Topic: carbon capture

Power Almanac of the American Midwest

Kevin Lustig — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:07:40 -0400

Low-Carbon Energy Technology

Kevin Lustig — Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:37:59 -0400

The engine of economic growth around the globe has traditionally run on fossil fuels. However, a wide variety of technologies now provide opportunities for tremendous growth while reducing the risk to our climate. WRI informs efforts to employ an effective mix of policy, economic mechanisms, and international cooperation to spur the global energy transformation yielding low-cost, safe, and reliable low carbon energy solutions.

Use these links to explore WRI’s work on low-carbon energy technology:

Who Pays for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS) Demonstrations in Developing Countries?

Francisco Almendra — Thu, 21 Apr 2011 12:57:35 -0400

On April 7th, a group of 24 Energy Ministers met in Abu Dhabi for the 2nd Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM). The group represented the governments of countries collectively responsible for over 80% of global energy consumption, and together they agreed to increase efforts to deploy carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) on a commercial scale worldwide.

In addition to this general agreement, the governments of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Republic of Korea, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, the United States and the United Kingdom agreed to initiate one or more concrete actions on CCS before the next Clean Energy Ministerial, which will be hosted next year in London. This announcement may provide a major boost to CCS technology, if countries can find a way to finance such projects.

The agreement came in the wake of recommendations set forth by the Carbon Capture Use and Storage (CCUS) Action Group—led by the United Kingdom and Australia and composed of 13 governments and 14 international institutions, including WRI—which included the need to identify and advance appropriate funding mechanisms to support the demonstration of large-scale CCS projects in developing economies.

Cost Barriers in Developing Countries

In its 2009 CCS Roadmap, the International Energy Agency estimated that that 3,400 CCS projects will be needed by 2050 to meet the global climate change mitigation challenge and two-thirds of them will need to be implemented in developing countries. However, CCS development in a non-OECD context has been slow to start, especially when it comes to large-scale (greater than1 million tons of CO2 per year) demonstration projects.

One of the main barriers to CCS demonstrations in developing countries is their significant cost— developing countries often do not have enough resources at their disposal to fund a robust CCS demonstration program by themselves. WRI sees the need to develop effective financing strategies to enable the implementation of CCS demonstration projects worldwide. CCS demonstration projects are one of the key ways to assess if the technology works and its potential to be part of the solutions portfolio against global climate change going forward.

Financing Options

The decision in the Clean Energy Ministerial is a step in the right direction, although more significant action needs to occur. The lack of funding for CCS development in developing countries is part of a broader challenge to finance CCS demonstrations and provide incentives for early deployments worldwide. The challenge is to deliver on this commitment made at the Ministerial, and structure one or more financing mechanisms that will be able to support CCS demonstration projects by providing seed capital and leveraging co-financing from other public and private sources.

WRI work on CCS is not designed to endorse the technology, but rather to explore whether and how society might safely move forward with CCS projects as part of a broad climate mitigation strategy. While WRI does not advocate or oppose the development of CCS, it does proactively engage with governments, international institutions, and businesses on this emerging technology. In this spirit, WRI joined the CCUS Action Group to ensure health, safety, and environmental integrity principles were upheld in the Group’s recommendations to the Clean Energy Ministerial.

In October 2010, WRI led a workshop with CCUS Action Group members to discuss financing options for CCS in developing countries. Representatives from the governments of Australia, Canada, Norway, Scotland, the United Kingdom, and the United States, as well as participants from the Asian Development Bank, the Clinton Foundation, the Global CCS Institute, and the World Bank attended. Drawing from these discussions, WRI just released a working paper highlighting priorities for funding CCS demonstration projects in developing countries. The paper supports and details the rationale behind the CCUS Action Group’s recommendation to provide additional support from developed countries to implement CCS demonstrations in developing countries.

The CCUS Action Group recommendations included the following specific actions relevant to financing CCS:

Funding mechanism: Request an international CCS body such as the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF) or Global CCS Institute to recommend a preferred funding mechanism for projects in developing countries. Work to establish a preferred funding mechanism and a process for project solicitation and support in developing countries.
Carbon credits and finance: Support and encourage the UNFCCC work program in 2011 on CCS in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to seek agreement on its inclusion in the December 2011 COP-17 talks in Durban. Support and encourage CCS in other UNFCCC processes, including but not limited to the Global Climate Fund.
Support from multilateral development banks: Urge multilateral development banks to support CCS as an effective low emission technology in developing countries and to introduce mechanisms to address institutional and financial barriers.

Progress on all three fronts will be needed for effective implementation of CCS projects in developing countries in order to move forward on answering the key questions in CCS development and deployment. It is unlikely that any of these three channels will on their own have the necessary scale and delivery conditions to fund CCS demonstrations; however, by complementing each other, there is a good chance that enough momentum can be generated to get CCS demonstrations up and running globally. In turn, the learning generated from these demonstrations will enable non-OECD countries to better gauge the potential of the technology for their local context.

WRI Summary of S. 699: Department of Energy Carbon Capture and Sequestration Program Amendments Act of 2011

Sarah Forbes — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 15:30:36 -0400

S.699 authorizes the Department of Energy to conduct a program to demonstrate commercial application of integrated geologic storage projects, and provides a framework for selection criteria for these demonstrations. Importantly, the bill addresses the long term-stewardship challenges associated with demonstration, including site closure requirements and liability protection.

