu61.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=819&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Most renewable energy lease areas off the Atlantic Coast are near the Mid-Atlantic states and Massachusetts. About 480,000 acres of the New York Bight is scheduled to be auctioned for wind farms in February 2022.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.boem.gov/renewable-energy/mapping-and-data/renewable-energy-gis-data">BOEM</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As a <a href="https://www.earth.columbia.edu/users/profile/david-s-goldberg">marine geophysicist</a>, I have been exploring the potential for <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEIyAulMtxc">pairing wind turbines with technology that captures carbon dioxide</a> directly from the air and stores it in natural reservoirs under the ocean. Built together, these technologies could <a href="https://youtu.be/qqpYVXfqr9Q">reduce the energy costs</a> of carbon capture and minimize the need for onshore pipelines, reducing impacts on the environment.</p>
<h2>Capturing CO2 from the air</h2>
<p>Several research groups and tech startups are <a href="https://theconversation.com/these-machines-scrub-greenhouse-gases-from-the-air-an-inventor-of-direct-air-capture-technology-shows-how-it-works-172306">testing direct air capture devices</a> that can pull carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere. <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20437-0">The technology works</a>, but the <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2516-1083/abf1ce">early projects</a> so far are expensive and energy intensive.</p>
<p>The systems use <a href="https://cdrprimer.org/read/chapter-2#sec-2-8">filters or liquid solutions that capture CO2</a> from air blown across them. Once the filters are full, electricity and heat are needed to release the carbon dioxide and restart the capture cycle. </p>
<p>For the process to achieve net negative emissions, the energy source must be carbon-free.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://climeworks.com/news/recent-investment-in-climeworks-has-been-boosted-from">world’s largest active direct air capture plant</a> operating today does this by using waste heat and renewable energy. The plant, in Iceland, then pumps its captured carbon dioxide into the underlying basalt rock, where the CO2 reacts with the basalt and calcifies, <a href="https://www.carbfix.com/scientific-papers">turning to solid mineral</a>.</p>
<p>A similar process could be created with offshore wind turbines.</p>
<p>If direct air capture systems were built alongside offshore wind turbines, they would have an immediate source of clean energy from excess wind power and could pipe captured carbon dioxide directly to storage beneath the sea floor below, reducing the need for extensive pipeline systems. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two men stand beneath a large structure with fans" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/433064/original/file-20211122-19-10oi9zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/433064/original/file-20211122-19-10oi9zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/433064/original/file-20211122-19-10oi9zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/433064/original/file-20211122-19-10oi9zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=375&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/433064/original/file-20211122-19-10oi9zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/433064/original/file-20211122-19-10oi9zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/433064/original/file-20211122-19-10oi9zt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Climeworks, a Swiss company, has 15 direct air capture plants removing carbon dioxide from the air.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://climeworks.com/purpose">Climeworks</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Researchers are currently studying how these systems function <a href="https://pics.uvic.ca/projects/solid-carbon-negative-emissions-technology-feasibility-study?page=1">under marine conditions</a>. Direct air capture is only beginning to be deployed on land, and the technology likely would have to be modified for the harsh ocean environment. But planning should start now so wind power projects are positioned to take advantage of carbon storage sites and designed so the platforms, sub-sea infrastructure and cabled networks can be shared. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/these-machines-scrub-greenhouse-gases-from-the-air-an-inventor-of-direct-air-capture-technology-shows-how-it-works-172306">These machines scrub greenhouse gases from the air – an inventor of direct air capture technology shows how it works</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Using excess wind power when it isn’t needed</h2>
<p>By nature, wind energy is intermittent. Demand for energy also varies. When the wind can produce more power than is needed, production is <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.06.082">curtailed</a> and electricity that could be used is lost.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/research/commentary/electricity-oversupply-maximizing-zero-carbon-power-accelerate-transition-fossil-fuels">That unused power</a> could instead be used to <a href="https://worldprojects.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/2021-05/Accelerating%20Offshore%20Carbon%20Capture%20and%20Storage%20Report.pdf">remove carbon from the air and lock it away</a>. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All-Programs/Offshore-Wind/Focus-Areas/NY-Offshore-Wind-Projects">New York State’s goal</a> is to have 9 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2035. Those 9 gigawatts would be expected to deliver 27.5 terawatt-hours of electricity per year. </p>
<p>Based on historical wind curtailment rates in the U.S., a surplus of 825 gigawatt-hours of electrical energy per year may be expected as offshore wind farms expand to meet this goal. Assuming direct air capture’s efficiency continues to improve and reaches commercial targets, this surplus energy could be used to capture and store upwards of 0.5 million tons of CO2 per year. </p>
<p>That’s if the system only used surplus energy that would have gone to waste. If it used more wind power, its carbon capture and storage potential would increase. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A map showing undersea storage options in the vicinity of offshore wind farm lease areas." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440912/original/file-20220114-13-1vblb7d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Several Mid-Atlantic areas being leased for offshore wind farms also have potential for carbon storage beneath the seafloor. The capacity is measured in millions of metric tons of CO2 per square kilometer. The U.S. produces about 4.5 billion metric tons of CO2 from energy per year.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">U.S. Department of Energy and Battelle</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has projected that <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/">100 to 1,000 gigatons</a> of carbon dioxide will have to be removed from the atmosphere over the century to keep global warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) compared to pre-industrial levels.</p>
<p>Researchers have estimated that <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsfs.2019.0065">sub-seafloor geological formations</a> adjacent to the offshore wind developments planned on the U.S. East Coast have the capacity to store more than <a href="https://www.netl.doe.gov/sites/default/files/2017-12/Gupta-P2-FY17_MidAtlanticProjectTeam_DOE_FINAL.pdf">500 gigatons of CO2</a>. Basalt rocks are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0913721107">likely to exist</a> in a string of buried basins across this area too, adding even more storage capacity and enabling CO2 to react with the basalt and solidify over time, though geotechnical surveys have not yet tested these deposits.</p>
<h2>Planning both at once saves time and cost</h2>
<p>New wind farms built with direct air capture could deliver renewable power to the grid and provide surplus power for carbon capture and storage, optimizing this massive investment for a direct climate benefit. </p>
<p>But it will require planning that starts well in advance of construction. Launching the marine geophysical surveys, environmental monitoring requirements and approval processes for both wind power and storage together can <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/oct/23/crown-gives-go-ahead-to-rival-net-zero-carbon-north-sea-schemes">save time, avoid conflicts</a> and improve environmental stewardship.</p>
<p><em>This article has been updated to correct a typo. The potential surplus wind energy calculation listed is in gigawatt-hours.</em></p>
<p>[<em>Get fascinating science, health and technology news.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?nl=science&source=inline-science-fascinating">Sign up for The Conversation’s weekly science newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/173208/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Goldberg receives funding from the US National Science Foundation; Climateworks Foundation, US Dept of Energy, and the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions</span></em></p>Wind turbines often can produce more power than is needed for electricity onshore. That extra energy could be put to work capturing and storing carbon.David Goldberg, Lamont Research Professor, Columbia UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1714542021-12-15T14:49:20Z2021-12-15T14:49:20ZWhy carbon capture and storage is key to avoiding the worst effects of the climate emergency<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437357/original/file-20211213-19-16xy3hf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=28%2C57%2C3801%2C2467&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Some industries, including steel and cement, emit carbon dioxide as part of the manufacturing process, and could benefit from carbon capture technologies. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(haglundc/flickr)</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>With the ongoing climate emergency and nations’ commitments to meet net-zero goals by 2050, there’s a heightened need to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions through whatever means possible. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) or carbon capture, utilization and sequestration (CCUS) are included in the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2019/02/SR15_Chapter2_Low_Res.pdf">mitigation pathways</a> set out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. </p>
<p>Despite this, carbon capture technologies have been labelled as a <a href="https://www.eco-business.com/news/carbon-capture-and-storage-wont-work-critics-say/">distraction from supporting renewable energies</a> and as extending the life of the oil and gas industry. But CCUS is a technology we cannot ignore. </p>
<p>CCUS are technologies that concentrate carbon dioxide from various streams, including combustion stacks, industrial processes and air, and either make use of the carbon dioxide or store it away. I research the technical development of carbon capture and previously oversaw the innovation around CCUS through <a href="https://cmcghg.com">Carbon Management Canada</a>, and have come to understand these technologies. </p>
<h2>The climate emergency is a complex problem</h2>
<p>Mitigation — finding ways to avoid the worst effects of the climate emergency — is a hugely complex problem. The problem itself is <a href="https://ethicsandclimate.org/tag/scientific-uncertainty-and-climate-change/">multifaceted, value-laden and carries uncertainty</a>. There is no silver bullet.</p>
<p><a href="http://homerdixon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Homer-Dixon-Oxford-Leadership-Journal-Manion-lecture.pdf">Complexity science</a> — a research approach that studies the interconnectedness of dynamic systems — tells us that in order to deal with complex problems, we need to apply non-linear thinking (draw connections from multiple concepts) and be adaptive and learn. Given the urgent need to decarbonize, we need renewable energy sources to replace fossil fuels to produce electricity. But this will take time, and it is here, through this transition period, that CCUS can provide a much-needed technical solution. </p>
<p>We also need CCUS to decarbonize heavy industries such as cement and steel, which account for <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html">about 10 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada</a>. Using renewable energy won’t affect their emissions much because carbon dioxide is released from the material used in the process, and not through combustion. CCUS technologies can be a strong part of the arsenal to accelerate the decarbonization of industries. </p>
<p>Time matters in the race to decarbonization. Fortunately, CCUS technologies are no longer a curiosity or experimental, but are ready or nearly ready to be exploited.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Three orange and white smokestacks in the background rise above a series of industrial buildings and corridors, with a few people in safety vests walking around." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437346/original/file-20211213-10093-v4cxrs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437346/original/file-20211213-10093-v4cxrs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437346/original/file-20211213-10093-v4cxrs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437346/original/file-20211213-10093-v4cxrs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437346/original/file-20211213-10093-v4cxrs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437346/original/file-20211213-10093-v4cxrs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437346/original/file-20211213-10093-v4cxrs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Visitors tour part of the Boundary Dam Power Station in Estevan, Sask., in 2014. The carbon capture and storage project is the world’s first commercial-scale operation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Michael Bell</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Canada has successfully demonstrated <a href="https://unfccc.int/climate-action/momentum-for-change/activity-database/boundary-dam-carbon-capture-and-storage-project">CCS at Boundary Dam</a>, a coal-fired power station near Estevan, Sask. The technology is based on a liquid that absorbs carbon dioxide from emissions and lets the other gases through, and then releases pure carbon dioxide into another stream, allowing it to be captured and stored.</p>
<p>Over the past seven years, this demonstration project — the world’s first — has provided much information about capturing carbon dioxide from a coal-power plant, and has become a benchmark for technology developers. Researchers like myself learned that a liquid sorbent (the substance that absorbs the carbon dioxide molecules) requires <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-soon-could-carbon-capture-technology-solve-industry-co-shortages-168310">large amounts of energy</a> for regeneration (compared to solid sorbents) and degrades over time, releasing toxic chemicals. </p>
<p>Identifying challenges like these — and proposing solutions — is how technological breakthroughs evolve. This project also demonstrated how carbon dioxide can be <a href="https://ptrc.ca/projects/co2-eor-and-storage/aquistore">safely stored in geological formations and how technology can be used to monitor that containment</a>. </p>
<h2>Encouraging innovations</h2>
<p>The small CCUS steps taken almost a decade ago are now being followed by a flurry of innovative technologies whose commercial deployment can be measured in months or in a few years. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://svanteinc.com/news/">Svante</a> is developing a carbon capture technology using structured solid sorbent to bind carbon dioxide. The solid sorbent is placed in a rotating column that captures diluted carbon dioxide from flue gas and releases concentrated carbon dioxide when it’s exposed to steam. Svante is currently scaling its operations and working with hard-to-abate industrial emissions — such as in cement and steel industries. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Silhouette of gases rising from an industrial complex with a golden sunset." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437347/original/file-20211213-25-a2gmu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=32%2C262%2C5422%2C3374&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437347/original/file-20211213-25-a2gmu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437347/original/file-20211213-25-a2gmu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437347/original/file-20211213-25-a2gmu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437347/original/file-20211213-25-a2gmu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437347/original/file-20211213-25-a2gmu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437347/original/file-20211213-25-a2gmu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Plumes rise from the chimneys of the Tenaris steel mill factory, in Dalmine, Italy.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Luca Bruno)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Marketed as an industrial lung, <a href="https://co2solutions.com/poumon-industriel/">CO₂ solutions Inc.</a> is also developing carbon capture technology using a naturally occurring enzyme to capture carbon dioxide from flue streams and provide pure carbon dioxide stream as chemical feedstock for building material and fuels. </p>
<p>These are just a couple, from a large number of <a href="https://airminers.org/explore">examples of CCUS innovations</a> being developed and commercialized by start-ups and small-to-medium enterprises all over the world. Yet the perception of CCUS technologies continues to be that they are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112546">high-risk and too costly</a>. </p>
<h2>We need commitment and will</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/levelised-cost-of-co2-capture-by-sector-and-initial-co2-concentration-2019">cost of carbon capture</a> reflects the capital cost of building the system, concentrating the incoming carbon dioxide stream and providing the energy required to purify the carbon dioxide stream. As technologies develop and more versions are adopted, the cost of carbon dioxide capture and conversion will decrease. </p>
<p>However, they will remain costly even with the best of scenarios. If we want to add value to carbon dioxide, thermodynamics tell us that it will inevitably require energy — and energy has a cost. </p>
<p>Just as we, as a society, have come to accept paying for the proper handling of our solid wastes, industry must accept paying for the proper handling of its carbon dioxide emissions. Clearly, we can no longer expect to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5 C without considerable commitment of funds and political will. </p>
<p>Critics may say that we are gambling with <a href="https://theconversation.com/ottawas-latest-climate-plan-bets-on-expensive-and-unproven-carbon-capture-technologies-150527">unproven technologies</a>, but many of these technologies are far from unproven. Yes, many are being challenged through their scale-up, but this is typical of any new technology in any industry. We shouldn’t paint CCUS with a large brush stroke, but rather understand these technologies with granularity and in context. </p>
<p>There are many industrial emissions, such as lime kiln in the cement and pulp and paper industries, that require carbon dioxide capture from their processes. Just as we need to consider alternative fuel sources for transportation, heating and others, we need to look at industrial emissions in various sectors in context. </p>
<p>Demonstration projects allow us to continuously learn about how technologies improve, how the social systems react and adjust to changes, and how to change policies. At this point, we no longer have the luxury of finding the best solution that addresses such a complex problem as the climate emergency. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-world-leaders-hope-to-reach-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-and-why-some-experts-are-worried-climate-fight-podcast-part-2-169555">How world leaders hope to reach net zero emissions by 2050 – and why some experts are worried. Climate Fight podcast part 2</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Instead, we need to deploy some technologies based on our best judgement, learn from the cases and improve our understanding and technologies. We need to embrace some carefully chosen CCUS technologies and try to reduce emissions quickly, while we continue to develop and improve them and as we continue to deploy renewable energy sources. </p>
