Carbon Capture and Storag ebook ebook overview 1
Carbon Capture and Storag e-book
e-book overview 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Climate change and energy consumption CCS as an option for CO 2 emission reduction Geologic storage and trapping mechanisms Storage potentials and capacity estimates Site selection + characterisation CO 2 -EOR Storage risks Monitoring Numerical modeling of CO 2 storage Regulatory and social aspects of CCS technology
lecture 10 Regulatory and social aspects of CCS technology by Samuela Vercelli, Sapienza University of Rome CERI Research Centre
lecture overview (1) § § § introduction regulatory aspects § first steps of CCS regulation § CCS regulation in Europe – CO 2 storage § examples CCS regulations in the world § international standards for CCS implementation: ISO § CCS regulatory test toolkit § new areas for legislation development: CCUS and BECCS social aspects of CO 2 geological storage § CCS perception general considerations § CCS perception issues § communication guidelines for CCS projects
lecture overview (2) § § social aspects of CO 2 geological storage (cont. ) § research based CO 2 storage communication resources § examples of good interaction between CCS projects and the local context and community summary glossary references
introduction § regulatory and social aspects are closely related and constitute two key parameters for the deployment of CCS § the lecture introduces the reader to information and concepts that can help to get acquainted with the regulatory context and the social situation with regard to CCS § the scope is not so much to provide a complete understanding of these issues but rather to raise awareness and stimulate curiosity as to how the CCS technology can find its place in our society § the first part of this lecture deals with regulatory aspects and how they have developed in Europe and in other countries § the second part covers social aspects and provides information on approaches and tools which can help stakeholders get involved and understand the technology, the opportunities it can offer, and the challenges it poses.
regulatory aspects CCS legislation and regulations are important for: § establishing rules and control procedures to ensure the safety of the storage site § providing a reliable framework to industry and other investors, for project development and financial investment decisions, which require long term stability § creating a clear reference for public administrators and the public with regard to storage site selection and management, monitoring plan and provisions in case of anomalies, and long term handling of the storage facility (site closure, post-closure obligations, transfer of responsibility from the operator to the government, etc. ).
first steps for CCS regulation
the IPCC Special Report on CCS (2005) reviewed legal and regulatory issues around CO 2 geological storage giving impulse to: § 2006 to 2007: Revision of international marine treaties – Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR) and London Convention to facilitate and to regulate environmentally safe CO 2 geological storage. The issues identified in this process offer important examples for those seeking to design law and regulation for the technology. § 2006: Chapter on CCS in the IPCC Guidelines for GHG Inventories, which became the basis for many subsequent CCS regulations, to enable estimating, verifying, and reporting emissions from CO 2 storage sites § 2011: Inclusion of CCS into the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol.
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes it is under discussion no it was included in 2011 skip test
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes it is under discussion no it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes x it is under discussion no it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes it is under discussion x no it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes it is under discussion no x it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes x it is under discussion no it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes it is under discussion x no it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes it is under discussion no x it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes x it is under discussion x no it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes x it is under discussion no x it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes it is under discussion x no x it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes x it is under discussion x no it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes x it is under discussion no x it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes it is under discussion x no x it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? yes x it is under discussion x no x it was included in 2011 submit
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes x it is under discussion x no x it was included in 2011 submit
test unfortunately, this is not correct try again skip test
test Is CCS a recognised technology for reducing CO 2 emissions in the Clean Development Mechanism? x yes it is under discussion no x It was included in 2011 this is correct, good job
CCS regulation in Europe – CO 2 storage § 2009/31/EC European Union Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide establishes a common framework for CO 2 geological storage in all European countries § 2011 Guidance Documents (GD) to support implementation of the Directive’s requirements: § GD 1 on risk management § GD 2 on characterisation of the storage complex, CO 2 stream composition, monitoring, and corrective measures § GD 3 on criteria for transfer of responsibility § GD 4 on financial security and financial mechanism. Note: the EU Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide, here referred to as “CO 2 Storage Directive” is often called “CCS Directive”.
EU CO 2 Storage Directive main regulation areas § selection of CO 2 storage sites and exploration permits § storage permits § operation, closure, and post-closure obligations (including characteristics of the CO 2 stream, measures in case of leakage or significant irregularities, transfer of responsibility and financial mechanisms) § the EU Directive also includes two important annexes: § Annex I: criteria for the characterisation and assessment of the potential storage complex and surrounding area § Annex II: criteria for establishing and updating the monitoring plan and for post closure monitoring.
