The role of Carbon Capture and Storage & Carbon Capture and Utilization- Capturing carbon dioxide and storing (CCS) is a climate change mitigation technology which is aimed at reducing CO2 emissions. The utilization of CO2 (CCU) in the manufacture of commercial products is also a technology used to complement CCS technology. This paper presents a literature review on the mechanisms, developments, cost analysis, life cycle environmental impacts, challenges and policy options that are associated with these technologies.

1. The Role of CCS and CCU to Achieve The
Climate Change Mitigation Goals
TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT
BERGAKADEMIE FREIBERG
IMRE SEMINAR
July, 2017
Presenter: Kwabena Ofori
1

2. AGENDA
Introduction
Overview of Carbon Capture Storage (CCS)
Overview of Carbon Capture Utilization (CCU)
Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
Barriers/Challenges to CCS and CCU Technologies
Policy Options for CCS and CCU
Conclusion
References
2

3. Introduction
What is Climate Change? Changes in climate pattern including temperature,
precipitation, winds and other factors.
Global Warming: Specific change in the global average surface temperature.
Evidence for Climate Change include:
Global temperature rise
Sea level rice
Shrinking ice sheets
Declining Artic sea ice
Glacial retreat
3(NASA, 2016)
Climate Change

4. Introduction
Natural causes
Volcanoes
Solar radiation
Continental drift
Earth’s tilt
Ocean currents
4(EPA, 2014)
Climate Change
Anthropogenic causes
Energy (Electricity and Heat)
Industry
Transportation
Other energy
Agriculture, Forestry, Land use
Buildings
Causes of Climate Change

5. Introduction
Anthropogenic activities in different sectors cause
emission of greenhouse gases.
Greenhouse Gases (GHG’s) are gases which
when present in the atmosphere contribute to
climate change.
Burning/combustion of fossil fuels is the main
anthropogenic activity that emits GHGs.
5
(EPA, 2014)
Greenhouse Gases (GHG’s)

6. Introduction
Climate Change Mitigation refers to actions for reducing the sources or
enhancing the sinks of GHGs.
The goal of climate change mitigation is to stabilise atmospheric greenhouse
gas concentrations at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic
interference with the climate system.
6
Agency, E. E. (2007). Climate change policies
Climate Change Mitigation

7. Introduction
7(IPCC, 2007)
Climate Change Mitigation Measures
Sector Key mitigation technologies
Energy
Renewable heat and power (hydropower,
solar, wind, geothermal and bioenergy), CHP,
CCS, advanced nuclear power.
Transport
More fuel efficient vehicles, hybrid vehicles,
cleaner diesel vehicles, bio fuels.
Industry CCS, heat and power recovery.
Building
Efficient lighting and daylighting, efficient
electrical appliances and heating and cooling
devices, solar design.
Agriculture
Livestock and manure management to
reduce CH4 emissions, improved fertilizer
application techniques to reduce N2O
emissions.
Selected examples of key sectoral mitigation technologies:

8. (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2016)
Introduction
8
(Santoprete, G., Wang, J., & Berni, P. ,2011.
Industrial utilization of carbon dioxide)
Need for Climate Change Mitigation
The long term demand and dependency
on fossil resources for energy
consumption.
Evidence that future trend will be a
further increase in the emission of CO2.
The need for governments, energy and
climate policies to adopt integrated
systems involving the capture, transport,
storage and use/reuse of CO2: CCS and
CCU.
(IEA, 2015)

9. Overview of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
9
What is CCS?
A mitigation technology in which CO2 is captured, channelled and stored
permanently in a geological formation to prevent it from reaching the atmosphere.
The CCS Chain
Capture
Pre-combustion capture
Post-combustion capture
Oxy-fuel combustion capture
Transport
Storage
(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)

10. Overview of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
10
Key CCS project developments and milestones
(Global CCS Institute, 2011)

11. Overview of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
11
(IEA, 2015)
CCS Milestone in 2014
At the end of 2014, 13 large-scale
projects were capturing a total of
26MtCO2/yr but only 5.6Mt of the
captured CO2 is being stored with full
monitoring and verification.
The 35 projects currently in operation
under construction or in advanced
planning have the potential to capture
63MtCO2/yr by 2050.

