IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v54y2013icp66-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What can we expect from Europe's carbon capture and storage demonstrations?

Author

Listed:
  • Scott, Vivian

Abstract

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) on electricity generation and energy intensive industry is expected to play a considerable role in achieving the European Union's decarbonisation goals. EU CCS demonstration project funding has been created to encourage development and accelerate commercial CCS deployment by providing funds to bridge the capital gap for early commercial-scale CCS installation. Eleven CCS project proposals currently remain at least nominally active, but reduced funding and other constraints suggest at best delivery of around a third of these. To explore how these demonstrations impact on the scale of subsequent CCS deployment in the EU three simple scenarios for post-demonstration CCS activity and deployment (none, limited and considerable) are considered and examined in the context of key factors that have influenced the demonstration programme. Without strong political support for post-demonstration deployment including measures such as strategic storage validation and CO2 pipeline planning, and a clear process to make CCS commercially attractive to investors on a timeline consistent with climate ambitions, even a positive result from the demonstration programme is unlikely to enable CCS to deliver as expected.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott, Vivian, 2013. "What can we expect from Europe's carbon capture and storage demonstrations?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 66-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:54:y:2013:i:c:p:66-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.11.026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421512010087
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.11.026?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giovanni, Emily & Richards, Kenneth R., 2010. "Determinants of the costs of carbon capture and sequestration for expanding electricity generation capacity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6026-6035, October.
    2. Nadine Heitmann & Christine Bertram & Daiju Narita, 2012. "Embedding CCS infrastructure into the European electricity system: a policy coordination problem," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 669-686, August.
    3. Hansson, Anders & Bryngelsson, Mårten, 2009. "Expert opinions on carbon dioxide capture and storage--A framing of uncertainties and possibilities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2273-2282, June.
    4. Christian Oltra & Paul Upham & Hauke Riesch & Àlex Boso & Suzanne Brunsting & Elisabeth Dütschke & Aleksandra Lis, 2012. "Public Responses to Co2 Storage Sites: Lessons from Five European Cases," Energy & Environment, , vol. 23(2-3), pages 227-248, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bobo Zheng & Jiuping Xu, 2014. "Carbon Capture and Storage Development Trends from a Techno-Paradigm Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-30, August.
    2. Compernolle, T. & Welkenhuysen, K. & Huisman, K. & Piessens, K. & Kort, P., 2017. "Off-shore enhanced oil recovery in the North Sea: The impact of price uncertainty on the investment decisions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 123-137.
    3. Bossink, Bart, 2020. "Learning strategies in sustainable energy demonstration projects: What organizations learn from sustainable energy demonstrations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    4. Višković, Alfredo & Franki, Vladimir & Valentić, Vladimir, 2014. "CCS (carbon capture and storage) investment possibility in South East Europe: A case study for Croatia," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 325-337.
    5. Liu, Xiaoling & Sun, Xiaohua & Li, Mingshan & Zhai, Yu, 2020. "The effects of demonstration projects on electric vehicle diffusion: An empirical study in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Raugei, Marco & Leccisi, Enrica, 2016. "A comprehensive assessment of the energy performance of the full range of electricity generation technologies deployed in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 46-59.
    7. Åhman, Max & Skjærseth, Jon Birger & Eikeland, Per Ove, 2018. "Demonstrating climate mitigation technologies: An early assessment of the NER 300 programme," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 100-107.
    8. Alfredo Viskovic & Vladimir Valentic & Vladimir Franki, 2013. "The impac t of carbon prices on CCS investment in South East Europe," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(3), pages 91-120.
    9. Martínez Arranz, Alfonso, 2015. "Carbon capture and storage: Frames and blind spots," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 249-259.