EU CO 2 Storage Directive and ETS § 2009 inclusion of CCS in the revised Emissions Trading Scheme – ETS Directive 2009/29/EC: § if emissions go for permanent storage to a site which has a permit under the CCS Directive, allowances don’t have to be surrendered § 2010 guidelines for monitoring and reporting greenhouse gas emissions from capture, transport, and geological storage of carbon dioxide 2010/345/EU § if standard monitoring activities under the CO 2 Storage Directive lead to detect or suspect leakage, monitoring for the purpose of quantification under the ETS Directive is triggered.
national transposition of the EU CO 2 Storage Directive § the transposition of the EU CO 2 Storage Directive into national legislations was performed in most European countries by 2014, however some countries opted for limitations or postponed the possibility of implementing CCS to the future: § permitting with restrictions § excluding selected areas, such as active seismic areas § limiting extent of the exploration area § limiting volume of CO 2 stored § permitting only offshore § permitting only for research purposes § the transposition of the European CO 2 Storage Directive forms the basis for the regulatory instruments required for the implementation of CCS: more specific guidelines and criteria for permitting are being developed, at a different pace, in each country.
review of EU CO 2 Storage Directive in 2014 to 2015 Main recommendations of the review: § revision of Guidance Document 4 – Financial Security and Financial Mechanism to make it less stringent and more aligned with the Directive § creation of a Guidance Document on capture readiness (GD 5) to clarify this concept and the criteria to be used § https: //ec. europa. eu/clima/policies/lowcarbon/ccs/directive_en § http: //trinomics. eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/CCS-Directiveevaluation-final-report. pdf
CCS regulation in Europe – “capture-ready” power plants § should CCS be made mandatory? § during the first decade of the 21 st century, the possibility to make CCS mandatory for new power plants was discussed in Europe § the answer was not to make the capture of CO 2 emissions mandatory, however, new power plants should be CCS-ready whenever possible, meeting the following criteria: § suitable CO 2 storage sites are available § transport facilities are technically and economically feasible, and § retrofit for CO 2 capture is technically and economically feasible. § since 2009 the EU CO 2 Storage Directive requires that, when applying for a license, operators of combustion plants with capacity of 300 MW or more assess the technical and economical feasibility of carbon capture, transport, and storage. If the assessment is positive, space on the installation site must be set aside for the equipment necessary to capture and compress CO 2.
CCS regulation in Europe – “capture-ready” power plants (cont. ) § in the following years assessments were carried out in several countries. They found that CCS is not economically convenient. Some further difficulties were found for some plants, such as no suitable storage sites or technical incompatibility with the flexible operation of a plant. § however, most newly built power plants are generally going beyond the legal requirements and are setting aside land for CO 2 capture and compression facilities, should the conditions change in the future.
test The 2009/31/EC European Union Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide establishes recommendations for worldwide CO 2 storage technologies for the capture of CO 2 a common framework for CO 2 geological storage in Europe storage permits skip test
test The 2009/31/EC European Union Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide establishes x recommendations for worldwide CO 2 storage technologies for the capture of CO 2 a common framework for CO 2 geological storage in Europe storage permits submit
test The 2009/31/EC European Union Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide establishes recommendations for worldwide CO 2 storage x technologies for the capture of CO 2 a common framework for CO 2 geological storage in Europe storage permits submit
test The 2009/31/EC European Union Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide establishes recommendations for worldwide CO 2 storage technologies for the capture of CO 2 x a common framework for CO 2 geological storage in Europe storage permits submit
test The 2009/31/EC European Union Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide establishes recommendations for worldwide CO 2 storage technologies for the capture of CO 2 a common framework for CO 2 geological storage in Europe x storage permits submit
test unfortunately, this is not correct try again skip test
test The 2009/31/EC European Union Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide establishes recommendations for worldwide CO 2 storage technologies for the capture of CO 2 x a common framework for CO 2 geological storage in Europe storage permits this is correct, keep it up
examples of CCS regulations in the world
USA Establishment in 2010 of a regulatory framework for CCS linked to the Underground Injection Control Program, the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program § focus on the protection of underground sources of drinking water § EPA – Environmental Protection Agency developed the regulation based on ad hoc research projects, technical and stakeholder workshops, public comments § several US states have also developed laws on different aspects of CCS such as the rights to store CO 2, the ownership of injected CO 2, liabilities and their management.
Australia § comprehensive CCS regulation is in place, covering onshore and offshore storage § 2005 Carbon Dioxide Capture and Geological Storage: Australian Regulatory Guiding Principles are developed based on consultation with a wide range of stakeholders § 2008 amendment of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (Cth) regarding offshore storage sites and formations, safety and interactions between CCS activities and the petroleum industry § individual Australian states regulate storage activities, both onshore and offshore up to the 3 nautical mile limit.