12. Overview of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
12
The cost of capturing CO2 is
typically the greatest of a CCS
project.
CCS projects in power sector
are likely to cost € 60-90 per
tonne of CO2 abated.
The EPA estimates
$15/MtCO2 for long term
transportation and storage.
IEA, 2015
Cost of CO2 Capture and Transportation for various industrial CO2 sources:
(C2ES, 2017)
(Global CCS Institute, 2011)
Cost impacts of adding CCS to a power plant:

13. Overview of Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU)
13
What is CCU?
A technology used to convert captured CO2 into valuable commercial products.
Proposed targets in Carbon Capture and Use (CCU) by 2020
Completed feasibility studies for the use of captured CO2 for fuels and value
added chemicals.
At least 4 pilots on promising new technologies for the production of value
added chemicals from captured CO2.
Set up of 1 project of common European Interest for demonstration of different
aspects of industrial CCU, possibly in the form of industrial symbiosis.
Ramirez, P. A. (2015)

14. Overview of Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU)
14(Pekdemir, Bialkowski, Tsianou, & Technology, 2012)
Carbon Capture and Utilisation Options

15. Overview of Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU)
15
Carbon Capture and Utilisation Developments
(Global CCS Institute, 2011)

16. Overview of Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU)
16
Carbon Capture and Utilisation Potential Markets
(Styring, Jansen, de Coninck, Reith, & Armstrong, 2011)
Estimates put CO2
utilization potential at
1-7% for chemical sector
10% for fuel sector
Product identity and market

17. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
17
Environmental impacts of CCS
With 27 LCA studies conducted for different CCS and CCU options, 11 focused on
CCS.
In CCS, considerations were given to:
3 Plants:
Pulverised coal (PC)
Combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT)
Integrated coal gasification combined
cycle (IGCC)
3 Capture Options:
Pre-combustion
Post combustion
Oxy-fuel combustion
(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)

18. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
18
Environmental impacts of CCS
With 27 LCA studies conducted for different CCS and CCU options, 11 focused on
CCS.
In CCS, considerations were given to:
2 Storage Options:
Geological
Ocean storage
10 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Impacts:
AP – Acidification potential
ADP – Abiotic depletion potential
EP – Eutrohication potential
FAETP – Fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity potential
GWP – Global warming potential
HTP – Human toxicity potential
MAETP – Marine aquatic ecotoxicity potential
ODP – Ozone Depletion potential
POCP – Photochemical ozone creation potential
TETP – Terrestrial ecotoxicity potential
(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)

19. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
19
System boundaries in different LCA studies for CCS technologies
(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)

20. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
20(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)
Results:
Oxy-fuel combustion
method of capturing CO2 has
the lowest GWP with a
reduction potential up to 82%
Post-combustion capture of
CO2 has the highest GWP with
a reduction potential of 63%
Global warming potential (GWP) of CCS options for different PC, CCGT and IGCC plants.
Environmental impacts of CCS

21. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
21
Environmental impacts of CCU
With 27 LCA studies conducted for different CCS and CCU options, 16 focused on
CCU.
In CCU, considerations were given to:
4 CCU Options:
Chemical synthesis
Carbon mineralisation
Biodiesel production
Enhance Oil Recovery (EOR)
10 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Impacts:
AP – Acidification potential
ADP – Abiotic depletion potential
EP – Eutrohication potential
FAETP – Fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity potential
GWP – Global warming potential
HTP – Human toxicity potential
MAETP – Marine aquatic ecotoxicity potential
ODP – Ozone Depletion potential
POCP – Photochemical ozone creation potential
TETP – Terrestrial ecotoxicity potential
(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)

22. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
22
System boundaries in different LCA studies for CCU technologies
(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)

23. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
23(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)
Results:
Chemical synthesis has the highest average GWP.
Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) has the lowest average GWP.
Environmental impacts of CCU

24. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
24(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)
Results:
Average GWP for CCS is estimated at
276kgCO2/tCO2 removed which is significantly lower
than all CCU options.
Worst CCU option is the Chemical production
specifically for waste has an average GWP 216 times
higher than CCS.
Second worst CCU option is biological conversion of
CO2 as biodiesel production with average GWP 4
times higher than CCS.
Average GWP of Carbon mineralization is 2.9
higher than CCS.
Average GWP of EOR is 1.8 higher than CCS.
Comparison between CCS and CCU - GWP
Comparison of the different global warming potential (GWP) for CCS and CCU.

25. Life Cycle Environmental Impacts of CCS and CCU
25(Cuéllar-Franca & Azapagic, 2015)
Comparison between CCS and CCU- Impacts other than GWP
Environmental impacts (other than GWP) of CCS and different CCU options.
AP – Acidification potential
EP – Eutrophication potential
ODP – Ozone depletion potential
POCP – Photochemical ozone
creation potential

26. Barriers/Challenges to CCS and CCU Technologies
26(Pekdemir, Bialkowski, Tsianou, & Technology, 2012)
Cost
High investment cost for development, deployment and operation.
Awareness
General lack of awareness in public and business, government, debate and negative views.
Potential markets
Carbon and methane prices can have significant impact on CCU technology
Economies
Lack of funding for CCS and CCU projects.
Storage regulations
EPA regulation, EU CCS Directive on geological storage of CO2 (Directive 2009/31)
Commercialization
Quality standards
Use of CO2 in CCU options to produce products may have to conform to certain high quality standards
Supply chain
LCA to identify environmentally responsible solutions.