<p>Canada has contributed to CCUS through research and innovation, and demonstrated a few successful CCUS projects. With our commitment to <a href="https://theconversation.com/canadas-federal-election-made-big-strides-for-climate-and-the-environment-168918">place a price on carbon</a>, we have a greater chance at succeeding in applying CCUS technologies to decarbonize our activities. We have now entered the all-hands-on-deck phase to quickly mitigate the devastating effects of the climate emergency. Let’s shift the narrative on CCUS and reduce carbon emissions with all the available tools.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171454/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Naoko Ellis receives funding from the Canadian Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC). She is registered with the Engineers and Geoscientists British Columbia. </span></em></p>Carbon capture technologies have been labelled as a distraction. But as we enter the all-hands-on-deck phase of tackling climate change, they must not be ignored.Naoko Ellis, Professor in Chemical Engineering, University of British ColumbiaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1708152021-12-10T14:51:20Z2021-12-10T14:51:20ZHere’s what it would take to end emissions from fossil fuels<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/436936/original/file-20211210-137612-1x4dfqy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5112%2C3403&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The UK government has committed to phase out coal power completely by 2024.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/breakfree2016/26814246075">Break Free/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Achieving <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/net-zero-strategy">net zero</a> greenhouse gas emissions in the UK by 2050 is a massive challenge. It’ll mainly be achieved through cutting emissions from <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels">fossil fuels</a>: coal, natural gas and oil. This will require rapid, deep transformation across the UK’s energy system.</p>
<p>Smaller energy transformations have taken place before in the UK. For example, during <a href="https://www.rapidtransition.org/stories/the-great-switch-lessons-from-when-14-million-homes-and-businesses-changed-fuel-in-less-than-a-decade/">1966 to 1977</a>, there was a shift from using town gas (made from burning coal) to using <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-want-green-energy-jobs-say-north-sea-oil-and-gas-workers-what-they-need-to-make-the-leap-147612">North Sea</a> natural gas. The transformation involved building a <a href="https://www.nationalgrid.com/uk/gas-transmission/">national gas grid</a>, as well as updating millions of pieces of equipment. But since then, the UK’s energy system has become far more complex. The country has never transformed such a large, critical apparatus. </p>
<p>There are two main ways we can cut emissions from fossil fuels: <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/oct/04/uk-electricity-generation-boris-johnson-conservative-conference-gas">elimination and decarbonisation</a>. </p>
<p>Elimination means that low-carbon energy sources such as renewables, hydrogen gas from low-carbon sources and nuclear power replace fossil fuels. This process requires “<a href="https://fresh-energy.org/fuel-switching-101-moving-towards-an-efficient-and-carbon-free-future">fuel switching</a>” – changing or upgrading systems and equipment to run on these new fuels, such as moving from petrol to <a href="https://theconversation.com/electric-cars-alone-wont-save-the-planet-well-need-to-design-cities-so-people-can-walk-and-cycle-safely-171818">electric cars</a>. The two largest domains where fuel switching is required are vehicles and building heating. </p>
<p>On the other hand, <a href="https://www.drax.com/carbon-capture/what-is-decarbonisation/">decarbonisation</a> requires capturing emissions as they are produced. This technology, called <a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-capture-and-storage-where-should-the-world-store-co-its-a-moral-dilemma-167453">carbon capture</a> and use or storage, is generally done by chemically compressing carbon dioxide into a liquid and either storing it or <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/11/13/20839531/climate-change-industry-co2-carbon-capture-utilization-storage-ccu#:%7E:text=Captured%20CO2%20can%20be%20used,5">using it</a> to make synthetic fuels, chemicals and building materials. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Towers releasing steam" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/436938/original/file-20211210-17-5s6sa9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/436938/original/file-20211210-17-5s6sa9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436938/original/file-20211210-17-5s6sa9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436938/original/file-20211210-17-5s6sa9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436938/original/file-20211210-17-5s6sa9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436938/original/file-20211210-17-5s6sa9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436938/original/file-20211210-17-5s6sa9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Emissions can be captured and stored, instead of released into the atmosphere.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/gellscom/9460755014">Gerry Machen/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Additionally, other “<a href="https://policyexchange.org.uk/four-negative-emission-technologies-nets-that-could-get-us-to-net-zero/">negative emissions technologies</a>” that take greenhouse gases out of the air are being developed, but so far none are ready for mass deployment. </p>
<h2>Challenges</h2>
<p>Several plans for getting the UK to reach net zero emissions have been made public: including from the <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/sixth-carbon-budget/">Committee on Climate Change</a>, the Department for <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-energy-and-industrial-strategy">Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy</a> and the <a href="https://www.nationalgrideso.com/future-energy/future-energy-scenarios/fes-2021/scenarios-net-zero">National Grid</a>. </p>
<p>Country governments, including <a href="https://www.gov.scot/policies/climate-change/reducing-emissions/">Scotland</a>, <a href="https://gov.wales/climate-change-targets-and-carbon-budgets">Wales</a> and <a href="https://www.economy-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/consultations/economy/energy-strategy-for-NI-consultation-on-policy-options.pdf">Northern Ireland</a> have also made plans – but how achievable these will be in practice remains to be seen. </p>
<p>Among the many challenges that these plans pose, two stand out: sorting out mass fuel switching and deploying complex new technologies related to emissions reduction.</p>
<p>Mass <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/824592/industrial-fuel-switching.pdf">fuel switching</a> could cause problems if new equipment is initially too scarce, unreliable, or more expensive to buy or run than existing equipment. Additionally, actually meeting growing <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032115001471">demand</a> for low-carbon energy will mean significantly expanding the country’s current electricity generation capacity. Ensuring there are no delays in providing this power to citizens will be crucial.</p>
<p>Although these problems may only occur for a short time while the low-carbon transition takes place, they would still require rapid responses from those governing the transition to avoid causing <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/global-energy-shortage-or-coincidence-regional-crises-2021-09-29/">social unrest</a>.</p>
<p>Most energy transition plans also rely at least partly on some new, complex technologies being added to our roster, to help generate greener energy. These include carbon capture and storage, as well as <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/advanced-nuclear-technologies/advanced-nuclear-technologies">advanced nuclear power</a> such as small modular reactors and <a href="https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/green-hydrogen-explained">green hydrogen</a> produced using low-carbon electricity. The speed with which these inventions are developed and adopted, both in industry and society, will have to <a href="https://www.oecd.org/naec/new-economic-policymaking/Kerstin_H%C3%B6tte.pdf">increase</a> if we are to meet climate goals.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An electric car charging" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/436939/original/file-20211210-142574-egrp9a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/436939/original/file-20211210-142574-egrp9a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436939/original/file-20211210-142574-egrp9a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436939/original/file-20211210-142574-egrp9a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436939/original/file-20211210-142574-egrp9a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436939/original/file-20211210-142574-egrp9a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/436939/original/file-20211210-142574-egrp9a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A transition to low-carbon energy involves moving from petrol to electric vehicles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/janitors/13103915635">Kārlis Dambrāns/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>My <a href="https://www.ucl.ac.uk/energy-models/models/tempest">own research</a> into the complexity of energy transition shows that strong <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004873331300187X">political leadership</a> is needed to to keep transitions on track.</p>
<p>Leaders shouldn’t just set ambitious energy efficiency goals. They must also support energy efficiency improvement programmes like <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/home-energy-performance-retrofit-funding-for-local-authorities-and-housing-associations-to-help-improve-the-energy-performance-of-homes">retrofitting houses</a>, encourage <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519307384">investment</a> in energy technology research, and help local governments to make the transition easier for the public: for example, by installing more electric vehicle <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-an-infrastructure-problem-map-of-electric-vehicle-chargers-shows-one-reason-why-166024">charging points</a>. </p>
<h2>Opportunities</h2>
<p>Making a successful transition to low-carbon energy wouldn’t just help the UK meet its <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-becomes-first-major-economy-to-pass-net-zero-emissions-law">net zero</a> targets and <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-enshrines-new-target-in-law-to-slash-emissions-by-78-by-2035">climate obligations</a>. Other benefits could include better local <a href="https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/programs/geh/geh_newsletter/2013/12/spotlight/reducing_greenhouse_gas_emissions_can_improve_air_quality_and_save_lives_.cfm">air quality</a>, less <a href="https://theconversation.com/energy-poverty-in-zimbabwe-takes-many-forms-but-policy-only-looks-at-one-154437">energy poverty</a>, better national <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-energy-security-and-how-has-it-changed-102476">energy security</a> and more <a href="https://www.climatexchange.org.uk/policy/challenges/low-carbon-transport/">reliable transport</a>. </p>
<p>Social movements could play a key role during this transition. This might look like supporting people vulnerable to <a href="https://theconversation.com/as-thousands-die-the-uk-must-face-up-to-its-responsibilities-on-fuel-poverty-47952">fuel poverty</a> (including the elderly, renters and those living in rural areas) through the fuel switching process. Or it could involve developing new businesses to provide essential services like heating and transport in more efficient, sustainable ways.</p>
<p>And internationally, the UK could become more economically competitive within a decarbonised world, demonstrating how industrialised countries can achieve economic growth while cutting <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/compendium/economicreview/october2019/thedecouplingofeconomicgrowthfromcarbonemissionsukevidence">carbon emissions</a> and encouraging social <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-sense-of-wellbeing-has-been-in-decline-for-years-heres-how-to-turn-it-around-169988">wellbeing</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170815/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rachel Freeman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If the UK is to achieve net zero by 2050, it needs to get moving on making a successful green transition across fuel, transport and housing.Rachel Freeman, Senior Research Fellow in Energy Transition Modelling, UCLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1717912021-11-23T07:35:46Z2021-11-23T07:35:46ZWhy the oil industry’s pivot to carbon capture and storage – while it keeps on drilling – isn’t a climate change solution<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/432745/original/file-20211118-13-17icw4c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=7%2C46%2C5184%2C3409&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Most carbon dioxide captured in the U.S. today is used to extract more oil.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/pump-jacks-at-the-belridge-oil-field-and-hydraulic-fracking-news-photo/566447215">Citizens of the Planet/Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>After <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.04.014">decades of sowing doubt</a> about climate change and its causes, the fossil fuel industry is now shifting to a new strategy: presenting itself as the source of solutions. This repositioning includes rebranding itself as a “carbon management industry.” </p>
<p>This strategic pivot was <a href="https://www.globalwitness.org/en/press-releases/hundreds-fossil-fuel-lobbyists-flooding-cop26-climate-talks/">on display</a> at the Glasgow climate summit and at a <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/legislation/hearings/fueling-the-climate-crisis-exposing-big-oil-s-disinformation-campaign-to">Congressional hearing</a> in October 2021, where CEOs of four major oil companies talked about a “lower-carbon future.” That future, in their view, would be powered by the fuels they supply and technologies they could deploy to remove the planet-warming carbon dioxide their products emit – provided they get sufficient government support. </p>
<p>That support may be coming. The Department of Energy recently added “carbon management” <a href="https://www.energy.gov/fecm/articles/our-new-name-also-new-vision">to the name</a> of its Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management and is <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/cash-infused-carbon-capture-office-expands-does-climate-mission">expanding its funding for carbon capture and storage</a>. </p>
<p>But how effective are these solutions, and what are their consequences?</p>
<p>Coming from <a href="https://sites.tufts.edu/gdae/researchers/">backgrounds in economics, ecology</a> <a href="https://capitalismstudies.org/research/public-economy/">and public policy</a>, we have spent several years <a href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s41247-020-00080-5.pdf">focusing on carbon drawdown</a>. We have watched mechanical carbon capture methods struggle to demonstrate success, despite U.S. government investments of over <a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44902.pdf">US$7 billion in direct spending</a> and at least a <a href="https://www.rollcall.com/2020/04/30/treasury-ig-a-decade-of-carbon-capture-tax-credits-were-faulty/">billion more in tax credits</a>. Meanwhile, proven biological solutions with multiple benefits have received far less attention.</p>
<h2>CCS’s troubled track record</h2>
<p>Carbon capture and storage, or CCS, aims to capture carbon dioxide as it emerges from smokestacks either at power plants or from industrial sources. So far, CCS at U.S. power plants has been a failure.</p>
<p>Seven large-scale CCS projects have been attempted at U.S. power plants, each with hundreds of millions of dollars of government subsidies, but these projects were either canceled before they reached commercial operation or <a href="https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44902.pdf">were shuttered</a> after they started due to <a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/CCS-Tech-and-Costs.pdf">financial</a> or mechanical troubles. There is only one commercial-scale CCS power plant operation in the world, <a href="https://www.power-technology.com/projects/sask-power-boundary-dam/">in Canada</a>, and its captured carbon dioxide <a href="https://dualchallenge.npc.org/">is used to extract more oil from wells</a> – a process called “<a href="https://www.netl.doe.gov/sites/default/files/netl-file/co2_eor_primer.pdf">enhanced oil recovery</a>.”</p>
<p>In industrial facilities, all but one of the <a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/2021-Global-Status-of-CCS-Report_Global_CCS_Institute.pdf">dozen CCS projects in the U.S</a> uses the captured carbon dioxide for enhanced oil recovery.</p>
<p>This expensive oil extraction technique has been described as “<a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/storing-co2-through-enhanced-oil-recovery">climate mitigation</a>” because the oil companies are now using carbon dioxide. But a modeling study of the full life cycle of this process at coal-fired power plants found it <a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es902006h">puts 3.7 to 4.7 times as much carbon dioxide into the air as it removes</a>. </p>
<p><iframe id="0QJIj" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0QJIj/6/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>The problem with pulling carbon from the air</h2>
<p>Another method would directly remove carbon dioxide from the air. Oil companies like <a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/news-media/latest-news/oxy-and-carbon-engineering-partner-to-combine-direct-air-capture-and-enhanced-oil-recovery-storage/">Occidental Petroleum</a> and <a href="https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/News/Newsroom/News-releases/2019/0627_ExxonMobil-and-Global-Thermostat-to-advance-breakthrough-atmospheric--carbon-capture-technology">ExxonMobil</a> are seeking government subsidies to develop and deploy such “direct air capture” systems. However, one widely recognized problem with these systems is their immense energy requirements, particularly if operating at a climate-significant scale, meaning removing at least 1 gigaton – 1 billion tons – of carbon dioxide per year. </p>
<p>That’s about 3% of annual global carbon dioxide emissions. The U.S. <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259/negative-emissions-technologies-and-reliable-sequestration-a-research-agenda">National Academies of Sciences</a> projects a need to remove 10 gigatons per year by 2050, and 20 gigatons per year by century’s end if decarbonization efforts fall short.</p>
<p>The only type of direct air capture system in relatively large-scale development right now must be powered by a <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259/negative-emissions-technologies-and-reliable-sequestration-a-research-agenda">fossil fuel</a> to attain the extremely high heat for the thermal process. </p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25259/negative-emissions-technologies-and-reliable-sequestration-a-research-agenda">National Academies of Sciences</a> study of direct air capture’s energy use indicates that to capture 1 gigaton of carbon dioxide per year, this type of direct air capture system could require up to 3,889 terawatt-hours of energy – almost as much as the total electricity <a href="https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/">generated in the U.S. in 2020</a>. The largest direct air capture plant being developed in the U.S. right now uses this system, and <a href="https://www.naturalgasintel.com/oxy-taking-contrarian-approach-to-net-zero-emissions-by-developing-oil-resources-reusing-co2/">the captured carbon dioxide will be used for oil recovery</a>.</p>
<p>Another direct air capture system, employing a solid sorbent, uses somewhat less energy, but companies have struggled to scale it up beyond pilots. There are ongoing efforts to develop more efficient and effective direct air capture technologies, but some scientists are skeptical about its potential. One study describes enormous material and energy demands of direct air capture that the authors say make it <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17203-7">“unrealistic.”</a> Another shows that spending the same amount of money on clean energy to replace fossil fuels is <a href="https://research.american.edu/carbonremoval/2019/11/13/jacobson-mark-2019-why-carbon-capture-and-direct-air-capture-cause-more-damage-than-good-to-climate-and-health/">more effective at reducing emissions, air pollution and other costs</a>. </p>
