CARBON COSTS, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER

This is the story of the week. NewEnergyNews must have seen somebody quoted saying something like this at least several times a day every day. Yes, carbon capture is going to cost.

Two things nobody ever follows up with: (1) NOT capturing carbon is going to cost much more in the long run. (2) Mechanisms can be put in place to judiciously dissipate the costs.

The best news: Cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions introduces new economic opportunity and will profit the economy in the long run.

Carbon capture: economic realities setting in
David Niles, July 11, 2007 (Energy Business Review)

WHO
Oil companies looking at “clean coal” technologies.
storage (sequestration)--click to enlarge

WHAT
Cost and regulatory uncertainty are burdening the development of “clean coal” technologies.

WHEN
These statements have been emerging quite recently based on projects just abandoned.

WHERE
BP, Shell and Statoil invested in CCS projects in North Sea and value was supposed to be added by injecting the captured GHGs into oilfields to enhance production. Despite Norwegian experience at such operations at its Sleipner field, the oil companies evaluation concluded the project was "commercially defendable" and "extra oil volumes were too low to justify the necessary investments in the field." They abandoned the project. BP made a similar decision about a CCS project in Scotland after spending $50 million.

WHY
- “Carbon capture and storage (CCS)” or “clean coal” means using industrial engineering during the coal burning process to capture (sequester) the GHGs and pipe them somewhere safe, usually in underground (geologic) formations for storage.
Some estimates add $100/ton of coal processed to the power generation process. Present cap-and-trade markets value GHG credits at $20/ton so the CCS plant would lose $80 for every ton of coal it burned. That’s not incentivizing clean coal.
- Although DNV, a private standards company associated with the Norwegian government, has undertaken a comprehensive survey of CCS to establish protocols, there is presently nothing but regulatory uncertainty, which adds to the risk of building such capacity.
- The U.S. Department of Energy is also studying the process but test projects have not yet even begun.
the process (capture)--click to enlarge

QUOTES
Hans Bratfos, head, DNV Cleaner Energy Department: “There are obstacles that need to be dealt with regarding carbon capture and storage. These are related to the regulatory, legal, economical and technological risks involved in developing and operating a carbon capture and storage system…By facilitating these projects on capture, transmission and storage of carbon dioxide, DNV is contributing to the removal of several important barriers in order to realize the full vision of carbon capture and storage…"