carbon capture and storage and developments

Carbon capture and storage developments

Carbon capture and storage(CCS) is alternatively referred to as carbon capture and sequestration is means of mitigating the contribution of fossil emissions to global warming, based on capturing carbon dioxide CO2 from large point sources such as such as fossil fuel power plants, and storing such way that it does not enter the atmosphere . It can also be used to describe the scrubbing of CO2 from ambient air as a Geo engineering technique .

Although CO2 has been injected into geological formations for various purposes, the long term storage of CO2 is relatively new concept. The first commercial example is Wey burn in 2000,integrated plant scale CCS power plant to begin operating in September 2008 in east German power plant Schwarz pump e  run by Vattenfall, in the hope of answering about technological feasibility and economic efficiency . 

CCS applied a modern conventional power plant could reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere by 80-90 percent  compared to plant without CCS. The IPCC estimates that economic potential of CCS could between 10-55 percent of the total carbon mitigation effect until 2100.

NTPC and carbon capture

NTPC India ‘s highest power producer in talks with Toshiba corporation to build a pilot project in India for capturing and storing carbon emissions a Toshiba official said. The Japanese power equipment  maker aim its first 5 megawatt carbon capture plant in India. The project    may be similar plant Mikawa in Japan “ now that we have just finished in Japan, we would like to bring that the technology to other parts of world “  Kanji Ural  managing director Toshiba India said “ if think in five years we should have it “ India plan to add 64,000 MW or the equivalent of 50 nuclear power plants, in coal fired  electric plants by 2017. The nation is searching for ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions after having agreed to reduce green house gases in proportion to gross domestic product (GDP)by 25 percent from 2005 level by 2025. NTPC is trying to cut blackouts and increase supplies.

CANCUN and developments on carbon capture and storage 

The inclusion of carbon capture and storage s (CCS) in the U.N. ‘s  clean development mechanism (CDM) is boon for middle east, and north sea oil industries which would use the scheme to subsidize the extraction of even more oil from the ground.

carbon dioxide capture and storage in geological formations is now eligible as a basis for CDM projects as a result of U.N. Climate change conference( COP16) in Cancun. This is likely to be greatest benefit to oil companies which are hastily re branding  techniques known as  Enhanced Oil  Recovery (EOR) as means to store carbon under ground.

EOR was originally developed as means to extract more oil from fields that were reaching the end of their life  span. This is still its primary purpose  rather than reducing the emissions. If included  in the CDM a calculation of “ reductions “ would be made in relation the amount of CO2 pumped into old oil wells  . The calculation would not consider the far larger volume CO2 released into atmosphere through extraction and burning more oil. As has been seen with CDM methodologies the ‘tack in  effect of subsidizing a fossil fuel based energy model is not considered relevant to how off set “ reductions “ are calculated.

Looking further a head CCS is being  promoted as ‘clean  coal ‘ in the electricity sector, as well as attracting  interest from variety of industrial sector (notably steel) that are keen to claim emissions reductions without engaging in fundamental clean development path or technological overall. What all these technologies have common in an assumption that capture, transport and storage of carbon can be variably achieved on large scale. This has not yet been  proven, and there are more reasons to believe that this will be neither technically feasible nor economically viable.

The Cancun decision is not end of the storing CCS in CDM, implementing the agreement requires that series of issues are ‘resolved in a satisfactory manner. The decision catalogs a series of fit falls, including  risk that CO2 storage is not permanent and could leak from under ground geological formations . Other environmental and public health risk, and legal liabilities in the case of leaks or damage to the environment, property or public health remain to be addressed. The text of this decision also claims that projects will need to make ‘adequate  provision for restoration of damaged  Eco-system and full compensation for effective  communities in the event of release of carbon dioxide .’ ’ The CDM contains no mechanism to enforce such provisions, and nature of scheme ( which primarily a mean for subsiding pollutants) makes it unlikely that such provisions will emerge.

If serious assessment of risks and uncertainty surrounding CCS were carried out, such projects would never allowed to proceed. However it would   be naive to think that a technical decision will stand in the way of political pressure.

The push for CCS comes from Norway, Saudi Arabia ( with backing of OPEC) and the U.K. In the past , the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and Brazil have vocally opposed CCS but made concession in Cancun in return for progress  on other issues they considered to be non-negotiable.

Norway ,the U.K. and Australia have pushed CCS because they have common interest in technologies export, with former having developed EOR techniques to extend the life span of north sea oil. The gulf states, meanwhile envisage a series of potentially lucrative new projects . Further backing in this regard comes from Algeria and Indonesia.

On corporate side Shell, BP have heavily promoted the inclusion of CCS in CDM as well as under auspices of international chamber of commerce and international emission trading associations. The world coal association a global industrial association comprising the major international coal producers and stake holders also claimed that lobbying for inclusion in CCS in CDM . “ One of key topics we came to Cancun for “

The first projects would take a few years even if  agreement on CCS is concluded in Durban in 2011, but it is clear that CCS in CDM could prove to be lucrative market.

Developments in U.S.

In Washington the  energy department  recently awarded 575 million dollars for carbon capture research -and development projects in 15 states.

The exponential technique involves storing carbon dioxide emission from coal plants and other sources under ground , in an attempt to reduce pollution blamed  for contributing to global warming.

‘This is an major step for word in the fight to reduce carbon emission from industrial plants”  said U.S. energy secretary. “ these new technology will not only help fight climate change, they will create jobs now and help position the United States to lead world in clean coal technologies, which will only increase in demand in the years a head.”

Energy department has invested more than 4 billion dollars in carbon storage and capture matched by more than 7 billion dollars in private investments . The newest money  will fund 22 projects in 15 states, ranging from evolution of geologic sites for carbon storage to develop of turbo -machinery and engines to help improve carbon capture and storage.  The projects in states including California, Pennsylvania, Colorado, New York, Texas  are being funded from economic stimulus law.

President Barrack Obama wants to cost effective deployment of carbon capture and storage within 10 years despite questions about the technology and skepticism about  feasibility. He created a task force this year changed with  coming up with a plan to over come barriers to such deployment.