<h2>The cost of scaling up</h2>
<p>A 2021 study <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20437-0">envisions spending $1 trillion a year</a> to scale up direct air capture to a meaningful level. <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-politics-breakingviews/breakingviews-review-bill-gates-engineers-climate-risk-clarity-idUSKBN2AJ1I4">Bill Gates</a>, who is backing a direct air capture company called Carbon Engineering, estimated that operating at climate-significant scale would cost $5.1 trillion every year. Much of the cost would be borne by governments because there is no “customer” for burying waste underground. </p>
<p>As lawmakers in the U.S. and elsewhere consider devoting billions more dollars to carbon capture, they need to consider the consequences.</p>
<p>The captured carbon dioxide must be transported somewhere for use or storage. A 2020 study from Princeton estimated that <a href="https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu/img/Princeton_NZA_Interim_Report_15_Dec_2020_FINAL.pdf">66,000 miles of carbon dioxide pipelines</a> would have to be built by 2050 to begin to approach 1 gigaton per year of transport and burial.</p>
<p><iframe id="etQ3K" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/etQ3K/17/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The issues with burying highly pressurized CO2 underground will be analogous to the problems that have faced nuclear waste siting, but at enormously larger quantities. Transportation, injection and storage of carbon dioxide bring health and environmental hazards, such as the risk of <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/gassing-satartia-mississippi-co2-pipeline_n_60ddea9fe4b0ddef8b0ddc8f">pipeline ruptures</a>, <a href="https://eesa.lbl.gov/projects/potential-impacts-of-co2-leakage-on-groundwater-quality/">groundwater contamination</a> and the release of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcou.2018.11.002">toxins</a>, all of which particularly threaten the disadvantaged communities historically most victimized by pollution. </p>
<p>Bringing direct air capture to a scale that would have climate-significant impact would mean diverting taxpayer funding, private investment, technological innovation, scientists’ attention, public support and difficult-to-muster political action away from the essential work of transitioning to non-carbon energy sources. </p>
<h2>A proven method: trees, plants and soil</h2>
<p>Rather than placing what we consider to be risky bets on expensive mechanical methods that have a troubled track record and require decades of development, there are ways to sequester carbon that build upon the system we already know works: biological sequestration.</p>
<p>[<em>Science, politics, religion or just plain interesting articles:</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-checkoutweekly">Check out The Conversation’s weekly newsletters</a>.]</p>
<p>Trees in the U.S. already sequester <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-02/documents/us-ghg-inventory-2021-chapter-6-land-use-land-use-change-and-forestry.pdf">almost a billion tons</a> of carbon dioxide per year. Improved management of existing forests and urban trees, without using any additional land, <a href="https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu/img/NZA%20Annex%20P%20-%20Forest%20carbon%20sink.pdf">could increase this by 70%</a>. With the addition of reforesting nearly 50 million acres, an area about the size of Nebraska, the U.S. could sequester <a href="https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu/img/NZA%20Annex%20P%20-%20Forest%20carbon%20sink.pdf">nearly 2 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year</a>. That would equal about 40% of the country’s annual emissions. Restoring <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.06.037">wetlands</a> and <a href="https://www.fao.org/3/i1399e/i1399e.pdf">grasslands</a> and <a href="https://functionalfertiliser.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Lal-article-jswc.2020.0620A.full_.pdf">better agricultural practices</a> could sequester even more.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Looking up toward the crowns of giant sequoia trees." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/432455/original/file-20211117-21-miyapl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/432455/original/file-20211117-21-miyapl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/432455/original/file-20211117-21-miyapl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/432455/original/file-20211117-21-miyapl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/432455/original/file-20211117-21-miyapl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/432455/original/file-20211117-21-miyapl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/432455/original/file-20211117-21-miyapl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Storing carbon in trees is less expensive per ton than current mechanical solutions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/sequoia-forest-royalty-free-image/502687891">Lisa-Blue via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Per ton of carbon dioxide sequestered, biological sequestration <a href="https://www.climateadvisers.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Creating-Negative-Emissions_Climate-Advisers_June-2018-copy.pdf">costs about one-tenth as much</a> as current mechanical methods. And it offers valuable side-benefits by reducing soil erosion and air pollution, and urban heat; increasing water security, biodiversity and energy conservation; and improving watershed protection, human nutrition and health.</p>
<p>To be clear, no carbon removal approach – neither mechanical nor biological – will solve the climate crisis without an immediate transition away from fossil fuels. But we believe that relying on the fossil fuel industry for “carbon management” will only further delay that transition.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171791/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>June Sekera receives funding from Rockefeller Brothers Fund</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Neva Goodwin is a co-founder and member of the Steering Committee of the EcoHealth Network.</span></em></p>Most carbon dioxide captured in the U.S. today is used to extract more oil. Two scholars point to another way: biological sequestration.June Sekera, Senior Research Fellow, Visiting Scholar, The New SchoolNeva Goodwin, Co-Director, Global Development and Environment Institute, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1683102021-09-24T13:11:11Z2021-09-24T13:11:11ZHow soon could carbon capture technology solve industry CO₂ shortages?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423121/original/file-20210924-21-1xl6rxe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C2600%2C1732&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/environmental-pollution-problem-smoke-chimney-industrial-1701999739">AYDO8/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The recent spike in <a href="https://theconversation.com/gas-price-spike-how-uk-government-failures-made-a-global-crisis-worse-168324">natural gas prices</a> has closed many <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/22/why-is-the-uk-bailing-out-us-co2-supplier-cf-industries">plants that make fertiliser</a> in the UK – sending a shockwave through lots of other industries.</p>
<p>This is because ammonia fertilisers are made from nitrogen and hydrogen, and the latter comes from breaking down natural gas – a process which gives off carbon dioxide as a byproduct. It is this CO₂ that is then taken up and used in different industries, from carbonating soft drinks to euthanising livestock. In its solid form, known as cardice, CO₂ can even be used to transport and store temperature-sensitive pharmaceuticals – including the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. </p>
<p>The scarcity of CO₂ has caused havoc in UK supply chains, threatening <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/co2-shortage-beer-meat-supermarkets-b1922579.html">shortages</a> of meat, alcohol and fizzy drinks. While the government has <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58641394">paid to reopen</a> a fertiliser plant, firms buying CO₂ will have to pay five times more than usual.</p>
<p>It may seem surprising to read that CO₂ – the greenhouse gas heating our world – also keeps certain essential industries functioning. How can there be a shortage of something we’re desperately trying to emit less of? Couldn’t we just pull it down from the atmosphere and pump it into factories where it could be put to use?</p>
<h2>Carbon capture technology</h2>
<p>The problem is that the CO₂ used in industry comes from sources that are a well-established part of a complex supply chain. This CO₂ generated in the process of making fertiliser is relatively cheap and easy to separate. If that system fails, there is no ready alternative. Meanwhile, CO₂ concentrations in the atmosphere are about 420 ppm – 0.042% of all the gases. Separating CO₂ from the air is difficult, and far more expensive. </p>
<p>Something called “<a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-capture-on-power-stations-burning-woodchips-is-not-the-green-gamechanger-many-think-it-is-110475">point-source carbon capture technology</a>” is currently the best alternative option, and involves scrubbing CO₂ from exhaust gases in the chimneys of factories and power plants. Here, CO₂ is emitted in the highest volumes and concentrations are thousands of times higher that those found in the atmosphere.</p>
<p>Technologies which can capture carbon from power station chimneys or even directly from the air are being developed, but they aren’t available at the scale needed. Two UK-based competitions to drive innovation in carbon capture and storage technology have been launched and closed by successive governments since 2005, the last one ending in 2015 without much success.</p>
<p>Some initiatives have got off the ground though, including <a href="https://theacornproject.uk/">The Acorn Project</a> in St Fergus, Scotland, which separates CO₂ from natural gas – which is used to make hydrogen – and injects it under the North Sea. The <a href="https://www.c-capture.co.uk/">Drax C-Capture project</a>, meanwhile, extracts CO₂ from emissions at a biomass energy plant in North Yorkshire, England. This project, it’s claimed, aims to be carbon-neutral in time by transporting the CO₂ via pipeline to an offshore storage site.</p>
<p>Ten years of research and engineering are usually needed before any new carbon capture technology can be deployed at the necessary scale. Industries which use CO₂ must plan for new carbon capture technology being available many years in the future, rather than expect immediate solutions.</p>
<p>And carbon capture units currently operating at selected locations globally, such as at the <a href="https://www.saskpower.com/Our-Power-Future/Infrastructure-Projects/Carbon-Capture-and-Storage/Boundary-Dam-Carbon-Capture-Project">Boundary Dam coal-fired power station</a> in Canada, are unlikely to offer the solution to CO₂ supply industries need. That’s because they use liquids to absorb and purify the greenhouse gas at high temperatures, which produces over 99% pure CO₂, but requires a lot of energy and so is expensive. <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmats.2019.00042/full">Liquid adsorbents</a> decompose at high temperatures too, leaving toxic byproducts.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A glass canister containing white and blue gravel." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423122/original/file-20210924-22-vyybvt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423122/original/file-20210924-22-vyybvt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423122/original/file-20210924-22-vyybvt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423122/original/file-20210924-22-vyybvt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423122/original/file-20210924-22-vyybvt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423122/original/file-20210924-22-vyybvt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423122/original/file-20210924-22-vyybvt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Solid adsorbents combined with high pressures could be the next generation of carbon capture.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/askarit-asbestos-impregnated-molten-sodium-hydroxide-571617391">Yuriy Bartenev/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Solid adsorbents, like those made from silica or cellulose powders, are much more stable. Some new systems use solid absorbents and high pressures rather than high temperatures to adsorb the CO₂. These are <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenrg.2017.00013/full">likely to be</a> the cheapest to run and the least environmentally damaging, making them a good choice for industries to source sustainable CO₂. There are plans to install a <a href="https://www.sustainsteel.ac.uk/">pressure-based capture facility</a> at Tata Steel plant in South Wales that will capture waste CO₂ and convert it into transport fuels. </p>
<h2>Preventing future shortages</h2>
<p>In the next 30 years, industries will also need to consider <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/direct-air-capture-60535">direct air capture</a> – technology capable of pulling the greenhouse gas out of the air – as a source of CO₂, but this will come at a cost to the consumer. Products that are made in processes requiring CO₂, such as carbonated drinks and fresh and packaged food, will have to pass on these cost increases.</p>
<p>Captured CO₂ should be stored in industrial reserves – steel tanks on the same site as the power plant the CO₂ came from or the factory where it might be used, and not underground. Industrial reserves need to be readily accessible as a backup supply.</p>
<p>Given that all these technologies are some way off being rolled out widely, society runs the risk of regular shortages without monitoring committees, similar to the COVID-19 task force, that can provide workable scenarios as soon as a problem occurs, rather than days or weeks into potential supply crises.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168310/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Styring receives funding from UKRI, European Union, Global CO₂ Initiative and Unilever. He is affiliated with the Liberal Democrats. </span></em></p>CO₂ is used in a range of industries, from food production to pharmaceuticals.Peter Styring, Professor of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1476592020-10-07T05:09:36Z2020-10-07T05:09:36Z‘Backwards’ federal budget: Morrison government never fails to disappoint on climate action<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/362088/original/file-20201007-18-msbv4s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C0%2C3976%2C2239&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>When it comes to action on climate change, Tuesday’s <a href="https://budget.gov.au/index.htm">federal budget</a> delivered by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg was a real – though not unexpected – disappointment which favoured polluting technologies over a clean energy future.</p>
<p>It included money to upgrade a coal-fired power station in New South Wales, and confirmed A$50 million <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/news-media/climate-and-energy-news/new-package-to-lower-emissions-through-future-technologies">previously announced</a> to develop carbon capture and storage. The government will also spend A$52.9 million expanding Australia’s gas industry. </p>
<p>But investment in renewable energy was largely shunned. Notably, the government allocated just A$5 million for electric vehicles. It confirmed funding for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) for another decade, but the money is far less than what’s needed.</p>
<p>The COVID-19 pandemic has seen the Morrison government abandon long-held dogma on debt and deficits. However, the federal budget shows when it comes to climate and energy, the government is singing from the same old songbook.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/362090/original/file-20201007-24-1xa0ejc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/362090/original/file-20201007-24-1xa0ejc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362090/original/file-20201007-24-1xa0ejc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362090/original/file-20201007-24-1xa0ejc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362090/original/file-20201007-24-1xa0ejc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362090/original/file-20201007-24-1xa0ejc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362090/original/file-20201007-24-1xa0ejc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">On climate policy, the Morrison government is singing from the same old songbook.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A techno-fix</h2>
<p>The budget doubled down on the Morrison government’s rhetoric of “<a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/news-media/climate-and-energy-news/new-package-to-lower-emissions-through-future-technologies">technology, not taxes</a>”, by choosing preferred technologies for investment.</p>
<p>This “picking winners” approach would have some chance of addressing climate change if it were based on a comprehensive analysis of the best path to zero emissions. But instead, the government has largely made offerings at the altars of technologies worshipped by the conservative side of politics.</p>
<p>The government will spend an <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/vales-point-coal-power-station-secures-upgrade-20201005-p56248">as-yet undisclosed</a> sum, possibly <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/federal-budget-funds-vales-point-upgrade-and-ccs-but-snubs-evs-13886/">A$11 million</a>, to refurbish the Vales Point coal-fired power station. The commitment to this coal infrastructure, co-owned by prominent Liberal party <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/02/morrison-defied-treasurys-advice-to-reject-help-for-liberal-donors-power-company">donor</a> Trevor St Baker, is a disgraceful misuse of public money. It will also do little to halt the steady decline of coal-fired power generation.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-heres-the-lowdown-on-australias-low-emissions-roadmap-146743">‘The good, the bad and the ugly’: here's the lowdown on Australia’s low-emissions roadmap</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/sep/15/government-to-use-529m-funding-to-unlock-more-gas-for-domestic-market">previously announced</a>, the government will spend A$52.9 million to support the gas industry, which Frydenberg says will lower prices and support more manufacturing jobs. It includes money for gas infrastructure planning and to open up five gas basins, starting with Beetaloo Basin in the Northern Territory.</p>
<p>The budget confirms A$50 million for carbon capture and storage (CCS) to fund projects to cut emissions from industry. But proving the viability of large-scale CCS projects is extremely difficult, as experience in the <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1063714297">United States</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/business/energy-environment/technology-to-make-clean-energy-from-coal-is-stumbling-in-practice.html">Canada</a> has shown. In this context, allocating just A$50 million to get the technology off the ground is simply laughable. </p>
<p>History suggests the spending offers little return on investment. <a href="https://www.tai.org.au/content/money-nothing">Research</a> by the Australia Institute in 2017 revealed federal governments have spent A$1.3 billion in taxpayers’ money on CCS projects, with very little to show for it.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Vales Point coal plant" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/362091/original/file-20201007-14-pwyqz6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/362091/original/file-20201007-14-pwyqz6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362091/original/file-20201007-14-pwyqz6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362091/original/file-20201007-14-pwyqz6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362091/original/file-20201007-14-pwyqz6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362091/original/file-20201007-14-pwyqz6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362091/original/file-20201007-14-pwyqz6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The budget contained spending to upgrade the Vales Point coal plant.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">NSW Health/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Renewables snubbed</h2>