Overview of Bill

Authorizes the Department of Energy to conduct up to 10 commercial scale demonstrations of geological storage. The bill states that such demonstrations should inject over 1 million tons of carbon dioxide each year from an industrial source for a period of 10 years. These demonstrations would be selected competitively and awarded as cooperative agreements by DOE.
Requires sufficient geologic information to prove that the storage will be safe and permanent. The bill specifies that project selection be based on geological site information, including characteristics of the storage reservoir, identification of potential leakage pathways and a plan for measurement, monitoring and verification during and after injection. The bill also requires that, prior to selection, project operators demonstrate their ability to obtain necessary environmental permits.
Provides liability protection and Federal indemnity for these demonstration projects. The bill authorizes the Secretary of Energy to indemnify projects for personal, property and environmental damages that might be above what is covered by insurance or other financial assurance measures; with the exception of liability that is caused by gross negligence or intentional misconduct. The bill also authorizes the Secretary of Energy to collect fees from operators receiving indemnification and limits the amount of indemnification to $10 billion collectively for all applicable projects. Upon receiving the closure certificate, the site may be turned over to the Federal government for long-term site management and ownership.
Addresses need for proving legal property rights. The bill requires proof of possessing land or land interests for injection, storage, monitoring and closure prior to project selection.
Requires compliance with existing relevant laws for environmental protection. The bill requires compliance with applicable existing regulations for well construction and operation.
Ensures that operators maintain financial assurances. The bill requires that project operators maintain financial assurances after injection until the Secretary of Energy issues a certificate of closure.
Requires the operator to remediate any leaks. The bill requires remediation of any carbon dioxide leaks that might pose danger to human health or natural resources.
Outlines criteria for site closure certification. The bill provides details on requirements for long-term monitoring, including monitoring for at least 10 years after operations cease and the injected carbon dioxide stabilizes. Proof of certification includes demonstration of five criteria:

location and extent of the project footprint (injected and displaced fluid)
pressure in the injection zone is not increasing
no leakage of injected or displaced fluid that would endanger public health, drinking water or natural resources
the injected or displaced fluids are not expected to migrate in the future in a manner that would encounter a leakage pathway
the injection wells at the site are plugged and abandoned in accordance with applicable laws

Includes provisions for siting the demonstrations on public land. The bill authorizes the siting of a demonstration on public land, with the potential transfer of property rights, jurisdiction, and responsibility for long-term monitoring to another Federal Agency (such as the Department of Energy).
Establishes a training program for state regulators. The bill establishes and authorizes funding appropriations for a training program for state agencies involved in permitting, and oversight of carbon capture and storage demonstrations.

For additional information please contact Sarah Forbes, Senior Associate, WRI Climate and Energy Program, at sforbes@wri.org or at (202) 729-7714

CCS Demonstration in Developing Countries: Priorities for a Financing Mechanism for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage

Maggie Barron — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 10:54:35 -0400

Executive Summary

Climate Change and CCS

In facing the challenge of mitigating global climate change, world leaders have acknowledged that no single solution exists, and therefore, a portfolio of carbon dioxide (CO2) reduction technologies and methods will be needed to successfully confront rising emissions. Due to their dependency on fossil fuels, the energy supply and industrial sectors are the greatest contributors to CO2 emissions, accounting for 25.9 percent and 19.4 percent of the total respectively.

In addition to efficiency improvements and enhancing clean energy use, one key option for limiting future CO2 emissions from fossil fuel energy use is carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS). CCS is a suite of technologies integrated to capture and transport CO2 from major point sources to a storage site where the CO2 is injected down wells and then permanently trapped in porous geological formations deep below the surface. Candidates for CCS technology include fossil fuel power plants; steel, cement, and fertilizer factories; and other industrial facilities.

CCS in Developing Countries

Despite often-aggressive programs to promote energy efficiency and deploy nuclear, renewable, and other low-carbon energy sources, many developing countries will still rely heavily on fossil fuel energy to power their development for decades to come. There is therefore a need for developing countries to create strategies that address fossil fuel emissions in a way that minimizes the costs of doing so, and consequently minimizes impacts to their national development goals.

CCS is currently the only near-commercial technology proven to directly disassociate CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use at scale. Its deployment could potentially allow developing countries to gradually shift away from fossil fuels for energy and industrial needs with relatively little disruption to their long-term development strategies. If deployed as an interim measure, it could allow time for other alternative low-carbon technologies to be developed and deployed, permitting fossil fuels to be gradually phased out. This strategy could assist developing countries to transition to a low-carbon economy in the next 15–50 years.

While CCS is potentially attractive to some developing countries, there has been limited development of demonstration projects in Africa, Asia, or Latin America due mainly to their high cost in the absence of expected profits or significant carbon financing. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates the total cost for a new average-sized coal-fired power plant that captures up to 90 percent of its CO2 emissions to be US$1 billion over 10 years.

Existing financing for CCS is grossly insufficient to enable demonstration projects in developing countries. The few available funds are either spread over the full array of low-carbon technologies, or fall short of the magnitude or the mandate needed to propel commercial-scale CCS demonstrations forward. Current carbon offset mechanisms are not sufficient to spur CCS deployment in developing countries in today’s context either. Overall, existing CCS financing mechanisms help grow capacity, but their support is insufficient to leverage enough funding from capital markets to implement projects in a non-OECD context.

