Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
April 2012
Greenpeace
The reality is, you are not going to see another coal-fired power station built in Australia. You can talk all the stuff you like about carbon capture storage, that concept will not materialise for 20 years, and probably never3
However, the reality is that CCS has been an abject failure. Every attempt to construct a large-scale project has fallen over, revealing numerous technical, economic, social and regulatory risks that should sound alarm bells for potential investors. As the risks mount, the timeframe for when commercial-scale CCS power stations arrive slips further over the horizon. Even one-time advocates of CCS have begun to dismiss the technology. Former Energy and Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane had supported CCS as a member of the Howard Government, but said in 2009: The reality is, you are not going to see another coal-fired power station built in Australia. You can talk all the stuff you like about carbon capture storage, that concept will not materialise for 20 years, and probably never. This report describes the numerous risks that are preventing commercial -scale CCS power stations from ever becoming a realistic energy option. It shows how these risks have been borne out as the coal industry has attempted to make CCS happen. The report then draws on research conducted for Greenpeace by the Institute of Sustainable Futures, University of Sydney4, demonstrating the immense economic and technical undertaking that would be required if government aspirations for CCS were based in reality. Australia is one of many countries faced with the challenge of reducing carbon pollution while replacing an aging fleet of power stations.
Former Energy and Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane, 9th November 2009
Decisions will be made in the coming years that determine our energy future for decades to come. CCS has proven itself to be a useful public relations exercise for the coal industry, buying a few more precious years of social acceptance and allowing new dirty power stations to continue to be built. But the charade cannot be allowed to continue. This report makes is clear that the game is up. The CCS myth was always a dangerous distraction from real, clean, renewable energy solutions. It needs to be laid to rest once and for all. And, having pronounced it dead and buried, we need to accept that there is no such thing as clean coal and the only safe energy future requires a rapid shift from coal to renewables nationally and internationally.
Greenpeace
However, several established fuel recovery projects have revealed that very little is understood of actual CO2 movements once injected underground7. Climate change action to outstrip the need for CCS. CCS is not expected to become available at commercial scale until at least 2020, by which point alternatives to polluting power will already need to be in mass production. Limitations to storage capacity. Early estimates of CO2 storage capacity were grossly oversimplified and likely to have produced unreliable data8. One study suggests storage capacities have been out by a factor of between 5 and 20, rendering geologic sequestration of CO2 a profoundly nonfeasible option for the management of CO2 emissions9. The Kwinana project in Western Australia was cancelled after it was found that the proposed CO2 storage location could not be relied upon10.
ind
olar Thermal
Wind
IDGCC Integrated Drying Gasification and Combined Cycle IGCC Integrated Gasification and Combined Cycle
Coal industry investment in CCS has been scant, reflecting a lack of confidence in the technology overcoming the many risks and hurdles it faces. Instead of investing heavily in CCS, the coal industry has largely relied on public funding to support programs and projects. The carbon price is too low to drive commercial investment towards CCS. Dick Wells, Chairman of the National Low Emissions Coal Council, recently remarked that the carbon price is not high enough to drive investment towards Carbon Capture and Storage and that in the absence of a carbon price signal, companies with shareholders I mean, people have their superannuation with these companies arent going to do things which arent sensible economically11. However, other technologies that will not be driven by a carbon price such
as wind and solar attracted over $5 billion in investment in Australia during the 2010-11 financial year12. Private investment in renewable energy is at least one order of magnitude greater than in CCS. In Australia, the coal industry has committed $1 billion to CCS over 10 years, equivalent to only 1% of the black coal mining industrys pre-tax profit from 2002 201013 (see graphic to right) and less than the federal governments CCS Flagships program. The European Unions NER 300 policy, the main vehicle for supporting CCS projects, is expected to generate 4.5 billion, matched by a combination of member states and industry funding14.
In the United States, projects supported by funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act have been allocated nearly twice as much public funding as industry is providing15. This reveals a lack of belief from the coal industry that CCS is a genuine option for generating power at commercial scale with low carbon pollution.
Black Coal mining pre-tax profits from 2002 - 2010 ($ billions) Coal Industry committment to CCS investment over 10 years ($ billions)
April 2012
Australia
North America
July 2011 American Electric Power suspends its US$668 million CCS project at its Mountaineer power station in West Virginia, despite the US Department of Energy having agreed to fund half the project costs23.