<p>Meanwhile, last night’s budget largely shunned investment in renewable energy.</p>
<p>The budget confirmed A$1.4 billion in ARENA funding for a further ten years, including a pretty paltry A$223.9 million over the next four years. Separately, the government will also seek to pass legislation to <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/taylor-seeks-to-push-arena-and-cefc-towards-gas-and-ccs-31594/">change</a> ARENA’s investment mandate, enabling it to fund gas and carbon capture projects. </p>
<p>The government has allocated a tiny A$5 million towards electric vehicle development, including money towards a manufacturing facility in South Australia. It’s good to see electric vehicles on the government’s radar. But the commitment is dwarfed by investment overseas, including a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autoshow-detroit-electric-exclusive-idUSKCN1P40G6">reported</a> US$300 billion set aside by global car makers over the next decade to bring electric vehicles to mass production.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/budget-2020-at-a-glance-the-cuts-the-spends-and-that-big-deficit-in-7-charts-147016">Budget 2020 at a glance: the cuts, the spends, and that big deficit in 7 charts</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The measly spending on clean energy technology does not make economic sense. The renewable energy sector is <a href="https://theconversation.com/scott-morrisons-gas-transition-plan-is-a-dangerous-road-to-nowhere-130951">standing by</a> to slash emissions and deliver lower energy prices – if only the right policy environment existed.</p>
<p>The budget was also an opportunity for the government to ditch its irrational opposition to carbon pricing. <a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-pricing-works-the-largest-ever-study-puts-it-beyond-doubt-142034">Recent research</a> has comprehensively shown carbon pricing slows growth in greenhouse gas emissions. </p>
<p>Vehement carbon pricing critics, such as conservatives Tony Abbott, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/craig-kelly-accused-of-pushing-dangerous-covid-19-conspiracy-theory-20200827-p55pw4.html">Craig Kelly</a> and Barnaby Joyce, are now either discredited or out of parliament altogether. And scores of <a href="https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/map_data">countries around the world</a> have implemented some form of price on carbon.</p>
<h2>A global outlier</h2>
<p>Most obviously, the budget was an opportunity to commit to net-zero emissions by 2050, as many developed countries have <a href="https://www.climatechangenews.com/2020/09/17/countries-net-zero-climate-goal/">done</a>. </p>
<p>The Morrison government has already used <a href="https://theconversation.com/today-australias-kyoto-climate-targets-end-and-our-paris-cop-out-begins-thats-nothing-to-be-proud-of-mr-taylor-131137">dodgy accounting</a> tricks to meet Australia’s Paris Agreement commitment – reducing emissions by 26% on 2005 levels. The absence of a net-zero target suggests the government intends to allow emissions to grow indefinitely after 2030.</p>
<p>This approach is out of step with many of Australia’s international peers. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, now the <a href="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/">clear favourite</a> to win the US election in November, is campaigning on what has been <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02786-4">described as</a> “the most aggressive climate platform” ever put forward by a presidential nominee. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/south-koreas-green-new-deal-shows-the-world-what-a-smart-economic-recovery-looks-like-145032">South Korea's Green New Deal shows the world what a smart economic recovery looks like</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Biden wants the US to produce net-zero emissions by 2050. His US$2 trillion plan includes huge investments in clean energy research and development, and low-emissions infrastructure such as public transport and energy-efficient buildings. He has also promised a <a href="https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/aug/03/joe-bidens-climate-change-plan-explained/">border tax</a> levied on imports from countries without a carbon price.</p>
<p>Europe is well on the way to <a href="https://climateanalytics.org/briefings/eu-coal-phase-out/">phasing out</a> coal, and forging ahead with new carbon-free technologies to produce steel, cement and ammonia. The European Union has also <a href="https://www.allens.com.au/insights-news/insights/2020/05/climate-change-guide/the-big-picture-australias-commitments-under-the-paris-agreement/">said</a> any free trade deal with Australia is contingent on our commitment to deep emissions abatement.</p>
<p>And in China, President Xi Jinping recently <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/05/china-plan-net-zero-emissions-2060-clean-technology">announced</a> his nation will reach net-zero emissions by 2060.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Joe Biden" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/362092/original/file-20201007-14-1g408tg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/362092/original/file-20201007-14-1g408tg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362092/original/file-20201007-14-1g408tg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362092/original/file-20201007-14-1g408tg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362092/original/file-20201007-14-1g408tg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362092/original/file-20201007-14-1g408tg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/362092/original/file-20201007-14-1g408tg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has an ambitious climate agenda.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Patrick Semansky/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>We have no choice</h2>
<p>The budget was a chance to reset Australia’s failed climate policy – an opportunity enhanced by the stimulus spending brought on by COVID-19.</p>
<p>Instead, we got a string of backward-looking gestures including subsidies for coal, another go at the failed technology of carbon capture storage and a continued push for gas.</p>
<p>Sooner or later, Australia will have to join the rest of the world in ending our reliance on carbon-based energy. The catastrophic bushfires of last summer proved this. And if we refuse to move, the rest of the world will force our hand.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/147659/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Quiggin is a former Member of the Climate Change Authority. He has been an active campaigner on environmental issues for many years.</span></em></p>COVID-19 pandemic has seen the Morrison government abandon long-held dogma on debt and deficits. But on climate and energy, it’s singing from the same old songbook.John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1463412020-09-17T01:01:30Z2020-09-17T01:01:30Z‘A dose of reality’: Morrison government’s new $1.9 billion techno-fix for climate change is a small step<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358417/original/file-20200916-16-b338h5.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=26%2C0%2C4466%2C2991&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Morrison government <a href="https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/taylor/media-releases/investment-new-energy-technologies">today announced</a> A$1.9 billion over ten years to develop clean technology in industry, agriculture and transport. In some ways it’s a step in the right direction, but a far cry from what’s needed to drive Australia’s shift to a low emissions economy. </p>
<p>The big change involves what the money is for. The new funding will enable the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) to support technologies such as green steel production, industrial processes to reduce energy consumption and somewhat controversially, carbon-capture and storage and soil-carbon sequestration. </p>
<p>This is a big move away from ARENA’s current <a href="https://arena.gov.au/about/investment-priorities/">investment priorities</a>. Importantly it means ARENA will continue to operate, as it is running out of money now. </p>
<p>However technology development alone is not enough to cut Australia’s emissions deeply and quickly – which is what’s needed to address the climate threat. Other policies and more money will be needed. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Interior of steelworks" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358488/original/file-20200916-16-rnuh2e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358488/original/file-20200916-16-rnuh2e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358488/original/file-20200916-16-rnuh2e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358488/original/file-20200916-16-rnuh2e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358488/original/file-20200916-16-rnuh2e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358488/original/file-20200916-16-rnuh2e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358488/original/file-20200916-16-rnuh2e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cutting emissions from industry will be a focus of the new spending.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>New role for ARENA</h2>
<p>ARENA will receive the lion’s share of the money: A$1.4 billion over ten years in guaranteed baseline funding. ARENA has spent A$1.6 billion since it was established in 2012. So the new funding is lower on an annual basis. It’s also far less than what’s needed to properly meet the challenge, in a country with a large industrial sector and huge opportunities for zero carbon production. </p>
<p>To date, ARENA’s investments have focused on renewable energy supply. Prime Minister Scott Morrison today said the renewables industry was enjoying a “world-leading boom” and no longer needs government subsidies. Critics may be dismayed to see ARENA steered away from its original purpose. But it is true solar parks and wind farms are now commercially viable, and technologies to integrate large amounts of renewables into the grid are available. </p>
<p>So it makes sense to spend new research and development (R&D) funding on the next generation of low-emissions technologies. But how to choose what to spend the money on? </p>
<p>A few simple principles should inform those choices. The spending should help develop new zero- or low-emissions technologies or make them cheaper. It should also enable the shift to a net-zero emissions future, rather than locking in structures that continue to emit. The investment choices should be made by independent bodies such as ARENA’s board, based on research and expert judgement, rather than politically determined priorities.</p>
<p>For the industrial sector, the case for supporting zero-emissions technologies is clear. A sizeable share of Australia’s total emissions stem from fossil fuel use in industry.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/government-targets-emerging-technologies-with-1-9-billion-saying-renewables-can-stand-on-own-feet-146327">Government targets emerging technologies with $1.9 billion, saying renewables can stand on own feet</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In some cases, government-supported R&D could help lay the foundation for zero-emissions industries of the future. But in others, what’s needed is a financial incentive for businesses to switch to clean energy or zero-emissions production methods, or regulation to require cleaner processes. </p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/australians-want-industry-and-theyd-like-it-green-steel-is-the-place-to-start-137999">Green steel</a> is a perfect example of the positive change that is possible. Steel can be made using clean hydrogen and renewable electricity, and the long term possibility of a green steel industry in Australia is tantalising.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Steel being made" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358429/original/file-20200916-16-13hjlwr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358429/original/file-20200916-16-13hjlwr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358429/original/file-20200916-16-13hjlwr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358429/original/file-20200916-16-13hjlwr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358429/original/file-20200916-16-13hjlwr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358429/original/file-20200916-16-13hjlwr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358429/original/file-20200916-16-13hjlwr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Steel could be made cleanly using hydrogen instead of coking coal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dean Lewins/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A future for fossil fuels?</h2>
<p>The government’s support for carbon capture and storage (CCS) will be highly contested, because it’s a way to continue using fossil fuels at reduced – though not zero – emissions. This is achieved by capturing carbon dioxide before it enters the atmosphere and storing it underground, a technically feasible but costly process. </p>
<p>CCS will not perpetuate fossil fuel use in the energy sector, because renewables combined with energy storage are now much cheaper. Rather, CCS can be an option in specific processes that do not have ready alternatives, such as the production of cement, chemicals and fertiliser. </p>
<p>One step further is so-called “carbon capture and use” (CCU), where carbon dioxide is not pumped underground but turned into products, such as building materials. One program announced is for pilot projects of that kind.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-carbon-emissions-fell-during-covid-19-but-its-the-shift-away-from-coal-that-really-matters-138611">Yes, carbon emissions fell during COVID-19. But it's the shift away from coal that really matters</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A different proposition is the idea of hydrogen produced from coal or gas, in which some resulting emissions are captured. This method <a href="https://theconversation.com/for-hydrogen-to-be-truly-clean-it-must-be-made-with-renewables-not-coal-128053">competes</a> with “green” hydrogen produced using renewable electricity. It seems the government for now intends to support fossil fuel-derived hydrogen.</p>
<p>Reducing fossil fuel use, and using CCS/CCU where it makes sense, will not get the world to net-zero emissions. Emissions from other sources must be cut by as much as technically possible, at justifiable cost. Remaining emissions must then be negated by drawing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Such “negative emissions” can be achieved through technological means, and also by permanently increasing the amount of carbon stored in plants and soil.</p>
<p>The new funding includes support for increasing the amount of soil carbon. This method may hold promise in principle, but in practice its effectiveness is uncertain, and hard to measure. At the same time, the large emissions from agriculture are not yet addressed. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Gas flaring from an industrial plant" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358431/original/file-20200916-14-13cugac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358431/original/file-20200916-14-13cugac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358431/original/file-20200916-14-13cugac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358431/original/file-20200916-14-13cugac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358431/original/file-20200916-14-13cugac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358431/original/file-20200916-14-13cugac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358431/original/file-20200916-14-13cugac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Reducing the burning of fossil fuels is not enough to get to net-zero emissions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Matt Black Productions</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A piecemeal effort</h2>
<p>The spending amounts to A$140 million per year for ARENA, plus about A$500 million all up through other programs. A dose of reality is needed about what this money can achieve. It will create better understanding of options, some technological progress across the board and surely the occasional highlight. But a much greater effort is likely needed to achieve fundamental technological breakthroughs. And crucially, new technologies must be widely deployed. </p>
<p>For a sense of scale, consider that the Snowy 2.0 scheme is costed at around A$5 billion, and a single 1 gigawatt gas power plant, as mooted by the government for the Hunter Valley, would <a href="https://publications.csiro.au/publications/#publication/PIcsiro:EP201952">cost</a> in the order of A$1.5 billion to build. </p>
<p>As well as additional spending, policies will be needed to drive the uptake of low-emissions technologies. The <a href="https://energy.anu.edu.au/files/2020%2009%2003%20-%20Austalia%20the%20global%20renewable%20energy%20pathfinder%20-%20Andrew%20Blakers%2C%20Ken%20Baldwin%2C%20Matthew%20Stocks.pdf">shift to renewables</a> is now happening in the energy sector without government help, though some hurdles remain. But we cannot expect the same across the economy. </p>
<p>Governments will need to help drive uptake through policy. The most efficient way is usually to ensure producers of emissions pay for the environmental damage caused. In other words, putting a <a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-pricing-works-the-largest-ever-study-puts-it-beyond-doubt-142034">price on carbon</a>. </p>
<p>The funding announced today is merely one piece of a national long-term strategy to deeply cut emissions – and not a particularly big piece. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-pricing-works-the-largest-ever-study-puts-it-beyond-doubt-142034">Carbon pricing works: the largest-ever study puts it beyond doubt</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146341/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Frank Jotzo leads research projects supported respectively by the Australian government and the 2050 Pathways Platform, and occasionally consults to organisations, governments and businesses. No conflicts of interest exist in relation to this article.</span></em></p>We cannot rely on technology development alone to deeply cut Australia’s emissions. Other policies and more money will be needed.Frank Jotzo, Director, Centre for Climate and Energy Policy, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1307472020-03-04T12:50:41Z2020-03-04T12:50:41ZCarbon capture and storage has stalled needlessly – three reasons why fears of CO₂ leakage are overblown<p>The idea is simple: capture and concentrate CO₂ before it’s released to the air and store it deep underground where it can’t escape. Instead of adding to the climate crisis, carbon capture and storage could turn power plants and factories into CO₂-sucking behemoths, filling underground reservoirs that otherwise held fossil fuels or salty water.</p>
<p>The world’s first dedicated CCS project, Sleipner (in the Norwegian North Sea), started injecting CO₂ into underground reservoirs in 1996. Since then, it has successfully stored more than 20 million tonnes (Mt). That might sound impressive, but it’s nowhere near enough. The International Energy Agency recommends that 21,400 Mt of CO₂ should be captured and stored by 2030 to limit global warming to 2°C. But, by the end of 2017, only <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/action/downloadSupplement?doi=10.1098%2Frsta.2016.0447&file=rsta20160447supp1.pdf">442 Mt had been injected and stored</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318275/original/file-20200303-66084-1ek3ec2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318275/original/file-20200303-66084-1ek3ec2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318275/original/file-20200303-66084-1ek3ec2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318275/original/file-20200303-66084-1ek3ec2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318275/original/file-20200303-66084-1ek3ec2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318275/original/file-20200303-66084-1ek3ec2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318275/original/file-20200303-66084-1ek3ec2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=518&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Waste CO₂ is purified (the capture process), then transported to a storage site and disposed of by injecting deep underground.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Stephanie Flude</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Why has the world been so slow to adopt CCS? A big issue is the upfront cost needed to build capture plants. These are expensive in the short term, but much cheaper than doing nothing about CO₂ emissions in the long run. But there are other issues too. If a CO₂ storage site should contain the injected carbon for thousands to millions of years, but a company operating that site only exists for a few decades, who should pay to fix it if CO₂ starts to leak out? And how much insurance should operators pay to cover the cost of hypothetical future problems?</p>