The IEA CCS Roadmap proposes 50 CCS projects in developing countries in the next 10 to 20 years. As well as reducing the developing world’s greenhouse gas emissions, accelerating CCS demonstration efforts in non-OECD countries can likely also improve technologies, increase efficiency, reduce uncertainty and risk, and initiate learning-by-doing at a lower cost than would be possible in OECD countries. The captured benefits from doing so will be more significant the sooner acceleration in CCS development in developing countries begins.

About this Paper: Topics of Discussion for Financing CCS in Developing Countries

This paper seeks to promote the effective deployment of CCS demonstration projects in developing countries. Aimed at international policymakers and agencies engaged in CCS funding and deployment negotiations and discussions, the paper explores some of the key issues emerging around this critically important topic, and it presents a series of options and recommendations to international policymakers. WRI’s aim is to assist the initial design of an effective approach for financing CCS demonstration projects in developing countries over the next 10 years. Below is a summary of the key topics and options explored in the paper.

Topic 1: Aims of Financing CCS Demonstrations in Developing Countries

The main goal for developed countries to provide financing for early-stage CCS demonstrations in developing countries should be to support non-OECD countries in fulfilling their share in global climate change mitigation efforts.
A financing mechanism for CCS in developing countries should aim to foster tangible CO2 emission reductions through a clear focus on storage goals. The level of ambition for CO2 storage should support current CCS deployment requirements in developing countries. While it is impossible to objectively ascertain what proportion of this total a dedicated OECD country–funded CCS financing mechanism should support, it is evident that developing countries will need support for a significant share of these projects.
Implementing CCS demonstrations that lead to the storage of 45–60 million tons carbon dioxide (MtCO2) over 10 years could significantly spur the research and deployment rates needed for CCS development to take off in developing countries.

Topic 2: Eligible Costs for Financing

Most CCS demonstration projects will operate in conjunction with new or existing power plants or industrial facilities that may also function without the technology. Funding for CCS demonstrations can therefore be structured around whole projects—including the non-CCS components of the facility under consideration—or just the specific CCS components that would enable the facility to effectively capture and store its carbon dioxide emissions.
Funding should only be eligible to finance incremental costs incurred as a result of CO2 capture, transport, and storage efforts—not the full cost of the project.

Topic 3: Project Eligibility Criteria

Project objectives: Finance should be primarily directed toward projects that either actively store CO2 or directly provide the basis for near-future CO2 storage locally, avoiding duplication with other existing funding mechanisms.
Project scales and types: To maximize both near-term and future storage, eligible project types should cover geological site characterization and integrated CCS projects, both at the pilot and commercial demonstration scales.
Project sectors: CCS projects in fossil fuel power plants are likely to be the largest recipients of funding. However, some industrial CO2 sources may present advantages that could facilitate timely and cost-effective development of CCS projects in developing countries. “Low-hanging fruit” projects in industrial facilities with high-purity CO2 streams can advance infrastructure and technologic know-how in developing countries at a fraction of the cost of implementing CCS at a power plant. Funding criteria should therefore not discriminate against industrial sources of CO2.
EOR and other CCUS projects: Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) and other carbon capture, usage and storage (CCUS) projects have multiple advantages for early CCS development and can result in the net storage of CO2, warranting their inclusion in financing opportunities. However, awarding of CCS financing to CCUS projects should occur only where projects are managed and monitored with the aim of permanent CO2 storage.
Additional project requirements: Funding criteria should stipulate that awarded projects employ sound procedures for CCS site selection, operation, and stewardship. Site selection must be based on specific geologic characteristics. Awarded projects must also have monitoring plans in place for both the operational and the post-closure stewardship phase and ideally demonstrate local government support and local community buy-in.

Topic 4: Project Selection Process

In order to make the selection process as equitable and objective as possible while maximizing CCS deployment goals, projects that meet funding demonstration objectives should be awarded on a competitive basis under a points-based system to judge applications. Such system should reward, among other factors, storage efficiency, geographic diversity, and contribution to wider CCS advancement in developing countries.
The selection system should also favor improving knowledge of storage opportunities through projects implemented in deep saline formations, since they represent the largest knowledge gap and the largest storage potential in the future.

Topic 5: Financing Mechanism Characteristics

Significant attention has been focused on creating an international public fund solely dedicated to CCS, or a CCS window within a larger fund that may also finance other pre-commercial, low-carbon technologies in developing countries. Additional research is needed to ascertain the pros and cons of different structures in a developing country environment. However, there are several advantages of adopting a CCS-only mechanism for the early demonstration phase, instead of having CCS in direct competition with other technologies for the same pool of funds.
In order to meet the IEA-recommended storage goal of 45–60 million tons of CO2 in 10 years, a CCS fund needs to be able to invest or leverage total investments of US$5– 8 billion and have the capacity to disburse its resources effectively over the same period.
A CCS fund should employ strong early-mover and CO2 storage incentive provisions to leverage its goals. A 10-year storage incentive on a rising scale could be applied to ensure project operators act to permanently reduce emissions.

U.S.-China Clean Energy Cooperation and CCS

Sarah Forbes — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:56:49 -0500

This piece originally appeared on ChinaFAQs.org

On January 18, at a ceremony at the U.S.-China Strategic Forum on Clean Energy Cooperation in Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu and China’s Energy Minister Zhang Guogao and Science and Technology Minister Wan Gang signed an agreement to advance the U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center (CERC). The agreement was announced as part of a “new era” of clean energy cooperation, as Jon Huntsman, U.S. Ambassador to China, put it at the event.