China § China policies are rapidly evolving to reduce pollution and CO 2 emissions, CCS is being considered in the framework of these efforts, especially considering the high rate of recently built coal power plants which could be retrofitted § environmental protection and impact assessment laws are in place; they are, however, not fully satisfactory, and mechanisms for public participation need improvement to be able to build consensus § in the energy law CCS is not explicitly supported § no regulation for CO 2 can be found in the atmospheric pollution prevention law. CO 2 is not regarded as “pollution”.
international standards for CO 2 storage implementation: ISO § in 2011, ISO, an international organisation which works to define standards for various activities and technologies, set up a working group for CO 2 storage that involves interested governments and many other CCS stakeholders § in 2017, the standard “ISO 27914: 2017 - Carbon dioxide capture, transportation and geological storage – Geological storage” was released § the document provides recommendations for the safe and effective storage of CO 2 in subsurface geologic formations through all phases of a storage project life cycle § the standards have been developed based on a wide range of operational experiences in pilot to commercial scale carbon dioxide storage projects, that have used methods and technologies mostly developed and widely deployed by the oil and gas industry including CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery (EOR) § ISO standards are developed and followed on a voluntary basis.
CCS regulatory test toolkit § a toolkit to check CCS regulation, developed by Scottish Carbon Capture and Storage (SCCS) in collaboration with Global CCS Institute and Scottish Government § https: //www. globalccsinstitute. com/publications/carbon-capture-andstorage-regulatory-test-toolkit § the toolkit is a regulatory test exercise to help governments establish whether their carbon CCS legislative and regulatory frameworks are fit for purpose, providing a low-cost, low-risk approach to testing regional and national legislation and regulatory systems for CCS projects § the toolkit was originally developed for the Scottish Government (2011) and has since been deployed in jurisdictions such as Romania, Trinidad and Tobago, Malaysia, and Australia (Victorian State).
new areas for legislation development: CCUS and BECCS CO 2 geological storage can also be done in conjunction with CO 2 use § there are several opportunities for CO 2 use, for instance for enhanced oil recovery, geothermal energy recovery, mineral carbonation using waste materials, production of hydrogen and synthetic hydrocarbons using excess energy from renewables, in the agricultural industry to increase growth rates in greenhouses, etc. (more information in electure 2 and 6) § additional CCUS regulations and political incentives are under development. Bio-energy with CCS (BECCS) is a carbon dioxide removal method capable of achieving negative CO 2 emissions. Regulations for this technology still need to be introduced.
social aspects of CO 2 geological storage
social aspects of CO 2 geological storage § social aspects of CCS pertain to two main areas: § general understanding of the technology and of its possible role for reducing CO 2 emissions and consequent support or lack of support for its adoption § specific understanding of issues related to local implementation of CO 2 storage sites § both areas are characterised by the fact that CCS has developed mainly outside of the public domain, therefore the social representation of this technology is still at an early stage. This means that the common grounds (concepts, terminology, etc. ) for sharing knowledge and opinions on the technology are still in the making § this section of the lecture will introduce the main issues in CCS public perception and communication, both of general and local interest; it will provide information on communication guidelines and resources; finally it will offer some insight into positive experiences of interaction between CO 2 storage pilot projects and the surrounding social environment.
CCS perception – general considerations (1) § CCS is still unknown to the majority of the population in most countries, something that does not help to investigate how it will be regarded by the public § a variety of studies have tried to overcome this challenge and understand the way people think about CCS. Many of them are based on prior conceptions of the researchers and common categorisations, like economic convenience, belief (or lack of it) about climate change, understanding of the technology, etc. Others stem from CCS projects, that were either successful or rejected by the local population. Still others have explored the perception of CCS without superimposing prior categories and schemes (like climate change) § in all cases, as several researchers have demonstrated and pointed out [ter Mors et al. , 2010; Pietzner et al. , 2011; Malone et al. , 2009; 2010], the evaluation of the technology can be strongly influenced by the context in which it is presented § therefore we need to be cautious in reading the outcomes of public perception studies, since the study itself (and the way it is organised, the institution that is performing it, who is funding it, etc. ) might be
CCS perception – general considerations (2) § many CCS perception issues are common also to other innovations and technologies, as they are concerned with the relationships between stakeholders and with the local communities, the related decision making processes and their characteristics § other perception issues are specific to CCS or even to single projects. It will be important to bear in mind that social factors, just like geology features, are unique to each situation in a given point in time and place § while learning from previous experiences is essential, it will not be sufficient: observing and listening with an open mind and being ready to take into account what is actually present in the social context one is considering will be key for understanding and intervention – be it communication, planning, or collaboration – for a CO 2 storage project.