<p>This fear of CO₂ leaking out of storage is slowing progress on developing CCS at the scale needed. <a href="https://thenoblegasbag.wordpress.com/2015/01/09/what-ccs-is-and-perhaps-more-importantly-what-it-isnt/">Bad reporting of CCS research</a>, combined with a general distrust of the fossil fuel industry – as well as people wrongly assuming that there’s a link between CCS and fracking – seems to have convinced many people that the risk of CO₂ leakage is bigger than it really is.</p>
<p>Luckily, there are many reasons why sequestered CO₂ is likely to stay safely locked away underground for millions of years. Much of this relies on natural processes that can be optimised in CCS by choosing the right places and procedures to store CO₂.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-capture-on-power-stations-burning-woodchips-is-not-the-green-gamechanger-many-think-it-is-110475">Carbon capture on power stations burning woodchips is not the green gamechanger many think it is</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>1. Mimic oil and gas reservoirs</h2>
<p>Oil and gas are buoyant fluids. They move upwards through porous and permeable rocks until they reach an impermeable rock layer. This impermeable layer is like a lid on these fluids, stopping them from leaking out. Here, they accumulate in the underlying, porous reservoir rock, held in place for thousands to millions of years by the overlying, impermeable seal (at least until a fossil fuel company drills a well to extract them, that is).</p>
<p>This process, called structural trapping, is what keeps oil and natural gas underground – and it can do the same for stored CO₂. A good CO₂ storage reservoir will have multiple layers between the reservoir and the surface that CO₂ can’t penetrate.</p>
<p>But what if this impermeable layer is cut by a fault, or an old well that hasn’t been sealed properly? Good regulation is the first line of defence, but even if mistakes are made and the CO₂ does find a way out, there are other mechanisms that will keep the vast majority trapped underground.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318276/original/file-20200303-66089-16kihcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318276/original/file-20200303-66089-16kihcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318276/original/file-20200303-66089-16kihcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318276/original/file-20200303-66089-16kihcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318276/original/file-20200303-66089-16kihcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318276/original/file-20200303-66089-16kihcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318276/original/file-20200303-66089-16kihcs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The different trapping mechanisms that immobilise CO₂ underground.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Stephanie Flude</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>2. Trap microscopic CO₂ bubbles in pore spaces</h2>
<p>Soaking a sponge in water, you may notice that no matter how long it’s submerged, there are still air bubbles in the sponge. This process is called residual trapping. It happens when gases mix with water in the pore spaces of rocks and make it very difficult to remove all of the gas. When CO₂ is injected, it mixes with the salty water already in the reservoir’s pore spaces, and some of it will get stuck as microscopic bubbles. </p>
<p>Experiments on rocks that are typical of storage reservoirs suggest that <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1750583614000255">between 12 and 92% of injected CO₂ could be immobilised by this process</a>.</p>
<h2>3. Dissolve CO₂ in subterranean brine</h2>
<p>CO₂ is soluble in water, and the pore spaces of rocks underground are filled with salty water. When CO₂ is injected, it will start to dissolve in this brine almost immediately. The carbon from dissolved CO₂ will only be released if the pressure, temperature and chemical conditions in the reservoir change drastically, which is very unlikely far underground. </p>
<p>Even better, CO₂-saturated brine is denser than regular brine, meaning it will start to sink. This not only moves the carbon further away from the atmosphere, but it also increases mixing of brine within the reservoir, meaning more and more CO₂ can dissolve over time.</p>
<p>Over hundreds to thousands of years, the dissolved carbon will react with metal ions in the brine and start to precipitate carbonate minerals, making it even more difficult to release the carbon as CO₂. This is the same mechanism that the <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-technology-offers-hope-for-storing-carbon-dioxide-underground-60707">Carbfix project in Iceland</a> uses to trap CO₂ in basalt.</p>
<h2>Worth the risk</h2>
<p>Accidents can and will happen – CCS, like any other human activity, carries a degree of risk. But we know for certain that if a site were to fail, far less CO₂ would leak than was injected, because a lot of the CO₂ becomes permanently trapped anyway. All of these natural trapping mechanisms <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04423-1">ensure that</a> the vast majority of the CO₂ (up to 98%) will remain safely trapped below ground for 10,000 years. Even in an unlikely, badly-regulated, worst-case scenario, at least 78% of the injected CO₂ is likely to stay locked up.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318618/original/file-20200304-66099-1ycxiv2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/318618/original/file-20200304-66099-1ycxiv2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318618/original/file-20200304-66099-1ycxiv2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318618/original/file-20200304-66099-1ycxiv2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318618/original/file-20200304-66099-1ycxiv2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318618/original/file-20200304-66099-1ycxiv2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/318618/original/file-20200304-66099-1ycxiv2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Urgent action is needed to reduce and remove greenhouse gas emissions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/aerial-satellite-view-coal-fired-power-1592859061">GLF Media/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The risks of CO₂ leaking from storage should be weighed against the risks of not storing it at all. Currently, the alternative is to emit 100% of that CO₂ to the atmosphere. For industries such as steel and cement manufacturing – essential ingredients for many renewable energy technologies – CCS is the only way to reduce CO₂ emissions from many industrial plants. CCS can also help developing countries limit CO₂ emissions while reducing energy poverty. </p>
<p>Maintaining atmospheric CO₂ concentrations low enough to avoid catastrophic climate change will be <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg3/">incredibly difficult, and much more expensive, without CCS</a>. We cannot afford to delay this important technology any longer.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=140&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/263883/original/file-20190314-28475-1mzxjur.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=176&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/imagine-newsletter-researchers-think-of-a-world-with-climate-action-113443?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=TCUKengagement&utm_content=Imagineheader1130747">Click here to subscribe to our climate action newsletter. Climate change is inevitable. Our response to it isn’t.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/130747/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephanie Flude has received funding from EPSRC via UKCCSRC. She is a member of The Green Party of England and Wales.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Juan Alcade receives funding from MICINN (Juan de la Cierva fellowship - IJC2018-036074-I). </span></em></p>Carbon capture and storage has failed to put a dent in global emissions, and the world is running out of time.Stephanie Flude, Postdoctoral Researcher in Gas Geochemistry, University of OxfordJuan Alcade, Postdoctoral Researcher in Earth Sciences, Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra Jaume Almera (ICTJA - CSIC)Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1104752019-02-14T15:48:14Z2019-02-14T15:48:14ZCarbon capture on power stations burning woodchips is not the green gamechanger many think it is<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259036/original/file-20190214-1730-1miz45g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Drax biomass plant, Yorkshire. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/drax-power-station-cooling-towers-biomass-775570336?src=ZMUbgY5tJ_5v1CqampQ_Bw-1-2">Coatsey</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The UK’s efforts to develop facilities to remove carbon emissions from power stations took a step forward with <a href="https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/worlds-first-for-carbon-capture-at-drax-power-plant/10039829.article">news</a> of a demonstrator project getting underway at the Drax plant in north Yorkshire. Where most electricity carbon capture projects have focused on coal-fired power, the Drax project is the first to capture carbon dioxide (CO₂) from a plant purely burning wood chips – or biomass, to use the industry jargon. </p>
<p>This so-called Bio Energy Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) demonstrator is only a pilot project; it covers just a tiny proportion of emissions from the 4GW plant and Drax has no plan yet for storing the captured gas. But coming after a decade in which various other UK carbon capture initiatives and government competitions <a href="https://qz.com/972939/the-uk-could-have-changed-the-way-the-world-fights-global-warming-instead-it-blew-200-million/">have</a> ended up <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/carbon-capture-storage-technology-greenhouse-gases-climate-change-government-failure-cost-taxpayers-a7707416.html">scrapped</a>, it is certainly progress. </p>
<p>Some specialists <a href="https://www.bioenergy-news.com/display_news/14147/comment_why_beccs_will_be_critical_to_deliver_an_affordable_energy_system_transition_in_the_uk/">believe</a> this technology has a bright future in the UK, envisaging big wood-fired power plants whose carbon emissions are prevented from returning to the atmosphere. Other countries <a href="https://www.bioenergy-news.com/display_news/13867/indonesian_and_austrian_beccs_research_initiative_announced/">are looking</a> at it seriously, too, and Drax and its partners have been <a href="https://www.energy-reporters.com/industry/carbon-capture-pilot-launched-in-uk/">talking up</a> the <a href="https://www.drax.com/technology/negative-emissions-techniques-technologies-need-know/">prospect</a> of eventually achieving “negative emissions” at the plant in Yorkshire. But this is fundamentally misleading. Without wanting to reject carbon capture out of hand, it is time to get realistic about what can be achieved with this technology. </p>
<h2>The carbon capture delusion</h2>
<p>The logic of the negative emissions argument is that burning wood is “<a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47163840">carbon neutral</a>” because trees absorb CO₂ from the atmosphere in the first place, and you are simply releasing it back. When you combine this with a carbon capture facility, it is argued, you are therefore removing CO₂ from the atmosphere overall. </p>
<p>But this view considers the process of burning wood in isolation. It ignores, just as an example, a wider chain of activities including planting and harvesting the trees, converting the wood into chips and then <a href="https://www.energy-reporters.com/industry/carbon-capture-pilot-launched-in-uk/">shipping them</a> to the power plant – not to mention storing and using the captured CO₂ once the wood has been burned. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259051/original/file-20190214-1758-10i0a84.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Carbon neutral?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/backoe-pick-woodchips-trucks-storage-outdoor-1062737072?src=zLGWuR15nULI1tRBdhXXVQ-1-3">Amarin Jitnathum</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There is also a misconception that burning wood produces only CO₂ – a BBC News reporter was saying as much the other day. But if this were the case, we would not need to separate CO₂ from other flue gases. Some of the carbon in the wood could become carbon monoxide, for instance, which, if not captured, would <a href="https://esseacourses.strategies.org/module.php?module_id=170">indirectly contribute</a> to levels of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere. The process also produces other noxious emissions, such as <a href="https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/technical-overview-volatile-organic-compounds">volatile organic compounds</a> and oxides of nitrogen, which are responsible for acid rain.</p>
<p>Too many people also tend to see wood as better than oil or coal because the amount of CO₂ produced by burning a given unit is much lower for wood. But this overlooks the fact that you get considerably more heat from burning a unit of oil or coal than from wood. In other words, you have to burn much more wood to produce the same amount of heat, so the carbon emissions are actually much more than they appear. This leads people to greatly underestimate the amount of land we will need for trees if biomass power is to become a much bigger part of the energy mix. The Drax plant alone <a href="https://www.energy-reporters.com/industry/carbon-capture-pilot-launched-in-uk/">uses</a> more wood than the UK produces every year, for instance. </p>
<p>The blinkered thinking around carbon capture also goes way beyond biomass power plants. There are now <a href="https://indd.adobe.com/view/2dab1be7-edd0-447d-b020-06242ea2cf3b">43 carbon capture facilities</a> either operating or in development – ten in the US, followed by Canada and Norway. <a href="https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=33552">Very few</a> are attached to power plants so far, with most instead removing CO₂ from <a href="https://www.bgs.ac.uk/science/CO2/home.html">oil fields</a> or <a href="http://www.dmp.wa.gov.au/Documents/Community-Education/Shute_Creek.pdf">gas processing plants</a>. But generous new subsidies in the likes of <a href="https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/carbon-capture-gains-momentum#gs.Q8rt5vWM">the US</a> are making the industry optimistic about carbon capture in the power sector regardless of which feedstock is burned. </p>
<p>Across the board, there is the same tendency to ignore the carbon emissions in everything from coal/gas/oil extraction to CO₂ storage. We also hear very little about the solvents traditionally used to separate the CO₂ from the rest of the combustion gases. These amines are highly corrosive and bad for the environment, plus there are CO₂ emissions from producing them in the first place. </p>
<h2>A different approach</h2>
<p>My point is not that we should be against carbon capture plants; the technology is much needed, and pilots like the one at Drax are important for possibly scaling up the process and measuring what is achievable. But when scientists conduct these measurements, they need to consider the complete chain to look at all of components involved – including, in the case of wood, the land used for the trees, and the consequences of deforestation. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259052/original/file-20190214-1717-1h02x7x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fore!</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/area-illegal-deforestation-vegetation-native-brazilian-1156323859?src=sAzpQi5gEfzFJGzZoVWk2A-1-22">Tarcisio Schnaider</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We also need much more discussion and research into which solvents are the most environmentally friendly for gas separation: Drax <a href="https://www.drax.com/press_release/europes-first-bioenergy-carbon-capture-storage-pilot-now-underway/">claims</a> to be using a new solvent with environmental benefits, so it will be interesting to see what the results look like down the line. </p>
<p>Clearly, our society needs energy. We would never be able to sustain ourselves if we eliminated fossil fuels completely. Capturing carbon dioxide emissions certainly has a role to play in the energy systems of the future, but it needs to be appraised in a way that looks at the whole picture. </p>
<p>The reality is that if the UK and EU are <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46360212">serious about</a> being completely carbon neutral by 2050, it will have to use a <a href="https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/greenhouse-gas-removal/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI1J7396q74AIV6p3tCh0Awgu4EAAYASAAEgKg5vD_BwE">mixture</a> of methods and cut back more aggressively on the emissions <a href="https://theconversation.com/now-that-uk-nuclear-power-plans-are-in-tatters-its-vital-to-double-down-on-wind-and-solar-110253">being produced</a> in the first place. This is always going to be more efficient than any attempts to put the genie back in the bottle afterwards. Regardless of what anyone says about technological solutions to the carbon problem, it is almost impossible to get away from this basic fact.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/110475/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Raffaella Ocone does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Drax biomass plant in Yorkshire is the first in the world to pioneer carbon capture and some specialists see it as it has a bright future. But hold the rosy headlines.Raffaella Ocone, Chair of Chemical Engineering, Heriot-Watt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1101422019-01-31T11:43:21Z2019-01-31T11:43:21ZCapturing carbon to fight climate change is dividing environmentalists<p>Environmental activists are teaming up with fresh faces in Congress to <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/12/21/18144138/green-new-deal-alexandria-ocasio-cortez">advocate for a Green New Deal</a>, a bundle of policies that would fight climate change while creating new jobs and reducing inequality. Not all of the activists agree on what those policies ought to be.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/397201459/Green-New-Deal-Letter-to-Congress">Some 626 environmental groups</a>, including Greenpeace, the Center for Biological Diversity and 350, recently laid out their vision in a letter they sent to U.S. lawmakers. They warned that they “vigorously oppose” several strategies, including the use of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/around-the-world-in-22-carbon-capture-projects">carbon capture and storage</a> – a process that can trap excess carbon pollution that’s already warming the Earth, and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/first-fight-about-democrats-climate-green-new-deal/580543/">lock it away</a>.</p>
<p>In our view, as a <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=dqT4eqUAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">political philosopher</a> who studies global justice and an <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=3_-bNuAAAAAJ&hl=en">environmental social scientist</a>, this blanket opposition is an unfortunate mistake. Based on the <a href="https://www.economist.com/leaders/2017/11/16/what-they-dont-tell-you-about-climate-change">need to remove carbon from the atmosphere</a>, and the risks in relying on land sinks like <a href="http://www.doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00122-z">forests</a> and <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/climate-changes-impact-on-soil-moisture-could-push-land-past-tipping-point">soils</a> alone to take up the excess carbon, we believe that carbon capture and storage could be a powerful tool for <a href="http://www.doi.org/10.1126/science.aah3443">making the climate safer</a> and even rectifying <a href="http://www.doi.org/10.1038/srep20281">historical climate injustices</a>.</p>
<h2>Global inequality</h2>
<p>We think the U.S. and other rich countries should accelerate negative emissions research for two reasons.</p>