The U.S. and Chinese governments have been cooperating on clean energy technologies for decades, but the CERC program arguably represents a fundamentally new way of working together. In the past, collaboration on clean energy has taken place on a government-to-government, academic-to-academic, and business-to-business basis. But this program integrates activities into what both sides have said they wanted for a long time – a genuine public-private partnership.

The program— funded by a bilateral $150 million in public-private funding— includes research groups, or “consortia,” focused on building efficiency, electric vehicles, and advanced coal technologies, including carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS). Each consortium is led by a research institution and includes private sector partners— and the World Resources Institute is one of groups focusing on advanced coal and CCS.

The collaboration is significant since both countries face critical choices in their energy mix, and technology and policy choices. Both countries continue to be heavily dependent on coal, as the top two coal consumers in the world. And, both countries stand to benefit from the experience and lessons of this collaborative initiative.

China and Coal

While China has made advancements in renewable energy and energy efficiency production, it still relies on coal as its main energy source. Last year, China was the world’s leading coal consumer, using 3.5 billion short tons of coal. And, although China produces most of its own coal, as the New York Times recently pointed out, China is now importing major amounts from other countries, including the United States— from which it brought in some 2.9 million tons in the first six months of 2010 alone.

The United States also uses large amounts of coal—1.4 billion short tons. Although coal production and use is declining in the United States, it continues to be a major aspect of the country’s energy mix.

China’s coal dependence will continue into the foreseeable future, especially as its economy becomes more modern and the country provides its people a higher quality of life. Estimating China’s long-term coal use is difficult because it continues to make policy and technology changes to cut its growth. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency’s estimate, China’s use of coal in the electricity sector will increase from 27.7 quadrillion Btu in 2007 to 72.2 quadrillion Btu in 2035 (based on a “business as usual growth”)— which is an average rate of 3.5 percent per year.

China and Carbon Capture and Storage

In order to meet its growing energy demands, yet constrain its emissions– both traditional air pollutants and greenhouse gases– China has been working to substitute non-coal energy sources, use coal more efficiently, and address its emissions directly. These efforts include increasing energy efficiency, deploying nuclear and renewable energy, and implementing carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS).

If China is going to meet its emissions targets in the future, many analysts and academics agree that CCS will be needed. Even with advances in efficiency, renewables, and nuclear energy, without CCS, China’s emissions would stabilize around 2030, but would not actually decline. (See: The China Human Development Report 2009/10.)

These modeling efforts, however, assume that CCS technology will be available and implemented at a much greater scale than is currently available. Researchers, including members of the CERC, are evaluating ways to reduce the energy and water penalties associated with the CCS and to ensure that it can be deployed widely.

That’s why the CERC represents an important pilot project. The joint work plan announced for the advanced coal technology consortium features on-the-ground collaboration and research around existing complementary demonstration projects. The U.S. funding goes to researchers in the United States who will be working with their Chinese counterparts who focus on the same issues in China.

In Both Countries’ Interest

In his opening remarks at the Clean Energy Forum, Zheng Bijian, Chairman of the China Institute for Innovation & Development Strategy, reminded participants that Chinese investment in the United States surpassed United States investment in China last year. The countries’ economies are increasingly interdependent – as are the energy and environmental challenges they face. Zheng said, “It is both necessary and possible to work together,” and he spoke of a future where our two countries find and foster “communities of common interest.”

Reducing emissions, shifting to cleaner energy sources, and implementing advanced coal technologies are clearly areas of common interest to the United States and China. The CERC serves a prime example of joint collaboration to advance clean energy development and deployment.

US and China Sign Agreement to Advance Clean Energy Research Center (CERC)

Michael Oko — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:12:14 -0500

This morning, Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu and representatives from the Chinese government, including Minister Wan Gang and Minister Zhang Guobao, signed a joint work plan to expand US-China cooperation on the Clean Energy Research Center (CERC) that was established in November 2009. The World Resources Institute is a member of the CERC, focused on advanced coal and carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS).

Following is a statement by Sarah Forbes, senior associate and lead for CCS, the World Resources Institute:

“This joint work between the United States and China demonstrates the great potential for cooperation on clean energy. As the world’s largest energy consumers and producers, the United States and China recognize that advancing clean energy technology is essential to reduce greenhouse gases and other pollutants, and to enhance energy security.

“This announcement is important for two reasons: First, it identifies the members of the bilateral teams– including leading academics, government institutions and businesses– in each consortium that will enable greater integration. Second, the joint work plans provide a road map for moving forward with work on advanced coal technology, electric vehicles, and building efficiency.

“As the United States and China embark on a new level of clean energy cooperation, this initiative is a prime example of practical, real world engagement that will accelerate knowledge sharing and advancements in clean energy technology.”

MEDIA ADVISORY: Press Teleconference: Clean Energy and U.S.-China Relations on Eve of President Hu's Visit to Washington

Michael Oko — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 13:24:53 -0500

Leading Experts in the U.S. and China Discuss Clean Energy and Related Issues Ahead of Presidential Meeting

WASHINGTON D.C. // BEIJING – As President Hu Jintao prepares for his state visit with President Obama next week, this is a key moment for U.S.-China relations. With clean energy high on the agenda, leading experts will provide insights into key issues that are likely to be addressed. Experts from tanks and academia in the United States and China will discuss bilateral issues, including clean energy technology, coal, CCS, urbanization, business relations, and more.