Europe
October 2011 The proposed Logannet coal-fired power station in Scotland is cancelled when its financial backers withdrew24.
31 March 2011 Danish Minister of Climate and Energy, Lyyke Friis, rejects a proposal by Vattenfall to store CO2 onshore after sustained opposition from local communities25.
27 October 2010 Finncap demonstration CCS project in Finland cancelled after the withdrawal of TVO and Fortum, the main companies backing the project26.
November 2010 Shells proposed CO2 storage in Barendrecht, Netherlands, cancelled due to lack of public acceptance27.
20 October 2010 E.On withdraws from the controversial Kingsnorth project, citing economic conditions as too poor to go ahead28.
15 February 2011 All CCS projects in the Netherlands that involved onshore storage abandoned, mainly due to community opposition31. November 2010 Rotterdam-based CCS project owned by C.GEN cancelled due to a combination of technical difficulty29 and public opposition30.
June 2011 Austria introduces legislation to ban the geological storage of carbon dioxide32.
April 2012
Despite the many social, technical, regulatory and financial risks that warrant ruling out CCS as a future energy option, the coal industry is still claiming that CCS will be a major part of our energy future. As unlikely as this is, Greenpeace commissioned research from the Institute of Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney to demonstrate what Australia would look like if CCS was a significant portion of our future energy mix33. All of the information presented on in this section is from this research unless otherwise stated. To make the economics as favourable towards CCS as possible, conservative values were taken and cost estimates from industry and government were used whenever possible. The analysis
was then compared to the costs of delivering an Energy [R]evolution scenario34, where already existing renewable energy technologies (such as solar, wind, wave and geothermal) are deployed as fast as technically possible, regardless of cost. The Australian CCS model in this report used what in theory is the cheapest option for implementing CCS building new power stations with pre-combustion capture. These were either Integrated Gasification and Combined Cycle (IGCC) stations or, if using brown coal, the same technology with a drying stage added (IDGCC). The rationale for avoiding retrofits of existing power stations is explained on the opposite page.
eConomiCs of CCs
Period 2015-2031 Total costs* Total CO2 avoided Cost per tonne of CO2 avoided Unit cost of energy in 2031
Perth
CCS Analysis $34.7 billion 560 million tonnes $147 $139 per MWh
Energy [R]evolution $27.2 billion 610 million tonnes $105 $110 per MWh
Perth Adelaide Basin: Bunbury By 2030, 6.1 million tonnes of CO2 stored per year Melbourne
*Total costs include the construction capital for construction and network augmentation, operation and maintenance, and carbon.
The table above presents the key economic indicators of the CCS and Energy [R]evolution scenarios for Australia. Essentially, renewable energy delivers greater emission reductions at less cost. In fact, if the entire cost of CCS was invested in renewable energy, it would generate 27% more power with 38% less carbon pollution.
Hoba
LEGEND Basin Site Carbon Capture and Storage Facility
The hub model of using one storage location to service multiple CCS sites results in CO2 storage concentrated in four main regions: the North Denison and Surat Basins in Queensland, the Gippsland Basin in Victoria and Bunbury Basin in Western Australia. The map opposite shows the approximate location of power stations, pipelines and CO2 storage locations if the CCS scenario was to become a reality.
Darwin
North Denison Basin: By 2030, 2.6 million tonnes of CO2 stored per year
Brisbane
Surat Basin: by 2030, 14.4 million tonnes of CO2 stored per year
Melbourne
Hobart
LEGEND Basin Site Carbon Capture and Storage Facility
Gippsland Basin: By 2030, 43.4 million tonnes of CO2 stored per year
April 2012
CarbonneT
In 2009 the Victorian Government submitted a proposal to the CCS Flagships program for its CarbonNet project, which is intended to provide an infrastructure network for CO2 storage in Victoria in the event that CCS ever becomes commercially available40. The intention is to ultimately use CarbonNet to sequester one million tonnes of CO2 per year, although it is not expected to be operational until at least 2020. CarbonNet was accepted as part of CCS Flagships in late 2011.