<p>First, they can afford it. Second, they have a <a href="https://www.cgdev.org/media/who-caused-climate-change-historically">historical responsibility</a> as they burned a disproportionate amount of the carbon causing climate change today. Global warming is poised to hit the least-developed countries, including dozens that were <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2012/oct/22/resource-extraction-colonialism-legacy-poor-countries">colonized by these wealthier nations</a>, the hardest.</p>
<p>Consider this: The entire African continent <a href="https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/emis/tre_afr.html">emits less carbon</a> than the U.S., Russia or Japan.</p>
<p>Yet Africa is likely to experience climate change impacts <a href="https://clarknow.clarku.edu/2016/09/23/professor-presents-findings-on-climate-smart-agriculture-in-sub-saharan-africa/">sooner and more intensely than any other region</a>. Some African regions are already experiencing warming increases at <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/8/085004">more than twice the global rate</a>. Coastal and island nations like Bangladesh, Madagascar and the Marshall Islands face <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/11/rising-seas-force-marshall-islands-relocate-elevate-artificial-islands/">near or total destruction</a>. </p>
<p>But the world’s <a href="https://www.mcc-berlin.net/en/research/negativeemissions.html">richest nations have been slow to endorse and support</a> the necessary research, development and governance for negative emissions technologies. </p>
<h2>Bad track record with coal</h2>
<p>What explains the objections from climate justice advocates?</p>
<p>The U.S. has heavily funded <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/12/10/trump-carbon-capture-storage-coal-dream-dead">experiments with carbon capture and storage</a> to drastically reduce greenhouse gas <a href="https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/infrastructure/news/a27886/how-does-clean-coal-work/">emissions from new coal-fired power plants</a> since <a href="https://issues.org/clean-energy-diplomacy-from-bush-to-obama/">George W. Bush’s presidency</a>.</p>
<p>Those efforts have not paid off, partly because of economics. <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/7/13/17551878/natural-gas-markets-renewable-energy">Natural gas and renewable energy have become cheaper</a> and <a href="https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=37952">more popular</a> than coal for generating electricity.</p>
<p>Only a handful of <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants">coal-fired power plants are under construction</a> in the U.S., <a href="https://about.bnef.com/blog/u-s-coal-plant-retirements-near-all-time-high/">where closures</a> are routine. The <a href="https://qz.com/1235125/the-number-of-coal-plants-worldwide-is-shrinking-but-nowhere-near-enough/">industry is in trouble</a> everywhere, with <a href="https://theconversation.com/chinas-climate-progress-may-have-faltered-in-2018-but-it-seems-to-be-on-the-right-path-108589">few exceptions</a>. </p>
<p>In addition, carbon capture with coal has a <a href="https://energytransition.org/2018/11/post-mortem-auditors-analyse-eus-failed-carbon-capture-projects/">bad track record</a>. The <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/02/clean-coal-america-kemper-power-plant">biggest U.S. experiment</a> is the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/02/clean-coal-america-kemper-power-plant">US$7.5 billion Kemper power plant in Mississippi</a>. It ended in <a href="https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/carbon-capture-suffers-a-huge-setback-as-kemper-plant-suspends-work#gs.PQcUy2os">failure in 2017</a> when state power authorities ordered the plant operator to give up on this technology and <a href="http://msbusiness.com/2018/02/psc-brings-kemper-plant-saga-end/">rely on natural gas instead</a>.</p>
<p><iframe id="OWP7d" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/OWP7d/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Other uses</h2>
<p>Carbon capture and storage, however, isn’t just for fossil-fuel-burning power plants. It can work with <a href="https://www.euractiv.com/section/climate-environment/news/environmentalists-find-renewed-hope-in-industrial-ccs/">industrial carbon dioxide sources</a>, such as steel, cement and chemical plants and <a href="http://bellona.org/news/ccs/2016-01-carbon-capture-and-storage-comeback-must-focus-on-industrial-emissions-say-experts">incinerators</a>.</p>
<p>Then, one of two things can happen. The carbon can be turned into new products, such as <a href="https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/6/14/17445622/direct-air-capture-air-to-fuels-carbon-dioxide-engineering">fuels</a>, <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cement-producers-are-developing-a-plan-to-reduce-co2-emissions/">cement</a>, <a href="https://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/coca-cola-going-use-captured-co2-carbonate-its-drinks.html">soft drinks</a> or even <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/shoes-no-carbon-footprint-180960542/">shoes</a>. </p>
<p>Carbon can also be stored permanently if it is injected <a href="https://www.c2es.org/content/carbon-capture/">underground</a>, where geologists believe it can stay put for centuries.</p>
<p>Until now, a common use for captured carbon is <a href="https://www.iea.org/topics/ccs/storagethroughco2-eor/">extracting oil out of old wells</a>. Burning that petroleum, however, can make climate change worse.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255885/original/file-20190128-108364-yy0bpv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=454&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Captured carbon has a variety of industrial uses, including oil extraction and fire extinguisher manufacturing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.netl.doe.gov/research/coal/carbon-storage/research-and-development/co2-utilization">U.S. Energy Department's National Energy Technology Laboratory</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Going carbon negative</h2>
<p>This technology may potentially also <a href="https://www.wri.org/blog/2018/03/taking-greenhouse-gases-sky-7-things-know-about-carbon-removal">remove more carbon than gets emitted</a> – as long as it’s designed right.</p>
<p>One example is what’s called <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/the-dirty-secret-of-the-worlds-plan-to-avert-climate-disaster/">bioenergy with carbon capture and storage</a>, where farm residues or crops like trees or grasses are grown to be burned to generate electricity. Carbon is separated out and stored at the power plants where this happens.</p>
<p>If the <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1039/C7EE00465F">supply chain is sustainable</a>, with cultivation, harvesting and transport done in low-carbon or carbon-neutral ways, this process can produce what scientists call <a href="https://qz.com/1416481/the-ultimate-guide-to-negative-emission-technologies/">negative emissions</a>, with more carbon removed than released. Another possibility involves <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/cost-plunges-capturing-carbon-dioxide-air">directly capturing carbon</a> from the air.</p>
<p>Scientists point out that bioenergy with carbon capture and storage could require <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-why-beccs-might-not-produce-negative-emissions-after-all">vast amounts of land</a> for growing biofuels to burn. And climate advocates are concerned that both approaches could pave the way for oil, gas and coal companies and big industries to simply <a href="https://www.climatecentral.org/news/scientists-warn-negative-emissions-moral-hazard-20785">continue with business as usual</a> instead of phasing out fossil fuels. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/255878/original/file-20190128-108358-25qtog.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Many experts agree that limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2 degrees Celsius will require reducing the volume of carbon emissions through energy efficiency and renewable-energy generation and CO₂ removal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.mcc-berlin.net/en/research/negativeemissions.html">MCC</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Natural solutions</h2>
<p>Every pathway to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius in the most recent U.N. <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/in-depth-qa-ipccs-special-report-on-climate-change-at-one-point-five-c">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> report projected the use of carbon removal approaches.</p>
<p><iframe id="ZkVBY" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/ZkVBY/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Planting more trees, <a href="http://www.regenerativeagriculturedefinition.com/">composting and farming in ways that store carbon in soils</a> and <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/bluecarbon.html">protecting wetlands</a> can also reduce atmospheric carbon. We believe the natural <a href="https://phys.org/news/2019-01-state-of-the-art-climate-crisis.html">solutions many environmentalists might prefer are crucial</a>. But soaking up excess carbon through afforestation on a massive scale could <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.06.002">encroach on farmland</a>.</p>
<p>To be sure, not all environmentalists are writing off carbon capture and storage.</p>
<p>The Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council, along with many other big green organizations, <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/152885/biggest-green-groups-cold-feet-green-new-deal">did not sign the letter</a>, which objected not just to carbon capture and storage but also to <a href="https://www.conservationinstitute.org/pros-and-cons-of-nuclear-energy/">nuclear power</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/taxes-and-caps-on-carbon-work-differently-but-calibrating-them-poses-the-same-challenge-104898">emissions trading</a> and <a href="https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=biomass_waste_to_energy">converting trash into energy</a> through <a href="http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/negative-impacts-waste-to-energy/">incineration</a>.</p>
<p>Rather than leave carbon removal technologies out of the Green New Deal, we suggest that more environmentalists consider their potential for removing carbon that has already been emitted. We believe these approaches could potentially create jobs, foster economic development and reduce inequality on a global scale – as long as they are meaningfully accountable to people in the world’s poorest nations.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/110142/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Holly Jean Buck receives research funding from The Nature Conservancy and the UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. The views expressed are her own and do not reflect those of her funding organizations.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>These technologies could turn into a powerful tool for fighting global warming, and they have the potential to address historical climate injustices.Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Georgetown UniversityHolly Jean Buck, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, University of California, Los AngelesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/883372017-12-01T16:31:44Z2017-12-01T16:31:44ZStoring carbon under the North Sea: are wrong sites being looked at?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197347/original/file-20171201-17360-1b14j75.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">shutterstock</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">belfastlough via Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>One effective way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change is to prevent carbon dioxide from reaching the atmosphere by capturing and storing it. There <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/651916/BEIS_The_Clean_Growth_online_12.10.17.pdf">are now</a> 21 large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities either operating or being built around the world, including in the US, Australia, Canada and Saudi Arabia. </p>
<p>The UK looked like joining them until the government <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-38687835">cancelled</a> its £1 billion competition in 2015 which had intended to lead to deployment of the technology. In October, however, a new £100m commitment was announced, potentially benefiting CCS projects in <a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/projects/caledonia-clean-energy-project">Grangemouth</a>, <a href="http://www.teessidecollective.co.uk">Teesside</a> and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-41167176">Aberdeenshire</a>. </p>
<p>This includes a cost reduction drive aimed at having a fleet of CCS facilities by the 2030s. The UK government also recently published a new <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/modern-industrial-strategy-to-boost-business-support-for-scotland">industrial strategy</a> placing clean energy systems including carbon capture at its heart; and the Scottish government has continually promoted and supported feasibility studies. </p>
<p>The three current UK proposals all seek to store the carbon dioxide (CO₂) offshore, probably still the simplest option for the country. But it comes with a major presumption – that the geology works and the gas won’t escape. </p>
<h2>Performing seals</h2>
<p>The offshore options on the table are depleted petroleum fields and saline aquifers – massive porous sedimentary rock formations saturated with salt water. The petroleum fields are closed-off “traps” that sit within these aquifers. Potentially this makes traps more secure for storage, but aquifers have vastly more storage capacity and may well be required to store CO₂ in substantial quantities. </p>
<p>The Grangemouth and Aberdeenshire projects are both looking at depleted fields in the Moray Firth in the north of Scotland, while Teesside is looking at the Triassic Bunter Sandstone saline aquifer off east England in the southern North Sea. The two leading proposals in the UK government’s previous competition had similar plans – a <a href="https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/peterhead.html">Shell/SSE Aberdeenshire project</a> would have used the Moray Firth while <a href="https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/projects/white-rose-ccs-project">White Rose</a> in Yorkshire would have used Triassic Bunter. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=437&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/196953/original/file-20171129-29134-1q36qd7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=549&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Electric dreams.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://ukccsrc.ac.uk/news-events/news/wales-and-ccs">Sitiardi21</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Oil and gas is trapped in a field or saline aquifer by <a href="http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/Terms/s/seal.aspx">a robust seal</a> – a layer of fairly impermeable rock surrounding the reservoir. To store CO₂ securely, it must not be able to leak or react with the seal either now or in future – or escape up faults that break the seal or leak along borehole walls. </p>
<p>It is essential to completely understand the physical properties and general integrity of seals in relation to CO₂. After all, it is a more mobile and smaller molecule (0.28nm) than gases more commonly trapped in petroleum reservoirs such as methane (0.38nm) or longer chained hydrocarbons. </p>
<p>Some gas accumulations do contain CO₂, which points to where storage will be viable. The Fizzy and Oak discoveries in the southern North Sea are examples, as are the North Morecambe and Rhyl gas fields in the East Irish Sea Basin off north-west England. </p>
<p>On the other hand, there was no CO₂ in the Goldeneye field in the Moray Firth that Shell/SSE considered. There are no indications that the adjacent Atlantic field proposed for the Grangemouth and Aberdeenshire projects contains CO₂ either. If not, was CO₂ once housed there and leaked? Or if it was never there, can we be confident CO₂ injection is safe?</p>
<p>Another potential issue is chemical reaction. Seals are unlikely to react with hydrocarbons because they are inert. But carbon dioxide reacts with water to produce carbonic acid, which may severely corrode the top seal and allow the gas an unwelcome return to the atmosphere. It all depends on what the seal is made of. The seal for Goldeneye and Atlantic, the Rodby Formation, is carbonate-rich so has reactive potential. </p>
<h2>Aquifer anxieties</h2>
<p>Aquifers are not traps but large migration pathways for oil and gas. Their vast storage potential has led some <a href="http://www.sccs.org.uk/images/expertise/reports/progressing-scotlands-co2/ProgressingScotlandCO2Opps.pdf">to champion</a> them as more attractive sites for carbon storage. The aquifer in which the Goldeneye and Atlantic fields sits is known as the Lower Cretaceous Captain Sandstone. Some <a href="https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/SPE-154539-MS">suggest</a> it could store 1,700m tonnes of CO₂ – <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/uk-carbon-emissions-fall-1894-first-petrol-powered-car-patent-greenhouse-gases-environment-climate-a7614066.html">around</a> five years of UK emissions. Goldeneye, in contrast, <a href="https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2425884/goldeneye-north-sea-reservoir-suitable-for-ccs-project-says-independent-review">only had an estimated</a> capacity of about 20m tonnes.</p>
<p>Yet <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/INT-2017-0009.1">new mapping suggests</a> we should be cautious about the Captain Sandstone. The Moray Firth is riddled with faults reactivated by <a href="https://theconversation.com/there-may-be-a-huge-flaw-in-uk-fracking-hopes-the-geology-80591">the uplift and easterly tilt</a> that took place in Britain some 55m years ago. </p>
<p>These are evident in the seismic image of the Moray Firth below. The top of the picture shows the boreholes in the various oil drilling concessions. The coloured bands underneath are different rock formations – the yellow band with red lines on either side is the Captain Sandstone. The black lines cutting through the Captain Sandstone are fault lines that potentially allow CO₂ a route out. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197298/original/file-20171201-10155-17jlqfo.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">John Underhill/Heriot Watt University</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The next image shows the same area but east-west instead of north-south and shows that the Captain Sandstone rises up to the seabed. This raises more concerns about leakage. And like the depleted fields within it, the carbonate-rich formation sealing the entire aquifer is susceptible to corrosion from carbonic acid. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197301/original/file-20171201-10155-pldwrk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">John Underhill/Heriot Watt University</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><a href="https://www.agr.com/Papers/Planning%20for%20Commercial%20Scale%20CO2%20Storage%20in%20North%20Sea%20Saline%20Aquifer.pdf">Enthusiasts</a> for the Triassic Bunter Sandstone aquifer in the southern North Sea face the same issue as it is affected by the same tilt as the Captain Sandstone – causing it to rise to the sea floor, a few kilometres off east England. </p>
<p>Plans to store CO₂ in either aquifer are therefore premature. It is better to look to use large traps containing CO₂ like Rhyl and North Morecambe in the East Irish Sea, where an active CO₂ gas processing plant already exists at Barrow. </p>
<p>When the country reaches the stage of a demonstrator project, it really needs to succeed. An early leakage could destroy national confidence in CCS. This means obtaining the best possible geological understanding of the sites and prioritising those fields that contain CO₂ already. </p>
<p>In some cases, these are places where drilling has found CO₂ ruling out commercial extraction of oil or gas. As such, the potential exists to turn an exploration failure into a storage opportunity and extend the life of the North Sea.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88337/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Richard Underhill's research has been undertaken in collaboration with Gustavo Rojas, who is in receipt of a PhD studentship investigating the subsurface geology of the Moray Firth from the Scottish Overseas Research Scholarship Awards Scheme (SORSAS).