    10. Viktorija Terjanika & Jelena Pubule, 2022. "Barriers and Driving Factors for Sustainable Development of CO 2 Valorisation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Krüger, Timmo, 2017. "Conflicts over carbon capture and storage in international climate governance," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 100(1), pages 58-67.
    2. Marie Renner, 2014. "Carbon prices and CCS investment: comparative study between the European Union and China," Working Papers 1402, Chaire Economie du climat.
    3. Zhang, Dongjie & Liu, Pei & Ma, Linwei & LI, Zheng, 2013. "A multi-period optimization model for planning of China's power sector with consideration of carbon dioxide mitigation—The importance of continuous and stable carbon mitigation policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 319-328.
    4. Sébastien Chailleux, 2020. "Making the subsurface political: How enhanced oil recovery techniques reshaped the energy transition," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(4), pages 733-750, June.
    5. Moura, Maria Cecilia P. & Branco, David A. Castelo & Peters, Glen P. & Szklo, Alexandre Salem & Schaeffer, Roberto, 2013. "How the choice of multi-gas equivalency metrics affects mitigation options: The case of CO2 capture in a Brazilian coal-fired power plant," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1357-1366.
    6. Eckhause, Jeremy & Herold, Johannes, 2014. "Using real options to determine optimal funding strategies for CO2 capture, transport and storage projects in the European Union," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 115-134.
    7. Renner, Marie, 2014. "Carbon prices and CCS investment: A comparative study between the European Union and China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 327-340.
    8. Christine Merk & Gert Pönitzsch & Katrin Rehdanz, 2019. "Do climate engineering experts display moral-hazard behaviour?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 231-243, February.
    9. Peter Viebahn & Emile J. L. Chappin, 2018. "Scrutinising the Gap between the Expected and Actual Deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage—A Bibliometric Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-45, September.
    10. Lee, Jui-Yuan & Tan, Raymond R. & Chen, Cheng-Liang, 2014. "A unified model for the deployment of carbon capture and storage," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 140-148.
    11. Niko Jaakkola, 2012. "Monopolistic sequestration of European carbon emissions," OxCarre Working Papers 098, Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies, University of Oxford.
    12. Xiao, Ting & Chen, Ting & Ma, Zhiwei & Tian, Hailong & Meguerdijian, Saro & Chen, Bailian & Pawar, Rajesh & Huang, Lianjie & Xu, Tianfu & Cather, Martha & McPherson, Brian, 2024. "A review of risk and uncertainty assessment for geologic carbon storage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PB).
    13. Verbruggen, Aviel & Al Marchohi, Mohamed, 2010. "Views on peak oil and its relation to climate change policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5572-5581, October.
    14. Hong-Hua Qiu & Jing Yang, 2018. "An Assessment of Technological Innovation Capabilities of Carbon Capture and Storage Technology Based on Patent Analysis: A Comparative Study between China and the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    15. Peter Stigson & Anders Hansson & Mårten Lind, 2012. "Obstacles for CCS deployment: an analysis of discrepancies of perceptions," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 601-619, August.
    16. Evar, Benjamin, 2011. "Conditional inevitability: Expert perceptions of carbon capture and storage uncertainties in the UK context," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3414-3424, June.
    17. Ma, Jinchen & Zhao, Haibo & Tian, Xin & Wei, Yijie & Rajendran, Sharmen & Zhang, Yongliang & Bhattacharya, Sankar & Zheng, Chuguang, 2015. "Chemical looping combustion of coal in a 5kWth interconnected fluidized bed reactor using hematite as oxygen carrier," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 304-313.
    18. Fischlein, Miriam & Larson, Joel & Hall, Damon M. & Chaudhry, Rumika & Rai Peterson, Tarla & Stephens, Jennie C. & Wilson, Elizabeth J., 2010. "Policy stakeholders and deployment of wind power in the sub-national context: A comparison of four U.S. states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4429-4439, August.
    19. Lee, Suh-Young & Lee, Jae-Uk & Lee, In-Beum & Han, Jeehoon, 2017. "Design under uncertainty of carbon capture and storage infrastructure considering cost, environmental impact, and preference on risk," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 725-738.
    20. Stephens, Jennie C. & Jiusto, Scott, 2010. "Assessing innovation in emerging energy technologies: Socio-technical dynamics of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) in the USA," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 2020-2031, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Carbon capture and storage; CCS; EU climate policy; NER300;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:54:y:2013:i:c:p:66-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.