The speakers are part of ChinaFAQs, a WRI-led network of independent, U.S.-China experts formed to answer questions for U.S. policymakers about climate and energy issues in China.

WHAT:
Press teleconference on clean energy and related issues ahead of President Hu’s state visit to Washington D.C.

WHO:
Manish Bapna, Managing Director, World Resources Institute

Dr. Zou Ji, China Country Director, World Resources Institute (in Beijing)

Dr. Robert Kapp, President of Robert A. Kapp & Associates, Inc.; Senior China Advisor to Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis; and former President, US-China Business Council

Dr. Elizabeth Wilson, Associate Professor of Energy and Environmental Policy and Law, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota

Sarah Forbes, Senior Associate, Climate and Energy Program, World Resources Institute

WHEN:
Friday, January 14, 2011

9:00 a.m. EST

DIAL-IN:
U.S. (Toll-free): (888) 566-6506

International (Toll ): +1 (517) 308-9173

Passcode: WRI

Twitter hashtag: #chn11

Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage and the UNFCCC: Recommendations for Addressing Technical Issues

Maggie Barron — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:07:04 -0500

Summary

Achieving cuts in energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions is critical to avoiding more than a 1.5 degree Celsius (°C) (2.7 degree Fahrenheit [°F]) rise in global temperatures by 2050 and the irreversible and damaging impacts such a temperature rise would have on people and ecosystems. Meeting this challenge will require the international community to implement a portfolio of clean energy technologies and energy efficiency efforts. Most credible analyses project that among these technologies, carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) may need to play a substantial role in achieving the necessary emissions reductions. CCS encompasses a suite of existing and emerging technologies for capture, transport, and storage of CO2 that together can be used to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fossil fuel power generation and other industrial sources.

CCS and the UNFCCC

A number of countries - including the United States, China, and 27 members of the European Union (EU) - are putting significant resources into the development of CCS technologies, and four commercial-scale projects are in operation in Norway, Canada, and Algeria. At the international level, the role of CCS in new technology mechanisms under discussion at the ongoing United Nations-led negotiations is not yet clear. In an effort to inform the negotiations, this policy brief provides context, concise analysis, and recommendations to Parties for addressing CCS issues raised to date in the twin track United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Kyoto Protocol (KP) processes. These issues include:

Non-permanence, including long-term permanence;
Measuring, reporting and verification (MRV);
Environmental impacts;
Project activity boundaries;
International law;
Liability;
Safety; and
Insurance coverage and compensation for damages caused due to seepage or leakage.

In addition, the authors explore a broad range of current and future mechanisms and regulatory frameworks whereby the UNFCCC and national governments can consider CCS technologies. The report does not presuppose the successful implementation of CCS around the world. Nor does it make recommendations on whether CCS should be included in specific existing or future UNFCCC mechanisms (such as the Clean Development Mechanism [CDM] or technology mechanisms) or in countries’ climate change mitigation commitments and actions (e.g., Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions [NAMAs], etc.). Instead, the report focuses on technical issues, with the aim of helping Parties evaluate a robust strategy for CCS as part of international negotiations and establish CCS best practice criteria for governments and the international process, thereby enhancing transparency and ensuring that CCS deployment is safe and effective.

The analysis draws heavily from the World Resources Institute (WRI) report the Guidelines for Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage and draws to a lesser extent from WRI’s Guidelines for Community Engagement in Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage Projects. The report also benefits from the 2005 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage, the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories’ methodology for carbon dioxide transport, injection and geological storage, and the UNFCCC Experts’Report on CCS, Implications of the Inclusion of Geological Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage as CDM Project Activities (UNFCCC/CCNUCC EB 50).

Engaging Communities in Carbon Capture and Storage Projects

Jonathan Lash — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 17:42:01 -0500

This piece originally appeared as the Foreword to Guidelines for Community Engagement in Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage Projects.

There is no single quick fix or technological silver bullet that will reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that are altering the Earth’s climate. Rather, a range of technologies and strategies will need to be employed to keep global temperature rise below the 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit danger threshold identified by scientists.

Some of these solutions (think energy efficiency or wind and solar power) are tried and tested, but need scaling up; others are emerging and not yet commercially available, but offer great potential. Carbon dioxide capture and storage or CCS falls into the latter group. A suite of technologies that together can be used to sequester carbon dioxide greenhouse gas emissions from power stations and other major industrial sources, CCS is now moving from demonstration projects to commercial-scale pilots.

Read the Report

Most credible analyses project a key role for CCS as a bridging technology between today’s fossil fuel–based global economy and the low carbon societies of tomorrow. To be effective in helping contain global emissions, however, CCS deployment would need to accelerate dramatically over the next three decades, which is where community engagement, the subject of this report, comes in.

As an emerging technology which involves injecting carbon dioxide into geologic formations, CCS has drawn wary reactions from some communities around the world where demonstration projects have been sited or proposed. Too often, the reaction from regulators, project developers and local authorities has been to view public opinion and local communities as a barrier to technology deployment. This report takes the opposite tack: it starts from the position that project developers and regulators should treat host communities as partners whose questions and concerns can improve the project and who should be consulted in the design, development and operation of CCS projects on their doorstep.

To be clear, this report does not aim to make a case for or against CCS. Instead, it outlines how local communities can help shape decisionmaking around CCS projects, and in so doing build wider public support for the emerging technology.