27. Policy Options for CCS and CCU
27(C2ES, 2017)
Price on Carbon
The ETS (EU Emissions Trading Scheme), Cap and trade.
Clean energy standards
Electric utilities to produce a certain amount of electricity from designated CO2 sources.
Incentives
Financial support for research, development and demonstration, subsidies.
Setting GHG emission rates
Require performance standard for power plants.
The CSS Roadmap
Support for development of CCS in the UK and commercialization programs.
CO2 Storage Regulatory Framework
Well defined regulatory authorities and legal requirementws for CO2 storage will enhance
development.

28. Conclusion
28
Climate Change, a global concern is caused by GHG emission specifically CO2 resulting from
anthropogenic activities.
Need for actions to mitigate climate change via reduction of GHG, energy efficiency and
renewable energy.
CCS and a complementary CCU are technologies that can be used to reduce CO2 to meet the
2DS.
Environmental impact assessments of CCS and CCU technologies are very necessary for
sustainability of the environment.
Government, climate and energy policies are needed to support CCSU to achieve climate
change mitigation goals.

29. References
29
Adisaputro, D., & Saputra, B. (2017). Carbon Capture and Storage and Carbon Capture and Utilization: What Do They
Offer to Indonesia? Frontiers in Energy Research, 5(March 2017), 2012–2015.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2017.00006
Agency, E. E. (2007). Climate change policies, 10. Retrieved from http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate/policy-
context
Bourne, D., Fatima, T., van Meurs, P., & Muntean, A. (2014). Is adding charcoal to soil a good method for CO2
sequestration? – Modeling a spatially homogeneous soil. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38(9–10), 2463–2475.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.10.064
Carbon Dioxide Utilisation Network. (2014). Roadmap for the future of CO2Chem and CCU, 10.
Cuéllar-Franca, R., & Azapagic, A. (2015). Carbon capture, storage and utilisation technologies: A critical analysis and
comparison of their life cycle environmental impacts. Journal of CO2 Utilization, 9, 82–102.
Elum, Z. A., & Momodu, A. S. (2017). Climate change mitigation and renewable energy for sustainable development in
Nigeria: A discourse approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76(February), 72–80.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.040
EPA. (2014). Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data | Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions | US EPA. United States
Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-
emissions-data

30. References
30
Global CCS Institue. (2011). Accelerating the Uptake of CCS: Industrial Use of Captured Carbon Dioxide. Technology,
(March).
IEA. (2015). Energy and Climate Change. World Energy Outlook Special Report, 1–200.
https://doi.org/10.1038/479267b
IEA. (2015). Energy Technology Perspectives 2015. Iea. https://doi.org/10.1787/energy_tech-2014-en
IPCC. (2007). AR4 SYR Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers - 4 Adaptation and mitigation options.
Mac Dowell, N., Fennell, P. S., Shah, N., & Maitland, G. C. (2017). The role of CO2 capture and utilization in mitigating
climate change. Nature Climate Change, 7(4), 243–249. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3231
NASA. (2016). Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Evidence. Http://Climate.Nasa.Gov/Evidence/ [Accessed 2016-
08-23]. Retrieved from http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
Pekdemir, T., Bialkowski, M., Tsianou, E., & Technology, F. (2012). Carbon Capture and Utilization ( CCU ), (14), 2–4.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ente.201600747
Ramirez, P. A. (2015). CCS : Unpopular , but Necessary.
Saint-Pierre, A., & Mancarella, P. (2014). Techno-economic assessment of flexible combined heat and power plant with
Carbon Capture and Storage. 2014 Power Systems Computation Conference, 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1109/PSCC.2014.7038449

31. References
31
Santoprete, G., Wang, J., & Berni, P. (2011). Industrial utilization of carbon dioxide: Products and processes for
environmental sustainability and for the obtaining of economic value. Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering
Conference, APPEEC. https://doi.org/10.1109/APPEEC.2011.5748767
Styring, P., Jansen, D., de Coninck, H., Reith, H., & Armstrong, K. (2011). Carbon Capture and Utilisation in the green
economy. Centre for Low Carbon Futures, 60.
U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2016). International Energy Outlook 2016. International Energy Outlook 2016
(Vol. 0484(2016)). https://doi.org/www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2016).pdf
von Stechow, C., McCollum, D., Riahi, K., Minx, J. C., Kriegler, E., van Vuuren, D. P., … Edenhofer, O. (2015). Integrating
Global Climate Change Mitigation Goals with Other Sustainability Objectives: A Synthesis. Annual Review of
Environment and Resources, 40(1), 363–394. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-021113-095626
Zero Emissions Platform. (2015). CCU – carbon capture and utilisation, 1–23.

32. 32