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people skip test
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? x nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low x CCS is well known to all people submit
test unfortunately, this is not correct try again skip test
test What hampers investigations by social scientists on how CCS technologies are regarded by the general public? nothing x CCS is unknown to the majority of the people in many countries x public awareness about CCS is still very low CCS is well known to all people this is correct, well done
CCS perception issues (1) Based on existing studies what are the most common public perception issues? § CCS can be hard to imagine: limited geological background and knowledge of industrial processes make it difficult to immediately form an idea of the technology § CCS can be difficult to understand: complexity of the technology, all the different elements that contribute to it, and the numerous fields of expertise involved, can make it challenging § lack of end-user friendly information or lack of its dissemination (knowing such information exists, having the possibility to access it, etc. ) § lack of trust in the way the technology would be implemented (both in terms of industry reliability and of the necessary institutional control ensuring that correct procedures are respected).
CCS perception issues (2) § uncertainty about who should pay for it: should public funds be used, at least for getting CCS started? § doubts on whether we should invest in this or in other technologies: is this a necessary technology or could we achieve similar results using other technologies (considered to be less costly or more environmentally friendly)? § doubts on whether we should invest in new technologies like CCS or just operate to improve efficiency and reduce our impact on the environment changing habits, developing new life styles, etc. § lack of acknowledgement of the environmental problems that motivate the implementation of CCS and support of “business as usual”.
CCS perception issues (3) § uncertainty about safety and environmental impacts and (difficult) access to scientific evidence of CO 2 geological storage safety § need of clear and trustworthy information about possible impacts and benefits at local level § need of a better understanding of long term issues, especially in view of the heritage we leave to future generations.
CCS perception: …and what do you think? § this report illustrates research outcomes on public perception issues in a quick and practical format § it provides an overview of the different issues involved and formulates suggestions or questions that can help progress; it can be the starting point for some out of the box thinking § with cartoons to help visualisation and to provide humour § for download: http: //www. eco 2 project. eu/
communication issues § CCS is a new technology which is mostly unknown to the public § many people have a limited knowledge of the subsurface, hence explaining how CO 2 storage works needs to take into account that also basic geological concepts need to be introduced § the context for CCS is controversial, since the release of CO 2 in the atmosphere from power plants and big industrial plants was not considered to be a problem in the past. Change of this situation towards considering CO 2 emitted from this sources as a pollutant, due to impact on climate or contribution to acid rain, is maturing very slowly § local communities: CCS is a new technology and we still have limited experience with full scale CO 2 capture and storage, not only at technical level but also at social level.
communication guidelines for CCS projects Due to the difficulties that some of the first CCS projects have met, research has been undertaken to extract lessons from positive and negative experiences and provide general recommendations for future project developers. The following are examples of guidelines that can help professionals in getting a CCS project started: § ESTEEM: The ESTEEM Toolkit (www. esteem-tool. eu) [Raven et al. , 2009] § CSIRO: Communication/Engagement Toolkit for CCS projects (2010), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) [Ashworth et al. , 2011 a] § NETL: Public Outreach and Education for Geologic Storage projects from the US National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) [NETL, 2017; revised edition].
research based CO 2 storage communication resources § access to information together with accurateness of the information itself are important factors in shaping the opinion that people will form about a given technology, independently from the fact that they will get in contact with the information directly or mediated through the media, school teachers, or other information sources § researchers have thus been working to offer simple tools that can be used by themselves or as a source for developing other dissemination materials, educational materials, etc. § here, we present a small selection of these tools, which can facilitate understanding of CO 2 storage and specific aspects of it. They have been developed with the contribution and cross check of many researchers, through iterative group work processes to ensure scientific soundness and, as far as possible, end-user friendly language.
brochure: “What does CO 2 geological storage really mean? ” § this one of a kind brochure is now available in 30 languages § produced thanks to the efforts of a committed group of researchers it provides a thorough introduction to CO 2 geological storage, covering such topics as: where CO 2 can be stored; what happens to the CO 2 in the storage reservoir; monitoring of the storage site; possible consequences of CO 2 leakage. § for download: http: //www. co 2 geonet. com/resou rces/#1392
video: “CCS – a bridging technology for the energy of the future” § short film (6 min) which introduces CCS through the story between Marco and Francesca, two young people who would like to find ways to produce energy without damaging the environment § developed integrating geological, psychological, and communication research § it is available on You. Tube in four languages: § § Italian https: //youtu. be/0 s. Wp. Ll. Bj 3 Rk English https: //youtu. be/RDU_PTKll_g
brochure: “Choosing good sites for storing CO 2 underground” § site characterization is the single most important phase of the development of a CO 2 storage site to ensure good operation, safety, and capacity § this brochure illustrates the different phases of a site characterization process, step by step towards the site choice § available both as digital and printable version
report: “What happens when CO 2 is stored underground? ” § Q&A document that presents common questions often raised by the general public about CCS and gives answers based on the data and results from 12 years of research at the Weyburn-Midale CO 2 injection site in Canada [GCCSI and PTRC, 2014] § the questions are grouped in three categories: 1. the basics: CO 2 and CCS 2. what happens to CO 2 in the underground? 3. what ifs? – the most common questions about CCS
the language of CCS – definitions, explanations and some frequently asked questions § glossary on CCS and CO 2 storage (under the seabed in particular). After an introductory discussion of basic terms like carbon, carbon dioxide, storage and capture, the glossary provides definitions for used and less used terms in the domain of CO 2 storage. § for those who are curious but also for professionals aiming at more precision § for download: http: //www. eco 2 project. eu/
examples of good interaction between CCS projects and the local context and community § CCS projects have a high degree of complexity which can be better managed when all societal stakeholders collaborate all along the process, i. e. from the project’s planning to its execution and closure § to understand how this can be done, we have concrete examples from pilot projects, which in addition to testing the technology have also carried out communication and public engagement activities to integrate the project in the local and wider social context § we present some of them, each one with its own special features, which can provide inspiration to future project developers.