Too often, the reaction from regulators, project developers and local authorities has been to view public opinion and local communities as a barrier to technology deployment. This report takes the opposite tack.

The report builds on WRI’s previous consensus-building stakeholder effort, which resulted in the publication of the Guidelines for Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage, a technical guide for CCS projects. This complementary publication is the product of the collective experience and best thinking of more than 90 experts and stakeholders involved in CCS across the world, including academics, project developers, regulators, nongovernmental organizations and community groups.

The resulting conclusions are intended to serve as international guidelines for regulators, local decisionmakers (including community leaders, citizens, local advocacy groups, and landowners) and project developers as they plan and seek to implement CCS projects. The guidelines will be road tested with CCS projects in the field, and the experience gained integrated into a revised edition of globally-applicable best practices.

Whether CCS will be viable at commercial scale is yet to be proven. Without public buy-in, however, the chances are slim that the technology will be deployed at meaningful scales for climate change mitigation. Transparency and consultation are prerequisites for this buy-in. WRI hopes this report will provide a basis for best practice engagement on CCS projects worldwide, which will help enable the public to judge the technology on its own merits.

NEWS RELEASE: Effective Community Engagement Essential for CCS Deployment

Jessica Forres — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:35:12 -0500

Building constructive relationships with host communities is crucial for the successful deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), a clean energy technology that can help reduce carbon pollution, according to a new report by the World Resources Institute (WRI).

The report, CCS and Community Engagement: Guidelines for Community Engagement in Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport and Storage Projects, outlines how project developers and operators can effectively engage local communities near a potential CCS site. The guidelines, which had input from over 90 contributors, are meant to strengthen the decision-making process so that community members, developers, and regulators are all represented during project planning and development and throughout a plant’s lifecycle.

“Local opposition stands as one of the biggest potential barriers to the successful implementation of CCS projects,” said Jonathan Lash, president of WRI. “In order for countries to move ahead with large-scale deployment of CCS around the world, greater transparency and community engagement need to be made a priority throughout the process.”

There are currently a few small-scale industrial operations capturing and storing carbon dioxide emissions around the world, but the technology has not yet been scaled to cut emissions in larger coal-fired power plants. Further testing of demonstration projects will be necessary to determine whether or not CCS is a viable solution to the climate change problem.

The report presents a series of case studies, including examples of successful and unsuccessful community engagement strategies including four places in the United States—Wallula, Washington; Matoon, Illinois; Jamestown, New York; and Carson, California. There are also international cases in Barendrecht, Netherlands; and Nirranda, Victoria Australia. The case studies confirm that the decisions on individual demonstration projects ultimately hinge on site-specific factors, including the needs of the local community.

In Matoon, Illinois, for example, trust diminished when the U.S. Department of Energy made changes to the original FutureGen project seven years after the initial announcement. According to the case study, the revised project, renamed FutureGen 2.0, would retrofit an existing power plant with CCS technology across the state in Merodisia rather than building a state-of-the-art plant and research facility in Matoon.

“While many communities across the globe have rejected CCS projects, our community of more than 50,000 people was willing to stake our future on the emerging science of CCS,” said Angela Griffin, president of Coles Together, which is based in Matoon, in a letter published in the Guidelines. “That all changed when FutureGen 2.0 was announced. The new plan enormously diminished the role our federal partners envisioned for the community.”

Griffin added, “It is evident that gaining the trust of the community through two-way information exchanges is a key ingredient to moving CCS projects forward.”

Recommendations in the report will be road-tested in real-life CCS demonstration projects, and the outcomes integrated into a more robust set of globally-applicable best practices for CCS projects. The report follows WRI’s Guidelines for Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport and Storage, a set of technical guidelines published in 2008 for how to responsibly proceed with safe CCS projects.

Guidelines for Community Engagement in Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage Projects

Maggie Barron — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 06:41:48 -0500

Executive Summary

CCS and Climate Change Mitigation

Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) encompasses a suite of existing and emerging technologies for capture, transport, and storage of carbon dioxide (CO2) that together can be used to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel power generation and other industrial sources. Achieving cuts in energy-related CO2 emissions is critical to avoiding more than a 1.5 degree Celsius (°C) (2.7 degree Fahrenheit [° F]) rise in global temperatures by 2050 and the irreversible and damaging impacts such a temperature rise would have on people and ecosystems. The scale of the climate change challenge requires a portfolio of clean energy technologies and energy efficiency efforts, and most credible analyses project that CCS will have to play a substantial role in achieving the necessary emissions reductions (see Appendix 3).

CCS has been tested at a small scale, and there are a few industrial operations around the world, including in North America and Europe, which already capture and store small quantities of CO2 emissions underground. However, the technology has not yet been demonstrated at the scale required for application to commercial power and industrial plants. To address this gap, governments of many major economies have announced plans to support commercial-scale CCS demonstration projects that store more than 1 million metric tons of CO2 annually. Several are currently being built in Europe, China, Australia, and Canada, and many more are in the planning stages, including in the United States. Leading industrial nations, through the G8, have called for 20 such demonstration plants to be launched by 2010, with a view toward broad deployment by 2020.

Actions taken to demonstrate transformational clean energy technology over the next decade will define the solutions available to help solve the climate problem. Commercial-scale CCS demonstration projects are required to demonstrate whether or not the technology should play a major role in bridging today’s fossil fuel–driven world and tomorrow’s low- or zero-carbon economy. Yet, as with the introduction of many new technologies, proposed CCS projects have been met with mixed reactions from the public, and in particular from the local communities asked to host them.