on its CCS plans, merely stating that the project would becapture ready and that space would be set aside on its site in order to install carbon capture equipment in the event that it becomes commercially available45. Documents revealed to Greenpeace through Freedom of Information (available on request) show HRLs project becoming increasingly linked to CarbonNet, with federal departmental memos, emails and documents describing HRL as supporting the CCS Flagships CarbonNet proposal, the most promising emissions source for the CarbonNet project and offering feed in support to CarbonNet. In 2011, the Victorian Department of Primary Industries transferred its management of HRLs project to CarbonNet, indicating that as far as the State of Victoria is concerned, HRLs is a CCS project. The reality is that HRL is not interested in CCS. Any attempt to make CCS part of its plans has been driven by governments keen to keep the CCS myth alive. Even in late 2010, when the connection between HRL and CarbonNet was clear, one federal energy department memo concedes that the carbon capture component
of the project is not a high priority [for HRL] at this stage. HRLs intentions to hand over the project after after four years is further evidence that they are not intending to hang around and wait for CCS to become available. On 16 April 2012, HRLs subsidiary Dual Gas announced that work on the project would be frozen46. With HRLs future very much in doubt, CarbonNet a project that has been awarded over $100 million in public funding - may soon be rendered irrelevant.
Greenpeace/Rose
emissions performanCe
The carbon price is expected to drive changes in the power sector that reduce its carbon intensity over time. For CCS, the pace of change may prove too great to keep up with. Treasury modelling anticipates that under the proposed future carbon price, CCS would only become available by 2035, by which time the electricity sectors emissions intensity will need to have fallen to 0.53 tonnes per megawatt hour as indicated by the dotted line in the graph below. The sectors emissions intensity continues to
1.0 t CO2-e/MWh
fall, reaching 0.2 tonnes per megawatt hour by 2050.This poses an additional challenge for CCS. While a CCS power station that comes online in 2035 would initially be able to operate while storing little to none of its emitted carbon, by 2050 it and any other new coal-fired power station with CCS would have to store almost all of their generated CO2. This represents yet another gamble for would-be operators of CCS power stations and in the event that emissions performance of power stations are regulated in future, one that risks creating stranded assets.
t CO2-e/MWh
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0 2011
2024
2037
0.0 2050
April 2012
150 100 50 0
250 200 150 100 50 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024
calls on the federal government to withdraw all public financing of CCS and develop transition plans based on real renewable energy solutions that allow Australias coal communities to become as much as part of the clean energy future as possible. The coal industry has distracted policymakers and the community with the promise of CCS for long enough. CCS is one of the least likely and would be one of the most expensive and, if it
existed, risky future energy options. It is time to take CCS off the table once and for all and acknowledge that building new coal-fired power stations is no longer acceptable. We must immediately invest in largescale renewable energy technologies that can be deployed today, sustain our power needs long into the future and provide the safest solution to the climate crisis.
It is the role of government to provide that certainty to the power sector and investors through clear regulation and direction of public funds. Greenpeace 10
referenCes
1. United Kingdom Carbon Capture and Storage Association presentation, Carbon Capture and Storage enabling a low carbon world. Available at http://www.ccsassociation.org.uk/docs/2009/ CCSA%20International%20Manifesto.pdf IEA 2009 CCS Roadmap. http://www.iea.org/ papers/2009/CCS_Roadmap.pdf ABC TV, Four Corners, 9 November 2009. http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2009/ s2737676.htm Usher, J, Riedy, C, Milne, G & Rutovitz, J (2010). Carbon Capture and Storage in Perspective. Prepared for Greenpeace Australia Pacific, by the Institute for Sustainable Futures, UTS, Sydney. Available at: http://www.greenpeace.org.au/climate /assets/docs/CCS_in_Perspective_2010.pdf Ibid. Capital costs per kW in 2015: IDGCC CCS $9430; IGCC CCS $8,573; Concentrating Solar Power $3,118; Onshore Wind $1,982. As demonstrated of page 7 of this report. See Reality Check on Carbon Storage, Greenpeace International, 2009. K. Spencer et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 48574864 C. Ehlig-Economides, M.J. Economides/Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 70 (2010) 123130 Fiona Harvey, BP axes plan for carbon capture plant, Financial Times, May 12, 2008. http:// www.ft.com/cms/s/2dfcb732-204c-11dd80b4-000077b07658,Authorised=false.html?