Lacq, France § fully integrated CCS pilot project operated by Total § project and injection period 2006 to 2013 § from 2009 to 2013 the project captured more than 51 thousand tons of CO 2 through oxyfuel combustion at a gas-fired power station, transported it by pipeline and injected it safely into the nearby Rousse geological reservoir § scientific information sharing and stakeholder dialogue policies promoted by Total during the whole life of the pilot project § public consultation with all stakeholders and providing information to them since the start of the project § establishment of a scientific academic advisory committee § creation of a permanent official local information and surveillance commission (CLIS) in April 2008, which has been regularly meeting every six months with the attendance of the administration and stakeholders (mayors and NGOs with an interest in the project) § https: //www. globalccsinstitute. com/insights/authors/Jacques. Monne/2 015/09/15/total-publishes-lacq-ccs-pilot-report
Ketzin, Germany § the Ketzin site, near Berlin, was managed by the German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ) § the research and industry pilot project started in 2004; CO 2 injection began in 2008 and ended in 2013; ca. 67 thousand tons of CO 2 were injected § CO 2 source: hydrogen production and oxyfuel pilot plant (Schwarze Pumpe) § storage: sandstone reservoir § early and comprehensive engagement and public outreach program. The fact that developers were scientists was important for trust § close collaboration with the county officials § the CO 2 storage project was embedded in the community’s strategy for a sustainable energy production which also included renewable energy sources (wind turbines, solar panels and a biogas plant) § transparent communication including open houses and weekly possibilities to visit the site for all interested citizens § https: //sequestration. mit. edu/tools/projects/ketzin. html
Hontomín, Spain § research pilot managed by CIUDEN (state energy research foundation) § the project started in 2006; injection began in 2015 into carbonate rocks § early and extensive outreach, engagement, and education activities § outreach team with specialists from different fields, including engineers and journalists; specialized spokespersons for the media; small dedicated team to interact with the public to provide familiar faces § the communication strategy encompassed outreach at a local, regional, national, and international level with specialized information packs for different audiences § to reach as many people as possible, priority was given to media interaction and attendance of local festivals § partnership with the regional authority to work on education and communication of CCS related issues: development of a set of educational and outreach activities including ”cooking with CO 2”, “wine and CO 2”, and lectures on sustainability and energy use. “The magic rocks of Hontomín” was a CCS-themed summer school
Decatur project and Illinois Industrial Carbon Capture and Storage project, Illinois, USA § large scale research demonstration and industrial scale demonstration projects § the Decatur project (2011 to 2014) has stored 1 million tons of CO 2; the follow-up industrial project started in 2016 and is going to store 5 million tons of CO 2 § research was undertaken in an industrial site, strong collaboration with the hosting company § early, comprehensive and long term public engagement activities and outreach, including city, county, state officials, media, and schools § CO 2 source: ethanol plant § storage: Mount Simon Sandstone § these projects are a good demonstration of how appropriate investment on early, systematic, and state of the art management of social aspects can lead to the satisfaction of all stakeholders § https: //sequestration. mit. edu/tools/projects/decatur. html https: //sequestration. mit. edu/tools/projects/illinois_industrial_ccs. html
CO 2 CRC Otway project § Australian carbon dioxide storage research and demonstration project § strong focus on stakeholder consultation and public engagement with the local community § social research to inform on the consultation process, monitor community attitudes, and provide the community with additional opportunities to comment on the project § in addition to the usual communication tools and strategies like newsletters, website, public meetings, ‘Open Days’, etc. a dedicated community liaison officer was established § this locally-based officer proved to be an important mean of direct consultation with landowners and a valuable two-way communication channel. It helped build trust between the project and the community, especially by working with landowners to develop protocols for monitoring surveys § http: //www. co 2 crc. com. au/ [Steeper, 2013]
summary § many countries have developed at least a basic regulatory framework for CCS § we have also achieved a fair understanding of CCS social issues § now the field of CCS is in a phase of rapid development, with more and more countries and projects being involved: regulation will need to become increasingly context specific, taking into account the requirements of the different cultural environments § CCS social research could then feed into political and regulatory processes, providing valuable information to policy makers for addressing the needs of the different stakeholders in making new legislation or improving the existing one § at the same time it is expected that a more mature legislation and regulatory framework will encourage a wider demonstration of the technology and make it ready for commercial scale § the intertwined development of regulatory and social aspects could greatly contribute to overcome doubts, uncertainties and build trust in the correct implementation of the technology.