</span></em></p>It may be just as well the UK government scrapped its previous carbon capture competition.John Richard Underhill, Chief Scientist & Professor of Exploration Geoscience, Heriot-Watt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/829292017-08-23T14:50:28Z2017-08-23T14:50:28ZIt’s time to accept carbon capture has failed – here’s what we should do instead<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183152/original/file-20170823-20456-1dix6lw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Drax and Eggborough power stations in England.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/145489125@N03/31886390394/in/photolist-QzG5XC-UtHunS-WBmux4-Wmq9tf-UFSQxm-Vk7qEq-Vdyb9J-UFVqYS-V2FhHd-V2FNxJ-UG5biS-VdyTb3-Vh9Wk2-V2EX2Q-6xg3v6-VnNv5K-Vdw2YE-9rSGPs-Vk7q2G-V2Fo9d-VdzpYA-at4Wdg-bqhVSm-U3up2R-TZEp6Y-bqhVSs-TZE6qs-6RGMBa-Vdwogo-dQaanu-V2PHY7-W25a3d-VhiYFX-ezM2KF-Wmq8Pj-f8jYo-UFSTRf-V2PNtQ-VdzKby-dEPLp-n9gRcq-djwZcs-VnNong-8HDwEU-pW6xA9-W256ew-8GkUCa-KjSWz-dCEjd9-Vh9xhZ">Pete Richman</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For years, optimists have talked up carbon capture and storage (CCS) as an essential part of taking emissions out of electricity generation. Yes, build wind and solar farms, they have said, but they can’t be relied on to produce enough power all the time. So we’ll still need our fleet of fossil-fuel-burning power stations; we just need to stop them pumping carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the atmosphere. </p>
<p>Most of their emphasis has been on post-combustion capture. This involves removing CO₂ from power station flue gases by absorbing them into an aqueous solution containing chemicals known as amines. </p>
<p>You then extract the CO₂, compress it into a liquid and pump it into a storage facility – the vision in the UK being to use depleted offshore oil and gas fields. One of the big attractions with such a system is it could be retrofitted to existing power stations. </p>
<h2>The big let-down</h2>
<p>But <a href="http://www.ccsassociation.org/docs/2007/CCSA%20Press%20Release%20on%20BERR%20Competition%20Announcement%20101007.pdf">ten years after</a> the UK government first announced a £1 billion competition to design CCS, we’re not much further forward. The reason is summed up by the geologist Lord Oxburgh in his contribution to the government-commissioned report on CCS published last year:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is no serious commercial incentive and it will stay that way unless the state demonstrates there is a business there. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The problem is that the process is costly and energy intensive. For a gas-fired power station, you <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srccs/srccs_wholereport.pdf">typically have</a> to burn 16% more gas to provide the capture power. Not only this, you end up with a 16% increase in emissions of other <a href="https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/120465/mtc_chem_of_air_pollution.pdf">serious air pollutants</a> like sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter. Concerns have also been <a href="https://www.sepa.org.uk/media/155585/review-of-amine-emissions-from-carbon-capture-systems.pdf">expressed about</a> the potential health effects of the amine solvent used in the carbon capture. </p>
<p>You then have to contend with the extra emissions from processing and transporting 16% more gas. And all this before you factor in the pipeline costs of the CO₂ storage and the uncertainties around whether it might escape once you’ve got it in the ground. Around the world, the only places CCS looks viable are where there are heavy state subsidies or substantial additional revenue streams, such as from enhanced oil recovery from oilfields where the CO₂ is being pumped in. </p>
<p>Well, say the carbon capture advocates, maybe another technology is the answer. They point to oxy-combustion, a system which is <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/05/goodbye-smokestacks-startup-invents-zero-emission-fossil-fuel-power">close to</a> reaching fruition at a plant in Texas. </p>
<p>First <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2017/02/21/revolutionary-power-plant-captures-all-its-carbon-emissions-at-no-extra-cost/#50c9a4402db0">proposed</a> many years ago by British engineer Rodney Allam, this involves separating oxygen from air, burning the oxygen with the fossil fuel, and using the combustion products – water and CO₂ – to drive a high-pressure turbine and produce electricity. The hot CO₂ is pressurised and recycled back into the burners, which improves thermal efficiency. It has the additional advantage that CO₂ is also available at pressures suitable for pipeline transportation. </p>
<p>It is, <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/08/02/british-inventor-close-holy-grail-carbon-capture-zero-cost/">according to</a> some enthusiasts, the “holy grail” of CCS. Admittedly it looks promising, but I wouldn’t go that far. It’s not suitable for retrofitting existing power stations. With many existing stations viable for several decades, this will do little for immediate emissions. And you are still obtaining and moving fossil fuels in large quantities, with the resultant emissions along the way. Finally, my experience would indicate that there is always very significant cost growth with new technology scaled up to industry. </p>
<h2>Number crunching</h2>
<p>One UK post-combustion CCS project that was <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-38687835">cancelled earlier</a> this year was the joint-venture between SSE and Shell at the Peterhead gas-fired ation in northeast Scotland. It aimed to capture 10m tonnes of CO₂ over a 10-year period and store it 2km under the North Sea. </p>
<p>Let’s put this saving into context. The diagram below summarises the amount of power produced and used in the UK. It shows that the country uses 108 terawatt hours (TWhrs) of domestic electricity per annum. </p>
<p><strong>UK electricity generation/consumption</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183144/original/file-20170823-13271-1ab6oas.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=536&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">All numbers are in terawatt hours (TWhrs).</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/633779/Chapter_5.pdf">DECC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Of this domestic usage, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261914011623">16% goes to</a> cooking. Boiling kettles makes up 34% – that’s 5.9TWhrs per annum, the equivalent of a 670MW power station. Domestic kettle use is particularly inefficient as we regularly overfill our kettles. We could save at least half the energy if we boiled only what we need to make tea and coffee. </p>
<p>That would negate the need for 335MW of power. Now compare that to what CCS would have saved from Peterhead – 85% of a 400MW gas turbine, or 340MW. Simply by not overfilling our kettles, we could remove about the same amount of CO₂. Unlike CCS, let alone oxy-combustion, we could do this immediately, for free, and cut our electricity bills and remove various air pollutants at the same time. </p>
<p>Of course, being kettle smart will only deliver a fraction of the UK’s required carbon reduction goals. It’s only about 3TWhrs out of the approximately 170TWhrs produced by gas-fired power in the UK each year. But it hopefully illustrates why energy efficiency is a much smarter way of reducing carbon and other harmful air emissions than CCS. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/183154/original/file-20170823-13303-mpsn59.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=528&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Tower of power.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/metal-kettle-closeup-kitchen-251796247?src=BvTXAoEjjxSm4xzUEXv1ig-1-12">gmstockstudio</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If we took the same approach to lighting, computer monitors, TVs on stand-by, running water and everything else, it becomes a very different proposition. If we could achieve the aim of a carbon-neutral house, <a href="http://www.zerocarbonhub.org/sites/default/files/resources/reports/Zero_Carbon_Strategies_for_Tomorrows_New_Homes.pdf">we could</a> shut down half the UK’s existing gas-fired power stations. And if industry and other non-domestic consumers made energy savings of the order of 20%, that would bring down the gas-fired power requirement by a corresponding percentage. </p>
<p>Is 20% realistic? As a chemical engineer with a 40-year industrial career, I am confident it is. Key areas to be considered would be pump and compressor efficiency, energy use in separation processes, combined heat and power, furnace fuel management, green concrete and energy integration.</p>
<p>Together with the government giving greater priority to renewable energy like offshore wind and solar, you have a viable plan for delivering the UK’s carbon goals. CCS may still have its place, but as a means of removing carbon emissions from burning things like wood and rubbish as opposed to fossil fuels. Suffice to say it looks more promising on that front. </p>
<p>But in short, it is time for governments to stop wasting time and money on technologies like CCS that aren’t working. They need to finally get serious about leading a major drive for energy efficiency instead.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/82929/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Baxter does occasional oil and gas consultancy work for Genesis Oil and Gas Consultants, but the ideas in this piece are entirely his own. </span></em></p>Why go to all that bother when you can just half-fill the kettle?Tom Baxter, Senior Lecturer in Chemical Engineering, University of AberdeenLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/668962017-03-07T03:15:09Z2017-03-07T03:15:09ZWhat fax machines can teach us about electric cars<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/158130/original/image-20170223-32714-jo6vy9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">No common standard: CHAdeMO, CCS and Tesla Supercharger plugs.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CHAdeMO_Plug_VacavilleDavisStDC2.jpg">CHAdeMO: C-CarTom; CCS: Hadhuey; Tesla: Paul Sladen</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Imagine if you could gas up your GM car only at GM gas stations. Or if you had to find a gas station servicing cars made from 2005 to 2012 to fill up your 2011 vehicle. It would be inconvenient and frustrating, right? This is the problem electric vehicle owners face every day when trying to recharge their cars. The industry’s failure, so far, to create a universal charging system demonstrates why setting standards is so important – and so difficult.</p>
<p>When done right, standards can both be invisible and make our lives immeasurably easier and simpler. Any brand of toaster can plug into any electric outlet. Pulling up to a gas station, you can be confident that the pump’s filler gun will fit into your car’s fuel tank opening. When there are competing standards, users become afraid of choosing an obsolete or “losing” technology.</p>
<p>Most standards, like electrical plugs, are so simple we don’t even really notice them. And yet the stakes are high: Poor standards won’t be widely adopted, defeating the purpose of standardization in the first place. Good standards, by contrast, will ensure compatibility among competing firms and evolve as technology advances.</p>
<p><a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/faxed">My own research into the history of fax machines</a> illustrates this well, and provides a useful analogy for today’s development of electric cars. In the 1960s and 1970s, two poor standards for faxing resulted in a small market filled with machines that could not communicate with each other. In 1980, however, a new standard sparked two decades of rapid growth grounded in compatible machines built by competing manufacturers who battled for a share of an increasing market. Consumers benefited from better fax machines that seamlessly worked with each other, vastly expanding their utility.</p>
<p>At present, there is not a single standard for plugs to recharge electric vehicles. That means that people who drive electric cars can’t rely on refueling at any of a wide range of nearly ubiquitous stations on street corners the way gas-vehicle drivers can. This creates an additional barrier, slowing the adoption of electric cars unnecessarily. Several potential standards are competing in the marketplace now; as we saw with fax systems, the sooner one standard becomes dominant, the sooner the electric vehicle market will take off.</p>
<h2>Making a new standard</h2>
<p>The two basic approaches to creating standards involve letting the market decide or forging a consensus among participants. Both have benefits and risks. A free-market approach often splits a young market into several competing and incompatible systems. Believing in their technical or commercial superiority, firms gamble that they will create de facto standards by dominating the market.</p>
<p>In reality, as my research into the first two attempts at standards for fax machines in the 1960s and 1970s showed, competing incompatible equipment can slow the growth of an entire market. In the case of the fax, poorly written standards attempted to codify into common use certain fax machine manufacturers’ methods for connecting two machines and sending information between them. As a result, many firms sold machines that could not work with other companies’ devices. Some manufacturers even deliberately made their machines incompatible to lock their customers into their equipment.</p>
<p>No single firm dominated the marketplace, and nobody agreed to use a single common standard. As a result, the fax world consisted of several smaller self-contained markets, not one larger market. And many potential users didn’t use faxes at all, preferring to wait until an obvious winning standard emerged.</p>
<h2>Third time’s the charm</h2>
<p>Crowning that winner can take many years. So can creating standards by consensus. In the meantime, the spread of fax technology stagnated.</p>
<p>But then a force outside the marketplace began to call for a real fax standard. In 1977, the Japanese government <a href="http://ethw.org/Milestones:International_Standardization_of_G3_Facsimile,_1980">pushed competing Japanese firms and telephone corporations to cooperate</a> and create one standard. The government then convinced the International Telecommunications Union to adopt this as the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/technology/fax">worldwide standard</a> in 1980. What ensued was the fax boom of the 1980s and 1990s.</p>
<p>This standard found two keys to its success. First, it was royalty-free, meaning any company could adhere to the standard without paying a fee to its creators. (A similar approach decades earlier proved essential for the adoption of <a href="https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#!iso:std:59673:en">standard dimensions for shipping containers</a>.) The Japanese officials and companies calculated that the profits from a larger market would more than compensate for any lost income from the lack of licensing fees.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/157957/original/image-20170222-6406-1llb7v3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A modern fax machine.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ASamfax.jpg">Johnnyt</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Second, the standard was not so restrictive as to prevent fax machine manufacturers from introducing other features – such as faster transmission. That allowed companies to compete on more than just price. The result was a continued flow of new, more capable and cheaper machines that attracted new users.</p>
<h2>The need for a standard for electric cars</h2>
<p>Successfully commercializing electric vehicles will similarly depend on the development, acceptance and implementation of standards. So far, just as happened with fax machines, incompatible chargers have slowed the spread of electric cars. </p>
<p>Depending on the type of car and its age, it may have <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fast-charge-plugs-do-not-fit-all-electric-cars/">one of four incompatible chargers</a>. If the charging station you pull up to lacks the appropriate charger for your car, you are out of luck.</p>
<p>People considering buying electric cars already worry about <a href="https://theconversation.com/range-anxiety-todays-electric-cars-can-cover-vast-majority-of-daily-u-s-driving-needs-63909">how far they could travel between recharge stops</a>. Then they realize that they can’t use just any charging station – the way a gasoline-powered vehicle can use any gas station. That doesn’t relieve their concerns and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814546372">dampens sales of electric vehicles</a>.</p>
<h2>Developing a standard</h2>
<p>Like fax machines, <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-incompatible-standards-slow-down-electric-cars/">electric vehicles’ incompatibility</a> reflected both evolving technology and groups of manufacturers promoting their own systems in hopes of dominating the marketplace. Already, the <a href="http://www.evelectricity.com/charging/">first generation</a> of chargers is essentially obsolete because they take so long to recharge a car battery.</p>
<p>The real battle is among the three <a href="https://longtailpipe.com/ebooks/green-transportation-guide-buying-owning-charging-plug-in-vehicles-of-all-kinds/electric-car-charging-advice-systems/ev-dc-fast-charging-standards-chademo-ccs-sae-combo-tesla-supercharger-etc/">incompatible</a> <a href="http://www.electriccarpledge.com/electric-vehicle-resources/electric-car-plug-types/">fast charging systems</a> available in the United States: the Japanese <a href="http://www.chademo.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/brochure_04.2016.compressed.pdf">CHAdeMO</a>, the <a href="http://www.charinev.org/about-us/mission/">European-American CCS</a> and <a href="https://www.tesla.com/supercharger">Tesla Supercharger</a>. (China is developing its <a href="https://longtailpipe.com/2014/02/13/chinas-electric-car-fast-charging-gb/">own standard</a>.) </p>
<p>CHAdeMO works only with Japanese and Korean vehicles like the Nissan LEAF and Kia Soul. CCS works only with European and American cars like the BMW i3 and Chevy Spark. The third system, Tesla’s Supercharger, works only with Tesla’s own cars. Tesla sells its customers a US$450 <a href="https://greentransportation.info/ev-charging/range-confidence/chap8-tech/fast-charge-adapters.html">adapter to use a CHAdeMO</a> charger but does not offer adapters that would let CHAdeMO or CCS vehicles use Tesla charging stations.</p>
<h2>The end of the battle?</h2>
<p>This three-way split is changing. In the last few years, Tesla has veered from its initial exclusivity to cooperation. In 2014, Tesla announced it would <a href="https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-our-patent-are-belong-you">share its patents royalty-free</a> – including its charger and plug designs – to encourage the spread of electric vehicle technology. In 2015, the company agreed to make its cars and charging stations compatible with <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-to-modify-cars-to-meet-china-charging-standards-1431412891">China’s new standard</a>, possibly by using adapters at charging stations. </p>
<p>And in 2016, Tesla <a href="https://chargedevs.com/newswire/tesla-joins-charging-interface-initiative-what-does-it-mean/">joined CharIN</a>, an industry group promoting the CCS standard. That raised the tempting possibility that the company might allow CCS charging at Tesla stations, probably by providing adapters. It also threw Tesla’s significant support behind an effort to create a new standard for even faster charging. This could lead CCS to market dominance, effectively establishing a standard by out-competing CHAdeMO.</p>
<p>Fax machines needed three generations of standards before real compatibility emerged, thanks to Japanese government pressure to cooperate. For electric vehicles, Telsa’s embrace of CharIN may provide that needed pressure. The real winner would be the cause of electric vehicles.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66896/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jonathan Coopersmith received funding from National Science Foundation in 1994 for fax research.</span></em></p>Standards, like electrical plugs, are usually so simple we don’t even really notice them. But they’re extremely important: Good ones can drive innovation; bad ones can stifle growth.Jonathan Coopersmith, Professor of History, Texas A&M UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/723642017-02-02T03:51:45Z2017-02-02T03:51:45ZTurnbull’s energy game-changer<p>In his speech this week to the National Press Club, Turnbull initiated a genuine “game-changer” in the debate about power generation in this country. It is instructive to focus explicitly on what he said.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Australia is the world’s largest exporter of coal - we have invested $590 million since 2009 in clean coal technology research and demonstration, and yet we do not have one modern High Efficiency Low Emissions (HELE) coal fired power station let alone one with [carbon capture and storage] CCS?…Here’s the current picture - old, high emissions coal fired power stations are closing down, reducing baseload capacity. They can not simply be replaced by gas - because it’s too expensive - or by wind or solar because they are intermittent.</p>
<p>Storage has a big role to play, that’s true, but we will need more synchronous baseload power and as the world’s largest coal exporter we have a vested interest in showing that we can provide both lower emissions and reliable base load power with state of the art clean coal fired technology.</p>
<p>The next incarnation of our national energy policy should be technology agnostic - it’s security and cost that matter most, not how you deliver it. Policy should be “all of the above technologies” working together to deliver the trifecta of secure and affordable power while meeting our emission reduction commitments.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>To date, as evidenced by Turnbull’s remarks, clean coal has mostly been taken to mean carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). In my experience, although CCS technology can be shown to work, it is unlikely to be commercial without a carbon price of around A$100-120 per tonne.</p>
<p>The other take out from Turnbull’s remarks has been a focus on more efficient coal-fired power plants, what are called “supercritical plants”, Turnbull called HELE. These operate at higher temperature, and higher pressure, and are therefore more efficient than a traditional coal-fired power plant, but obviously cost more.</p>
<p>In terms of emissions, the current average for Australian coal-fired power plants is just a bit short of 1 tonne of greenhouse gas emissions per megawatt hour (mwh) (Hazelwood being the ‘dirtiest’ is over 1.6 tonnes per mwh) whereas a supercritical plant would reduce these to a little less than 0.8 tonnes per mwh. </p>
<p>However, proven commercially viable, Australian technology, can further improve the efficiency of the power generation, at lower cost, with lower emissions and no ash ponds or waste or particulate emissions. </p>
<p>The essence is to refine coal. Crude oil and wellhead gas need to be refined, why not coal?</p>
<p>Coal refining removes all of the non-combustible mineral matter (ash) and water from as mined, raw coal. The resultant pure hydrocarbon fuel produced as a result of this process is ground into a fine powder and mixed with air to create an artificial gas stream called atomised refined coal (ARC).</p>
<p>ARC can be used as a less expensive natural gas substitute to fuel combined cycle power stations that operate at an efficiency of up to 65% - compared with about 42% for a supercritical plant. This increased efficiency results in significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions of 0.57 tonnes per mwh, and the total capital cost is less than for a supercritical plant.</p>
<p>The significance of this technology is that it ensures the lowest cost electricity from any new power plant – be it raw coal fired simple cycle, natural gas fired, diesel, nuclear, hydro, or pumped hydro. These deliver base load power and ensures energy security, with the lowest emissions theoretically obtainable from coal.</p>
<p>Turnbull also focused on the significance of energy storage. Again, this is what he said, in full:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Energy storage - long neglected in Australia - will also be a priority this year. Last week, at my request, ARENA and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) agreed to work together on a new funding round for large scale storage and other flexible capacity projects, including pumped hydro.</p>
<p>I have also written to Alan Finkel asking him to advise on the role of storage and pumped hydro in stabilising the grid.
