In the innovative field of carbon capture and utilization (CCU1), CO2 waste emissions from large emitters is captured and used to produce new products and economic opportunities.
CO2 can be used in its original form or converted to new forms, such as chemical feedstocks or energy.
Carbon emissions and climate change
In North America, carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas (GHG) emitted into the atmosphere, accounting for 79% of Canada’s total GHGs. In 2012 Canada emitted 699 million tonnes (Mt) of gases equivalent to carbon dioxide (CO2e), 551 Mt of which were CO2. While a variety of activities account for Canada’s overall carbon emissions, the consumption of energy through the burning of fossil fuels — coal, petroleum products and natural gas — is by far the largest contributor. These greenhouse gases trap heat on the earth’s surface. The recent rapid increase in GHGs is leading to global climate change.
Role of sequestration and utilization
One technique that could be a significant tool to drastically reduce CO2 emissions is carbon capture and storage (CCS), which would permanently store carbon in the ground. In Canada we have four large-scale industrial CCS projects (Shell’s Quest, SaskPower’s Boundary Dam, Cenovus Apache’s Weyburn-Midale and Enhance Energy’s Alberta Carbon Trunk Line). Further deployment of CCS has been hampered by a variety of factors, including high costs, need for further technological progress, limited resources and a lack of strong regulatory signals. Carbon utilization technologies can generate revenue that can offset some of the costs of capture and sequestration. For example, enhanced oil recovery (EOR), a proven technology where carbon dioxide is injected into depleted oil fields to boost their overall production, has supported the business case for several permanent sequestration operations in Canada (Weyburn- Midale, Boundary Dam and the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line). As capture technologies improve and utilization pathways develop and multiply, advances in technology will benefit all aspects of carbon management and in some cases provide permanent sequestration of CO2.
1 CCU may also be referred to as carbon capture and reuse or carbon capture and recycling (CCR).
Overview of technological pathways₂
2 Potential, permanence and time to commercialization from: Global CCS Institute, Accelerating the Uptake of CCS (2011). http://cdn.globalccsinstitute.com/sites/default/files/publications/14026/accelerating-uptake-ccs-industrial-use-captured-carbon-dioxide.pdf
If CCU technologies prove viable, we may find ourselves in a world where carbon is considered a valuable commodity instead of a waste stream in need of careful disposal.
Frequently asked questions
Does CCU result in net carbon reductions?
CCU technologies are so varied that each unique utilization process, in a specific context, will have a different carbon footprint. Factors to consider are the permanence of storage, the energy intensity of the process, the source of that energy and the end use of the product. Certain pathways are highly energy intensive, and depending on the source of the energy (for example coal-fired electricity vs renewables), the process itself might generate more CO2 than it consumes. Finally, net carbon reductions may be achieved when the products of a given pathway replace a more carbon-intensive alternative. A full life cycle assessment would be required to assess the GHG abatement of a given technology in a specific context in order to answer the question “what is the net carbon benefit?”
Can CCU truly reach the scale needed to thwart climate change?
Current demand for CO2 represents a fraction of our global net emissions (less than 1%). EOR is the largest consumer of CO2 and two-thirds of that CO2 still comes from naturally occurring reservoirs and not captured emissions.3 The opportunity for growing CCU consumption of CO2 lies in developing new market demand, driving down costs through innovation, and creating market incentives for low carbon products. Carbon utilization will not be a standalone solution to reducing CO2 emissions but it can assist in developing demand for carbon reuse, carbon neutral or net negative products, and in advancing technologies to capture and store carbon.
Aren’t the costs of CCU technologies as prohibitive as the costs for CCS?
EOR and urea boosting are cost-effective technologies with proven commercial viability. The remaining pathways are in various stages of development and have not established true commercial-scale costs. Based on laboratory and pilot scale work, the costs for many pathways are still hurdles to economic viability; however, as these technologies move from development to execution stages, costs are expected to decrease.
What is the benefit of CCU?
The broad range of CCU actions have the potential to shift the way we view carbon dioxide. If some or all of the technologies meet with economic success, a new industry will be born that values carbon dioxide emissions, invests in innovation that will drive down costs associated with capture and storage, and reduces CO2 emitted to the atmosphere. In the absence of strong regulatory signals, venture capital, grants and other funding is stimulating interest in the field of CCU around the world. CCU can support further deployment of CCS by providing a revenue stream to offset the costs and additional research and development that will improve affordability of capture and storage technology.
3 International Energy Agency, CCS 2014: What lies in store for CCS? (2014), 82. http://www.iea.org/publications/insights/insightpublications/Insight_CCS2014_FINAL.pdf
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