glossary BECCS Bio-energy with CCS Carbon dioxide (CO 2) Capture and Storage CCUS Carbon dioxide (CO 2) Capture, Utilisation and Storage ETS European Emission Trading Scheme ENOS Enabling Onshore CO 2 Storage in Europe EOR Enhanced Oil Recovery GCCSI Global CCS Institute ISO International Organization for Standardization NETL US National Energy Technology Laboratory ZEP Zero Emission Platform
references regulatory aspects (1) Dixon, T. , S. T. Mc. Coy and I. Havercroft, Legal and regulatory developments on CCS, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 40, 431 -448, 2015 EC, EU Directive Amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to Improve and Extend the Greenhouse Gas Emission Allowance Trading Scheme, 2009/29/EC, 2009 EC, Commission Decision of 8 June 2010 Amending Decision 2007/589/EC as regards the Inclusion of Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Capture, Transport and Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide, 2010/345/EU, 2010 EC, Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Implementation of Directive 2009/31/EC on the Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide. Brussels: European Commission; 1 -7, 2017 EPA, Federal Requirements Under the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program for Carbon Dioxide (CO 2) Geologic Sequestration (GS) Wells, 75 Fed. Reg. 77230, 77303 (10 December 2010, amending 40 C. F. R. § 124, 145, 146, and 147), 2010 a EPA, Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases: Injection and Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide; Final Rule. 75 Fed. Reg. 75060, 75089 (1 December 2010, amending 40 C. F. R. § 72, 78, and 98), 2010 b EU, Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directive 85/337/EEC, European Parliament and Council Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC, 2008/1/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 (1), Official Journal of the European Union 2009, L 140, 114 -35, 2009
references regulatory aspects (2) EU, The Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 88 pp, 2017 EU, EU Emission Trading System (ETS), 2018, http: //ec. europa. eu/environment/ets/ GCCSI, Understanding CCS – Resources, 2017, https: //www. globalccsinstitute. com/understanding-ccs/information-resource GCCSI, Existing CCS Ready Legislation, 2018, https: //hub. globalccsinstitute. com/publications/defining-ccs-ready-approachinternational-definition/12 -existing-ccs-ready-legislation IEA, The potential for equipping China’s existing coal fleet with carbon capture and storage, Insights Series 2016, 100 pp, 2016 IPCC, IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage, prepared by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Metz, B. , O. Davidson, H. C. de Coninck, M. Loos, and L. A. Meyer (eds. )], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 443 pp, 2005 IPCC, Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Vol. 2: Energy, Chapter 5, Carbon Dioxide Transport, Injection and Geological Storage, 32 pp, 2006 Japan Ministry of Environment, Regulatory Framework for Carbon Dioxide Sub-seabed Storage - Safety and Potential Environmental Impact, Office of Marine Environment et al. , Editors, 2011 MCMPR, Carbon dioxide capture and geological storage: Australian regulatory guiding principles, Ministerial Council on Mineral and Petroleum Resources, Canberra, 64 pp, 2005
references regulatory aspects (3) Milligan, B. , Planning for offshore CO 2 storage: Law and policy in the United Kingdom, Marine Policy, 48, 162 -171, 2014 Ming, Z. , O. Shaojie, Z. Yingjie, and S. Hui, CCS technology development in China: Status, problems and countermeasures – Based on SWOT analysis, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 604 -616, 2014 Rütters, H. and the CGS Europe partners, State of play on CO 2 geological storage in 28 European countries, CGS Europe report, No. D 2. 10, June 2013, 89 pp, 2013 Shogenova, A. , K. Shogenov, and J. Ivask, D 7. 3 Regional and national regulations, gaps and recommendations for CCUS scenarios, H 2020 project CLEANKER – Clean clinker production via calcium looping process, GA 764816, 72 pp, 2018 Shogenova, A. , K. Piessens, S. Holloway, M. Bentham, R. Martínez, K. M. Flornes, N. E. Poulsen, A. Wójcicki, S. Sliaupa, L. Kucharič, A. Dudu, S. Persoglia, V. Hladik, B. Saftic, A. Kvassnes, K. Shogenov, J. Ivask, I. Suárez, C. Sava, A. Sorin, and A. Chikkatur, Implementation of the EU CCS Directive in Europe: results and development in 2013, Energy Procedia, 63, 6662− 6670, 2014 Triple e, RECARDO-AEA and TNO, Study to support the review and evaluation of Directive 2009/31/EC on the geological storage of carbon dioxide (CCS Directive), Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 166 pp, 2015