Community Engagement in the CCS Context

Project developers and technical experts in CCS often cite the public as a “barrier” to CCS deployment, because decisions on whether individual projects move forward often significantly depend on the local community’s acceptance or opposition. The case studies from the United States, the Netherlands, and Australia featured in this report suggest that communities often have more concerns and questions about CCS than about more established industries and technologies. The guidelines for community engagement, however, were written with the belief that decisions on individual demonstration projects ultimately hinge on site-specific factors, including the needs of the local community. While much social science research around CCS to date has focused on gauging public attitudes toward the technology or on education and outreach best-practices for project developers (see Appendix 2), we focus instead on providing recommendations for creating a culture of effective, two-way community engagement around CCS projects.

In addition to project developers and host communities, there is a third partner essential to effective community engagement around CCS: regulators. In some countries, regulatory frameworks governing CCS development and deployment, including rules for community engagement, are already in place (see Appendix 1). In others, an environmental regulatory framework for CCS does not yet exist, and the advent of demonstration plants is forcing regulatory policymakers to make real-time decisions about how to ensure projects move forward safely, and what level of public participation should be required in the decisionmaking processes. The engagement around any one project, therefore, is contingent on the interactions of three primary groups: local decisionmakers (typically on behalf of those in the community), regulators, and project developers. All three groups are addressed in this report. It is important to underscore upfront, however, that effective community engagement is measured by the success of the engagement process, and is not contingent upon agreement between the project developer, regulator, and community on the outcome or the design of the CCS project. Nevertheless, effectively engaging communities can help move CCS projects forward and foster continuing constructive relationships between project developers and communities. Such relationships can help ensure that commercial-scale CCS demonstrations and any subsequent commercial projects progress in such a way that local economies, values, ecosystems, and people are respected, and the potential of the technology in helping to mitigate climate change is fully realized.

About the Guidelines

The Guidelines was drafted by authors at WRI in close consultation with an international group of stakeholders (see inside front cover) with specific expertise and experience in engaging local communities regarding deployment of CCS technology. This effort builds on WRI’s previous 2-year consensus-building stakeholder effort that resulted in the Guidelines for Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport, and Storage, a set of technical guidelines for how to responsibly proceed with safe CCS projects. The community engagement guidelines for CCS are intended to serve as international guidelines for regulators (including those in both regulatory policy design and implementation capacities); local decisionmakers (including community leaders, citizens, local advocacy groups, and landowners); and project developers to consider as they plan and seek to implement CCS projects.

The Guidelines begins with an introduction that describes their intent, a working definition of community engagement, and why effective engagement is an essential element of CCS deployment. It then provides an overview of relevant CCS technology issues, including the status of CCS technology, regulatory and permitting processes, and the timeline and various stages of a representative CCS project. The report then reviews existing relevant experience in community engagement, presented in six case studies from CCS projects. These studies were drafted by stakeholders engaged in the development of the Guidelines who had a hands-on role either in engaging the local community or in decisionmaking around the featured project. Chapter 4 of the report presents the guidelines for community engagement on CCS.

This effort was initiated with a hope of providing a set of best practices to guide the engagement of future commercial CCS projects, if the demonstration projects prove successful. The guidelines for regulators are designed to guide regulatory authorities responsible for overseeing CCS projects but also offer recommendations for improving the public participation rules as new regulations are drafted. The guidelines for local decisionmakers highlight how, in some cases, communities can take a proactive role in shaping the engagement around a potential CCS project, rather than a passive role as purely receiver of information. Finally, the guidelines for project developers highlight principles and activities that can be employed to promote effective community engagement and involve the local community in the CCS project.

The guidelines are separated into five categories as summarized in the table above. The full text of the guidelines follows, presented by audience. In Chapter 4, the guidelines are presented by engagement principle, with an introductory overview of each issue.

For more information, contact Sarah Forbes, Francisco Almendra, or Micah Ziegler

MEDIA ADVISORY: Media briefing on moving Carbon Capture and Storage projects forward through public engagement

Jessica Forres — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:07:41 -0500

Discussion featuring experts, industry and community members

WHAT:

The World Resources Institute (WRI) will launch a new report, Guidelines for Community Engagement in Carbon Dioxide Capture, Transport and Storage Projects, and host a panel discussion on how to engage people concerned about Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) projects in their backyards.

Jonathan Lash, president of WRI, will provide opening remarks. He will be followed by a panel of experts on CCS, community leaders from the FutureGen projects, and a representative from American Electric Power (AEP). Panelists will share their hands-on experiences with community engagement, as well as offering recommendations for regulators, project developers and local decision-makers working on CCS projects.

WHEN:

Wednesday, November 17, 2010
1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.

