Carbon capture: the hopes, challenges and controversies | FT Film

Summary

The transcript delves into the debate surrounding Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as a potential solution to climate change. While proponents see CCS as essential for decarbonizing hard-to-abate industries like steel, cement, and oil, critics argue it could enable continued fossil fuel use and delay necessary shifts to renewable energy. The script highlights the challenges of scaling CCS technology, its high costs, and the limited current capacity. It emphasizes the need for a holistic approach, combining CCS with renewable energy, hydrogen, and negative emissions technologies to effectively tackle global emissions and reach net-zero targets.

Takeaways

• 😀 CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) is considered essential by some for decarbonizing hard-to-abate industries like steel, cement, and oil and gas.
• 😀 Despite investments and government support, the number of operational CCS facilities remains small, capturing just 40 million tonnes of CO2 in 2021, far below the 1.7 billion tonnes needed by 2030.
• 😀 Environmentalists argue that CCS could become a distraction from the urgent need to reduce fossil fuel consumption and may perpetuate reliance on fossil fuels.
• 😀 CCS is expensive, with challenges related to capturing, transporting, and storing CO2 at scale. Economic viability and cost reduction are key to its future success.
• 😀 The oil and gas industry has a significant role in CCS development, leveraging its expertise in CO2 storage, but its involvement raises concerns about ‘greenwashing’ and continued fossil fuel use.
• 😀 Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) is a current use of captured CO2, but it is controversial because it increases fossil fuel extraction, which conflicts with climate goals.
• 😀 The emergence of blue hydrogen, which uses natural gas with CCS, is seen as a bridge to cleaner energy, but it still relies on fossil fuels, raising concerns about long-term sustainability.
• 😀 Some industries, like steel and chemicals, may struggle to decarbonize without CCS, but there is also a push for alternative solutions such as renewable energy and green hydrogen.
• 😀 There is a growing focus on the development of CCS hubs or clusters, where multiple industries share infrastructure, making carbon storage and transport more efficient and cost-effective.
• 😀 Although CCS is a critical part of the transition to net zero, it cannot be the sole solution. A holistic approach combining CCS with renewable energy, electrification, and hydrogen technologies is essential to meet climate targets.

Q & A

What is the role of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in achieving net-zero emissions?

CCS is seen as an essential tool in the transition to net-zero emissions, particularly for industries like steel, cement, and oil & gas, where decarbonization is challenging. However, its effectiveness is limited by high costs, scalability issues, and the concern that it could allow continued fossil fuel consumption without reducing emissions at the source.

Why is carbon capture considered necessary for certain industries?

Some industries, such as steel and cement, are hard to decarbonize due to the high emissions involved in their production processes. CCS can help reduce emissions from these industries, making it a critical component of their efforts to reach net-zero goals.

What challenges do carbon capture technologies face in terms of scalability?

CCS technologies face significant scalability challenges. The number of operational CCS facilities is small, and they capture only a fraction of the CO2 needed to meet global climate goals. For CCS to be effective, the number of facilities would need to increase dramatically, which would require substantial investment and technological advancements.

What is the difference between CCS and CCUS?

CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) refers to capturing carbon dioxide and storing it underground, while CCUS (Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage) involves using the captured CO2 in other industries, such as in the production of fertilizers, plastics, or for enhanced oil recovery, making it a more commercially viable option.

What are some commercial uses for captured CO2?

Captured CO2 can be used in industries such as soda production, where it is used to carbonate drinks, as well as in the production of fertilizers, plastics, and other essential products. The ability to sell captured CO2 to industrial users makes CCUS more economically attractive.

Why is enhanced oil recovery (EOR) controversial in the context of carbon capture?

EOR involves injecting captured CO2 into old oil wells to increase the pressure and dislodge remaining oil, which ironically leads to more fossil fuel extraction and burning. This seems counterintuitive to the goal of reducing fossil fuel use and CO2 emissions, making it a controversial use of CCS technology.

What role do oil companies play in carbon capture projects?

Oil companies, such as Occidental Petroleum, have been significant investors in CCS projects due to their technical capabilities in capturing and storing CO2. They also argue that CCS can help mitigate emissions from their operations, including offsetting emissions from the products they sell, like oil and gas.

What is the concern about the long-term reliance on CCS as a solution for climate change?

The concern is that CCS could serve as a 'quick fix' for carbon emissions without addressing the root problem: the continued reliance on fossil fuels. There is a fear that CCS might allow fossil fuel producers to continue their operations without fundamentally changing the way energy is produced and consumed.

How does hydrogen relate to carbon capture in the transition to net-zero emissions?

Hydrogen, particularly blue hydrogen (produced from natural gas with CCS), is seen as a potential bridge technology to decarbonize sectors like steel and energy. While green hydrogen, produced from renewable energy, is the ideal solution, blue hydrogen could be used in the interim, as it is more cost-effective at scale.

What are some of the main criticisms of blue hydrogen?

Critics argue that blue hydrogen still relies on fossil fuels (natural gas) and carbon capture, which doesn't fully address the environmental impact of fossil fuel extraction. They fear that increasing reliance on blue hydrogen could lock society into continued fossil fuel use, rather than transitioning to truly renewable energy sources.