references regulatory aspects (4) UNFCCC, Decision 10/CMP. 7 Modalities and procedures for carbon dioxide capture and storage in geological formations as clean development mechanism project activities, FCCC/KP/CMP/2011/L. 4 and FCCC/KP/CMP/2011/10/Add. 2, 2011 UNFCCC, SBSTA 35, Item 10(a) of the Provisional Agenda, Methodological issues under the Kyoto Protocol, Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage in Geological Formations as Clean Development Mechanism project activities, Draft Modalities and Procedures for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage in Geological Formations as Clean Development Mechanism Project Activities. FCCC/SBSTA/2011/4, 8 November 2011
references social aspects (1) Ashworth, P. , J. Bradbury, C. F. J. Feenstra, S. Greenberg, G. Hund, T. Mikunda, and S. Wade, Communication, project planning and management for carbon capture and storage projects: An international comparison, Queensland, Australia, CSIRO/GCCSI, 2010 a Ashworth, P. , N. Boughen, M. Mayhew, and F. Millar, From research to action: Now we have to move on CCS communication, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 4(2), 426 -433, 2010 b Ashworth, P. , J. Bradbury, C. F. J. Feenstra, S. Greenberg, G. Hund, T. Mikunda, S. Wade, and H. Shaw, Communication/engagement toolkit for CCS projects, Energy Transformed Flagship, National Flagships Research, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), 2011 a Ashworth, P. , G. Paxton, and S. Carr-Cornish, Reflections on a process for developing public trust in energy technologies: Follow-up results of the Australian large group process, Energy Procedia, 4, 6322 -6329, 2011 b Ashworth, P. , J. Bradbury, S. Wade, C. F. J. Y. Feenstra, S. Greenberg, G. Hund, and T. Mikunda, What's in store: Lessons from implementing CCS, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 9, 402 -409, 2012 Ashworth P. , A. -M. Dowd, S. Rodriguez, T. Jeanneret, L. Mabon, and R. Howell, Synthesis of CCS social research: Reflections and current state of play in 2013, CSIRO EP 134303, Australia, 2013 Ashworth, P. , Lessons from project level community engagement, ANLEC R&D Project 70414 -0227, 2014 Ashworth, P. , S. Wade, D. Reiner, and X. Liang, Developments in public communications on CCS, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 40, 449 -458, 2105 Boot, K. , S. Vercelli, L. Mabon, S. Shackley, and S. Lombardi, The language of CCS –
references social aspects (2) Bradbury, J. , I. Ray, T. Peterson, S. Wade, G. Wong-Parodi, and A. Feldpausch, The role of social factors in shaping public perceptions of CCS: Results of multi-state focus group interviews in the US, Energy Procedia, 1(1), 4665 -4672, 2009 Bradbury, J. A. , Public understanding of and engagement with CCS, in N. Markusson, S. Shackley, and B. Evar (eds. ), The social dynamics of carbon capture and storage, Routledge, 69 -97, 2012 GCCSI and PTRC, What happens when CO 2 is stored underground? Q&A from the IEAGHG Weyburn-Midale CO 2 Monitoring and Storage Project, Global CCS Institute and Petroleum Technology Research Centre, 56 pp, 2014, http: //hub. globalccsinstitute. com/sites/default/files/publications/151303/co 2 -storedunderground-ieaghg-weyburn-midale-co 2 -monitoring-storage-project. pdf Howell, R. , S. Shackley, L. Mabon, P. Ashworth, and T. Jeanneret, Engaging the public with low-carbon energy technologies: Results from a Scottish large group process, Energy Policy, 66, 496 -506, 2014 Lockwood, T. , Public outreach approaches for carbon capture and storage projects, IEA Clean Coal Centre, CCC/276, 86 pp, 2017 Lupion, M. , A. Perez, F. Torrecilla, and B. Merino, Lessons learned from the public perception and engagement strategy – experiences in CIUDEN’s CCS facilities in Spain, Energy Procedia, 37, 7369 -7379, 2013 Mabon, L. , S. Vercelli, S. Shackley, J. Anderlucci, and K. Boot, Carbon Capture and Storage Public Perception Factors: Literature Review and Open Issues, ECO 2 Deliverable, D 6. 1, 52 pp, 2012 Mabon, L. , S. Vercelli, S. Shackley, J. Anderlucci, N. Battisti, C. Franzese, and K. Boot, 'Tell me what you think about the geological storage of carbon dioxide’: towards a fuller