Large scale storage will support variable renewables like wind and solar, it will get more value out of existing baseload generation and it will enhance grid stability. And we are getting on with it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Clearly, the challenge for renewables is to deliver cost effective base load power, and effective storage is fundamental to this, not only to ensure energy security, but also lower average power costs. That is, to eliminate the intermittancy problem where, with the wind mostly blowing during the night, and the sun only shining during the day, the significant morning and evening peaks in demand can see average electricity prices ramped up significantly.</p>
<p>In the end, the power market will transition to the lowest cost, sustainable, power, with an imperative for renewables and other alternatives to lower costs to be competitive with current coal fired generation, the cost of which only needs to cover operating costs, as initial capital costs have been written off.</p>
<p>There are a host of energy storage proposals now in development for electric battery, thermal battery and pumped hydro, any of which could deliver schedulable, base load power from intermittent wind and/or solar generation systems. By giving renewable energy storage a priority, Turnbull will accelerate this process to hopefully be commercially competitive with fossil fuel generation systems in the near future.</p>
<p>Finally, politically, it would clearly be desirable to now achieve a degree of bi-partisanship in the energy debate, where we agree on the imperative of the long-term transition to renewables based power, but accept the reality that other technology solutions may have a role to play in the interim.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/72364/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Hewson is chair of the Asset Owners Disclosure Project, and was federal leader of the Liberal Party from 1990 to 1994. John has mix of financial interests in clean coal tech, base load solar thermal and a range of alternative technologies.</span></em></p>In his speech this week to the National Press Club, Turnbull initiated a genuine “game-changer” in the debate about power generation in this country. It is instructive to focus explicitly on what he said…John Hewson, Professor and Chair, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/717752017-01-27T13:54:50Z2017-01-27T13:54:50ZWhy artificial intelligence could be key to future-proofing the grid<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154352/original/image-20170126-23840-1mo1ycx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Watt a good idea. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/wired-brain-illustration-next-step-artificial-561931702?src=UobSFSwc534xvzH3GJYHkA-1-7">Laurent T</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-year-coal-collapsed-2016-was-a-turning-point-for-britains-electricity-70877">recent Conversation piece</a> pointed out that the British electricity mix in 2016 was the cleanest in 60 years, with record capacity from renewable energy, mainly from wind and solar power. But one problem with this great expansion in renewables is they are intermittent, meaning they depend on weather conditions such as the wind blowing or sun shining. Unlike conventional power, this means they can’t necessarily meet surges in demand. Hence many <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/11/britain-facing-energy-crisis-could-could-see-families-pay-extra/">press headlines</a> in recent years about the “lights going out”. </p>
<p>National Grid, the UK grid operator, has several ways of ensuring supply can always meet demand. For shorter gaps in generation, it asks electricity suppliers <a href="http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/technology-applications/spinning-reserve">to run</a> their conventional power stations at below maximum potential output and ramp up as needed. </p>
<p>For longer gaps, it ensures power stations, particularly gas-based ones, are kept on standby. Some stations may only be asked to generate power for between several dozen and a few hundred hours a year. Besides contributing to carbon emissions, operating power plants for such short interventions is expensive. </p>
<p>The question is what to do about this problem. We could build less renewable power and make conventional power “greener” instead by removing the CO₂ and burying it underground. Opinion <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/03/indian-firm-carbon-capture-breakthrough-carbonclean">divides</a> on <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-latest-bad-news-on-carbon-capture-from-coal-power-plants-higher-costs-51440">when</a> these carbon capture technologies <a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-capture-and-storage-is-unlikely-to-save-coal-in-the-long-run-54182">can</a> be made commercially viable on a large scale. In the UK, unfortunately two government kickstarter projects <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/20/carbon-capture-scheme-collapsed-over-government-department-disagreements">have floundered</a> due to concerns about costs and departmental disagreements.</p>
<p>An alternative is to install very big (“grid scale”) batteries capable of storing renewable power to be released when required. This has <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/10/holy-grail-of-energy-policy-in-sight-as-battery-technology-smash/">generated</a> a lot of interest lately. But given the costs of current battery technology, grid-scale storage requires expensive upfront investments. </p>
<h2>Solutions on demand</h2>
<p>While researchers study these problems, the UK is developing an alternative known as <a href="http://www2.nationalgrid.com/UK/Services/Balancing-services/Demand-Side-Response/">demand-side response</a>. One aspect involves rewarding certain electricity consumers for reducing their usage at short notice. This can range from large industrial customers to smaller consumers using power for heating rooms, cooling, lighting or even refrigeration. </p>
<p>The other aspect of demand response involves asking customers who own equipment that can store power to help balance surges in demand. For example, the owners of a house equipped with solar panels and corresponding battery storage might reduce repayment costs on the equipment by making the battery units available to the grid. Other equipment in this category includes electric vehicles and hospital/university uninterruptible power supply (UPS) units. </p>
<p>Both types of demand response are happening already. Some industrial power customers and certain other companies such as hotel operators have contracts for reducing power, while National Grid has been <a href="http://analysis.energystorageupdate.com/uks-200-mw-grid-storage-tender-flooded-battery-bid-interest">attracting much bidder interest</a> for power storage schemes and has some underway in parts of the country. This storage is an alternative to deploying large-scale batteries, and promises to be much more economical if we can make it work on a large enough scale. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=672&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=672&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=672&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=845&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=845&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154353/original/image-20170126-23854-1gkz8jh.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=845&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lightbulb moment?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/electricity-supply-vector-icon-computer-website-562320595?src=yOaoo_Uyfji2S34-8847bA-1-0">MyVector</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The problem is that these schemes get more complicated once the pool of customers gets beyond a certain size. Knowing which customers to sign up and what tariffs to offer requires understanding to what extent devices will be available and at what cost, for example. </p>
<p>Once a pool of customers is set up, some devices might not always be available for storage or reducing demand when needed. This needs to be factored into the calculations both to minimise grid disruption and incentivise customers to participate at these times. </p>
<p>There can also be undesired effects, such as large simultaneous rebounds in consumption. For example many refrigerators will draw extra power to get their internal temperature below the required level when a demand response period ends. </p>
<p>Finally there’s a <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-cyberattack-on-ukraines-power-grid-is-a-warning-of-whats-to-come-52832">potential major security issue</a>: a central system that collects data about energy usage from many devices may be prone <a href="https://theconversation.com/traffic-light-hacking-shows-the-internet-of-things-must-come-with-better-security-30803">to malicious attacks</a> and information tampering. This could undermine both grid balancing and keeping track of what customers are owed. </p>
<h2>How AI can help</h2>
<p>Emerging artificial intelligence technologies look like providing answers to these challenges. To select the best participants, for example, grid operators will be able to use sophisticated <a href="http://digitalsubstation.com/en/2017/01/17/ai-machine-learning-service-to-be-launched-for-energy-storage-managment/">machine-learning techniques</a> to model the behaviour of individual devices and battery storage units by reviewing data from smart meters and sensors. </p>
<p>Once signed up for grid storage, it should be possible to estimate the useful lifetime of a battery pack or unit by applying <a href="https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7f8a/48cabeee8b61d0c7bc27b818e923bf6dfcc1.pdf">prognostic algorithms</a> to its charging/discharging data. Owners will then receive appropriate compensation, plus the added incentive of knowing how long their battery will last. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/154355/original/image-20170126-23845-1tb7vrr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">What’s in store.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/3d-illustration-rendering-house-solar-panels-556227403?src=vl9MAZpwGqjiQpqnFX2UZA-2-65">3D_Creation</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>When it comes to managing devices in the pool, people used to think we could use individual smart meters or control devices to feed a central server in the cloud. But meters are expensive and the short response times require the cloud server to analyse data in milliseconds, which looks unfeasible once many thousands of units are in a pool. </p>
<p>An alternative is to have metering devices which detect demand levels on the grid themselves and reduce power accordingly. These take pressure off the central server and it only requires metering at site level, rather than for every electrical device. But it still leaves you with a complex control problem in coordinating all these individual decisions. We at Heriot-Watt are working on a solution to this using AI-based algorithms. </p>
<p>Another line of AI research draws on insights from algorithmic game theory <a href="https://pureapps2.hw.ac.uk/portal/files/10576055/Ma_ijcai16.pdf">to develop</a> reward/penalty mechanisms which ensure enough customers in the pool are willing to participate, and actually respond when necessary. Researchers are also optimistic that <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/492972/gs-16-1-distributed-ledger-technology.pdf">blockchain protocols</a>, using the same technology as Bitcoin, could underpin a decentralised ledger system that would get round the security risk of having a single storage point for user data. </p>
<p>Numerous AI research groups, both in the UK and elsewhere, have been addressing these challenges, while a number of start-ups have started developing such systems in practice – relatively simple versions of machine learning are now beginning to be used, for instance. The UK has a good chance to be at the forefront of international efforts to make smarter demand response a reality over the next few years.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/71775/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Valentin Robu is an Assistant Professor in the Smart Systems Group at Heriot-Watt University. He receives funding from Innovate UK for a joint research project on energy demand response, in partnernship with Upside Energy. Heriot-Watt receives no funding from Upside Energy. </span></em></p>Many believe we can stabilise the power supply by asking customers to help - but there’s a problem.Valentin Robu, Lecturer in Smart Grids, Heriot-Watt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/708632017-01-04T17:00:20Z2017-01-04T17:00:20ZHow to burn more oil and gas but slash emissions? Offshore power stations<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151722/original/image-20170104-18653-1vnt59r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-267980426/stock-photo-oil-rig-platform.html?src=0DfMjpPU86EkftFTMCB5Bg-1-73">Lucasz Z</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>While the energy in fossil fuels is valuable for society, burning them has well documented environmental consequences – global warming, smog and the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/ocr_gateway_pre_2011/rocks_metals/6_clean_air3.shtml">effects</a> of nitrous and sulphur oxides. Many think the time has come to stop burning them almost entirely. This led to the Guardian launching a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2015/mar/16/keep-it-in-the-ground-guardian-climate-change-campaign">campaign</a> a couple of years ago to “keep it in the ground”, which attracted much support. </p>
<p>The <a href="http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php">Paris Agreement</a> is a shift in this direction with its commitment to keep the global temperature rise this century to 2°C. But within days of it coming into force last November, Donald Trump was elected American president. He <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/11/keep-it-in-the-ground-what-president-trump-means-for-climate-change">wants</a> the US to withdraw from the agreement and has <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/10/donald-trump-name-rex-tillerson-us-secretary-state-nbc-news/">appointed</a> a fossil fuels champion, Rex Tillerson, as secretary of state. </p>
<p>There may however be a way to reconcile these two sides that is not being discussed. Instead of burning gas and coal in power stations and burning petrol and diesel in cars, we could extract their energy by burning them at source – in offshore power stations.</p>
<h2>Mission: carbon capture</h2>
<p>In parallel with developing green energy technologies like wind and solar, much attention in recent years has been devoted to cleaning up traditional fossil-fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS). </p>
<p>Most of the emphasis has been on <a href="http://www.ccsassociation.org/what-is-ccs/capture/post-combustion-capture/">post-combustion capture</a>, which involves removing carbon dioxide from the power station flue gases then compressing it into a liquid. This is then pumped to a storage facility, commonly proposed in the UK to be depleted oil and gas fields offshore. </p>
<p>So far CCS in the UK <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-34943034">is still</a> not much further forward after more than ten years of endeavour. It doesn’t help that the technology has several major difficulties. The process of removing, treating and pumping carbon dioxide is costly and energy intensive, which is somewhat self-defeating. And moving the hydrocarbons hundreds of kilometres from their source to treat and burn them only to pump the carbon dioxide all the way back again is very inefficient. </p>
<p>So why not move the power station to the oil and gas field instead? You would burn the hydrocarbons in their containing rock by feeding them oxygen or air, while pumping pressurised water from a surface facility – per the diagram below. The heat from burning the hydrocarbons would convert the water into steam, which would be piped up to the surface to power a turbine to produce electricity that could be transmitted to shore using power cables. </p>
<p><strong>In-situ combustion</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=366&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=366&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=366&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151713/original/image-20170104-18647-get2iz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=460&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>No hydrocarbons would be taken to the surface in this process, and the carbon dioxide and other environmentally unfriendly combustion products would remain locked within the subsurface reservoir. And in case you are wondering if the process is unsafe, it isn’t. Isolate the oxygen supply and you can quickly stop combustion. There’s also no question of explosions because these need a free path. Hydrocarbons are stored in a rock matrix, so no such paths are available. </p>
<p>Not only would this be a new form of green power for homes and businesses, with a concerted shift to electric cars it could displace petrol and diesel. It could also potentially be applied to onshore shale oil and gas reserves. In short, this is about having our cake and eating it. </p>
<h2>Practicalities</h2>
<p>In-situ combustion has already been used for many years in <a href="http://www.terrapinn.com/2012/eor-and-heavy-oil-world-mena/Data/statusofiscprojects.pdf">places such as</a> the US and Romania to extract heavy oil. This involves injecting air or oxygen to burn the oil and gas within the reservoir, but instead of producing steam like in my proposal, the heat thins the heavy oil and turns lighter components to vapour, enhancing the flow to the surface. </p>
<p>That said, subsurface steam generation and surface power production present numerous uncertainties. We’d need significant research and development to prove the concept. Areas to be addressed include: </p>
<ol>
<li><p><strong>Modelling the combustion process</strong>: developing a model of the heat generation and the way the thermal front would move through different kinds of rock is likely to be extremely complex. </p></li>
<li><p><strong>Efficiency of heat transfer</strong>: how much of the heat could be captured to produce steam?</p></li>
<li><p><strong>Steam well design</strong>: this would require a new well completion arrangement with materials that could handle very high temperatures. </p></li>
<li><p><strong>Surface facility and transmission requirements</strong>: what does the surface facility look like – steam turbines, high-voltage DC generation? What other support systems are required? What are the requirements for moving the power onshore? </p></li>
<li><p><strong>Effect of combustion products over time</strong>: would the build-up of carbon dioxide and other gases undermine the process? Where would these products migrate to and what would happen to them? </p></li>
<li><p><strong>Reservoir seal integrity</strong>: would the seal that prevents hydrocarbons and combustion products escaping be maintained, or would the process compromise its integrity?</p></li>
<li><p><strong>Effect on hydrocarbon recovery</strong>: current techniques for extracting oil from the North Sea <a href="http://www.offshore-technology.com/features/featurethe-biggest-oil-fields-in-the-north-sea-4836046/">can remove</a> a maximum of about two thirds of what is in a reservoir. Would burning the materials in-situ enable you to access more of the energy over the conventional process? </p></li>
<li><p><strong>Integration with other infrastructure</strong>: what potential is there for linking this kind of facility with other oil and gas fields and also offshore wind farms?</p></li>
<li><p><strong>Commerciality</strong>: you would of course need to calculate full capital and operating costs for the process, together with the associated revenue streams. Conventional accounting might prejudice analysis of such a scheme, however, unless there is a value ascribed to the benefit of emissions reduction using <a href="http://study.com/academy/lesson/full-cost-accounting-definition-example.html">full-cost accounting</a> techniques, the overall benefits for society will be missed.</p></li>
</ol>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=698&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=698&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=698&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=877&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=877&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/151752/original/image-20170104-18653-k64byu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=877&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Barrier Britain.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-345034715/stock-vector-illustration-of-a-vector-oil-drop-icon-with-a-map-of-the-uk.html?src=U0GDMIe3CVCpLNMvsyGgrw-1-58">blablo 101</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Developing this kind of scheme would not come cheap. In the UK it would require such a level of investment, integration and commitment across the competing energy companies that the current fully private set-up would be a barrier. </p>
<p>The best route would be to set up a state energy company – accepting that nationalising the remaining resource in the UK continental shelf was necessary to maximise what was left. This sort of thinking is necessary if we are to achieve our climate change goals. Offshore power stations could be exactly what we are looking for.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70863/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tom Baxter does occasional oil and gas consultancy work for Genesis Oil and Gas Consultants. It would not stand to benefit from developing the kind of project envisaged in this article.
</span></em></p>Carbon capture is fundamentally flawed. Here’s plan B.Tom Baxter, Senior Lecturer in Chemical Engineering, University of AberdeenLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.