WHERE:

World Resources Institute 10 G Street NE Suite 800, Washington, DC 20002
(Metro: Red Line to Union Station)

Call-in details:

Number: 218-339-2626
Access Code: 220177

Webcast details:
http://www.wri.org/news/webcasts

WHO:

Jonathan Lash, president, WRI
Gary Spitznogle, director of New Technology Development & Policy Support, American Electric Power
Angela Griffin, president, Coles Together – a local economic development group from Mattoon, IL, home of the original Futuregen site.
Brian Moody, executive director ofTuscola Economic Development Inc. – a local group in Tuscola, IL, one of the towns bidding to host the new Futuregen 2.0 site
Joe Ralko, manager of Corporate Communications, IPAC-CO2
Francisco Almendra, associate, WRI
Sarah Forbes, senior associate, WRI (moderator)

RSVP:
Jessica Forres, WRI media officer, +1 (202) 729-7736, jforres@wri.org
Stephanie Hanson, WRI communications associate, +1 (202) 729-7641, shanson@wri.org

Department of Energy Selects WRI and Partners for US-China CCS Project

Jessica Forres — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 16:16:28 -0400

The Department of Energy announced today the selection of the West Virginia University, the World Resources Institute, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and other partners to implement the US-China Clean Energy Research Center (CERC), which will focus on advancing Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). Throughout this program, WRI, WVU, LLNL and the consortia members will work together to rapidly implement the development, demonstration and commercialization of CCS, with the goal of helping the United States and China transition to a low-carbon economy.

Following is a statement by Jennifer Morgan, director of WRI’s climate and energy program:

“Collaborative action on clean energy technology research and development will enable results beyond what China and the United States could achieve alone. The coal challenge is global and its solutions must be global too. Cooperation between the two largest emitters is an important step for moving forward on solving the climate change challenge.”

Following are links to additional information about WRI’s work with China and CCS:

WRI Report on CCS in China

Ensuring Safe Carbon Capture and Storage in China

A First Hand View of China’s Carbon Capture and Storage Actions

Can the U.S. and China Cooperate on Coal?

The Challenge and Promise of Carbon Capture and Storage

Sarah Forbes — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:03:47 -0400

This article originally appeared in The Solutions Journal.

I don’t use the term “clean coal.” There will always be environmental issues surrounding the production and use of coal. But for the foreseeable future, global energy demands are going to require us to keep on burning it. That has brought everyone’s attention to bear on Carbon Capture and Storage, or CCS, the process that most commonly uses chemical solvents to “scrub” CO2 from the overall emission stream, transport it, and then inject and store it in rock strata.

There’s currently a lot of misinformation about CCS on both sides of the divide. Some in the coal industry claim the process as an environmental panacea. They’ve called America “the Saudi Arabia of CCS,” given its abundant rock formations, which are perfect for storage.

Many activists fear the process is just a way for the industry to do some greenwashing that will allow coal to go on polluting and the world to keep consuming vastly more energy than is sustainable. The truth is somewhat more prosaic, but it points to the crucial role that CCS must play to stop global warming.

Let’s get some facts straight. CCS is on the cusp of operational, first-of-a kind deployment, but for the time being it remains a demonstration tool. There are several projects operating at an industrial scale worldwide, in line with a G8 call to realize 20 demonstrations by 2020. Most of these demonstrations are operating at about a million tons per year, but there are no projects operating at several millions of tons of CO2 per year.

In the United States, American Electric Power’s Mountaineer power plant in New Haven, West Virginia, is currently doing integrated carbon dioxide capture and geologic storage, using a small stream of the overall emissions from that facility. On top of existing federal funding, the Obama administration has given $3.4 billion from the Recovery Act toward further research and demonstration.

The challenge facing this American Electric Power demonstration, and others globally, is that CCS is very site-specific. You have to have the right geology to promote safe and secure storage. That means there’s no single solution. This presents a real challenge for the energy industry. Ultimately, dealing with climate change requires global cooperation, and if a framework for sharing knowledge and building a network of integrated demonstrations can be put in place, technology might move forward towards deployment more quickly.

There are signs that this is happening. At the World Resources Institute (WRI), we’re focused right now on developing a set of guidelines for how to responsibly demonstrate and deploy CCS in China. We have already developed a set of guidelines with stakeholders from the United States who represent various viewpoints on CCS, including environmental groups, the coal industry, the oil and gas industry, and leading academics. To develop guidelines for China, we are working with Tsinghua University and leading experts on CCS from both China and the U.S. We are exploring the potential for global response to the challenges posed by developing this technology.

In parallel with the rollout of more demonstrations, WRI is urging both the U.S. and China to give proper thought to post-closure stewardship. This is where we really need to learn from the mistakes of the past, in the coal industry as well as others, and ensure that someone is responsible for stewardship of these sites over the long term.

There are a number of proposed mechanisms for apportioning responsibility and funding: One bill before Congress envisions a federal tax on operators, based on a cost for each ton of carbon dioxide stored, to create a trust fund that would cover post-closure stewardship costs. Another additional strategy is for CCS operations to post an assurance bond to cover costs. This could be similar to how mining operations currently have to post bonds for land reclamation (not large enough bonds). The idea here would be to shift the burden of CCS risk onto CCS project operations instead of making the public pay for it.

If we can get this right, and continue to move in the direction of greater global cooperation, there’s no reason why we can’t move toward a rapid deployment of the technology. When the G8 announced its goal of 20 demonstrations by 2020, it asked the International Energy Agency (IAEA) to come up with a road map for how to achieve that goal. This roadmap projects 100 projects worldwide by 2020, including many in China. This work is based on the assumption that the world must reduce its carbon emissions by 50 percent by 2050. The IAEA’s research suggests that CCS could account for 19 percent of that drop.

CCS is important because it’s a bridge that’s needed to help us get from our current power plants, which are spewing lots and lots of CO2, to that zero-carbon future we envision. We need to test and try CCS at commercial scales to see if it’s going to work, but we also need to bear in mind that it doesn’t address all the problems of our current energy production and use.