references social aspects (3) Malone, E. L. , J. A. Bradbury, and J. J. Dooley, Keeping CCS stakeholder involvement in perspective, Energy Procedia, 1(1), 4789 -4794, 2009 Malone, E. L. , J. J. Dooley, and J. A. Bradbury, Moving from misinformation derived from public attitude surveys on carbon dioxide capture and storage towards realistic stakeholder involvement, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 4(2), 419425, 2010 Monne, J. , N. Aimard, and S. Crepin, Carbon Capture and Storage. The Lacq pilot – Project and injection period 2006 -2013, TOTAL, April 2015 NETL, Best Practices: Public Outreach and Education for Geologic Storage Projects, National Energy Technology Laboratory, DOE/NETL-2017/1845, 2017 revised edition, 68 pp, June 2017 Pietzner, K. , D. Schumann, S. D. Tvedt, H. Y. Torvatn, R. Næss, D. M. Reiner, …, and F. Ziogou, Public awareness and perceptions of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS): Insights from surveys administered to representative samples in six European countries, Energy Procedia, 4, 6300 -6306, 2011 Raven, R. P. J. M. , E. Jolivet, R. M. Mourik, and Y. C. F. J. Feenstra, ESTEEM: Managing societal acceptance in new energy projects – A toolbox method for project managers, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 76, 963 -977, 2009 Shackley, S. , V. Scott, A. -M. Dowd, L. Mabon, B. Evar, R. Howell, N. Markusson, and K. Boot, Key Messages and Briefing Notes on Carbon Capture and Storage, IEAGHG, 148 pp, 2014 Steeper, T. , CO 2 CRC Otway project social research: assessing CCS community consultation, Energy Procedia, 37, 7454 -7461, 2013
references social aspects (4) Streibel, M. , R. M. Finley, S. Martens, S. Greenberg, F. Möller, and A. Liebscher, From pilot to demo scale –Comparing Ketzin results with the Illinois Basin-Decatur project, Energy Procedia, 6323 -6334, 2014 Ter Mors, E. , M. W. Weenig, N. Ellemers, and D. D. Daamen, Effective communication about complex environmental issues: Perceived quality of information about carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) depends on stakeholder collaboration, Journal of environmental psychology, 30(4), 347 -357, 2010 Terwel, B. W. , E. ter Mors, and D. D. Daamen, It's not only about safety: Beliefs and attitudes of 811 local residents regarding a CCS project in Barendrecht, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 9, 41 -51, 2012 Vercelli, S. and S. Lombardi, CCS as part of a global cultural development for environmentally sustainable energy production, in J. Gale, H. Herzog, and J. Braitsch (eds. ), Proceedings of the 9 th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Technologies (GHGT-9), 16 -20 Nov. 2008, Washington DC, USA, Energy Procedia, 1(1), 4835 -4841, 2009 Vercelli. S. , J. Anderlucci, R. Memoli, N. Battisti, L. Mabon, and S. Lombardi, Informing people about CCS: a review of social research studies, Energy Procedia, 37, 7464 -7473, 2013 Vercelli S. , S. E. Beaubien, S. Lombardi, F. Modesti, and S. Bigi, Selection and characterisation of CO 2 storage sites: research highlights from the Site. Char project, Site. Char Report, D 9. 2, February 2014, 33 pp, 2014 Vercelli, S. Pirrotta, C. Maynard, S. Shackley, F. Modesti, S. E. Beaubien, S. Bigi, and S. Lombardi, The Geological Storage of CO 2: and what do you think? – Findings from the ECO 2 project about the public perception of CO 2 geological storage, Lay report, ECO 2
references social aspects (5) Vercelli, S. Lombardi, S. Bigi, M. C. Tartarello, M. G. Finoia, and F. Dolcetti, Topic and Concerns Related to the Potential Impacts of CO 2 Storage: Results from a Stakeholders Questionnaire, Energy Procedia, 114, 7379 -7398, 2017 b
acknowledgement + disclaimer This lecture was completed with the support of the European Commission and European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 653718. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the Commission's own position. The document reflects only the author's views and the European Union and its institutions are not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained here. Lecture template by Dorothee Rebscher (BGR)
Carbon Capture and Storag e-book
Carbon Capture and Storag e-book
- Slides: 102