_i_ location=http%3A%2F%2F ABC News Online (Michael Atkin), Clean Coal unviable for two decades, 17 February 2012. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-02/cleancoal-unviable-advisor-says/3828946 Clean Energy Council, Clean Energy Australia report 2011, http://cleanenergyaustraliareport.com.au/ Response to question on notice in 2011 Budget estimates http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/ committee/economics_ctte/estimates/bud_1112/ RET/answers/BR1.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/lowcarbon/ ner300_en. United States Department of Energy media release, 10 June 2010, Secretary Chu Announces Nearly $1 Billion Public-Private Investment in Industrial Carbon Capture and Storage. http://www.energy.gov/9065.htm European Commission Technology Roadmap, 2009, http://ec.europa.eu/energy/technology/set_plan/ doc/2009_comm_investing_development_low_ carbon_technologies_roadmap.pdf As of 21 March 2012, according to the Global CCS Institutes Project Map, http://www. globalccsinstitute.com/projects/map Op cit. See Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism website: http://www.ret.gov.au/energy/ clean/ccsfp/Pages/default.aspx CO2CRC, CO2CRC Otway Project Overview, http://www.co2crc.com.au/otway/ accessed 21 March 2012 29. 30. 26. 25. 23. 21. CSIRO media release, Coal Generated CO2 captures in Australia a first. 9 July 2008. http://www.csiro.au/news/CarbonDioxide Capture.html Emissions captured will be up to 1000 tonnes per year. Based on an estimation of Loy Yangs emissions at 11 Mt/a AAP, reproduced in Climate Spectator, 20 December 2010. Bligh says CCS spending not wasted http://www.climatespectator.com.au/ news/bligh-says-ccs-spending-not-wasted PR Newswire, 14 July 2011, AEP Places Carbon Capture Commercialization on Hold, Citing Uncertain Status of Climate Policy, Weak Economy, http://www.prnewswire.com/ news-releases/aep-places-carbon-capturecommercialization-on-hold-citing-uncertainstatus-of-climate-policy-weak-economy125557738.html The Guardian, Longannet carbon capture project cancelled, 19 October 2011, http://www. guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/oct/19/davidcameron-longannet-carbon-capture?intcmp=239 Nordjyske, 31 March 2011. No CO2 storage in the North http://www.nordjyske.dk/ artikel/10/5/2/3829513/3/intet%20co2-lager%20 i%20nordjylland (article in Danish). Fortum Media Release, 27 October 2010, http:// fortum.com/en/mediaroom/Pages/fortum-todiscontinue-meri-pori-carbon-capture-andstorage-project.aspx Carbon Capture Journal, Shell Barendrecht project cancelled, 5 November 2010. http://www.carbon capturejournal.com/displaynews.php?NewsID=6 76&PHPSESSID=4p7vju5b989s5a4c4nthilp8t6 Energy Business Review, E.ON withdraws from next stage of UK governments CCS competition, 20 October 2010 http://carbon. energy-business-review.com/news/eonwithdraws-from-next-stage-of-uk-governmentsccs-competition_201010 C.GEN Power website. http://www.cgenpower. com/en/projects_rotterdam.html De Pers Online Newspaper (in Dutch) http:// www.depers.nl/economie/525045/Bouwenergiecentrale-in-Rotterdam-gaat-niet-door.html Letter from Economy, Agriculture and Innovation minister, M. Verhagen, to Dutch Parliament, 14 February 2011 (In Dutch) http://www.rijksoverheid .nl/bestanden/documenten-en-publicaties/ kamerstukken/2011/02/14/ccs-projecten-innederland/ccs-projecten-in-nederland.pdf Legislation available in German only. http://www. bmwfj.gv.at/Ministerium/Rechtsvorschriften/ entwuerfe/Documents/CCS-Gesetz%20 Entwurf%20aktuell.pdf As per reference #4 See http://www.greenpeace.org.au/climate/GIER-Report2010.php Massatchusetts Institute of Technology, 2007, The Future of Coal. http://web.mit.edu/coal/, based on Bozzuto, C.R., N. Nsakala,G. N. Liljedahl, M. Palkes, J.L. Marion,D. Vogel, J. C. Gupta, M. Fugate, and M. K. Guha, Engineering Feasibility and Economics of CO2 Capture on n Existing Coal-Fired Power Plant [Report No. PPL-01-T-09], NETL, U.S. Department of Energy, 2001, Alstom Power Inc 51. 45. 46. 42. 36. http://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analyses/pubs/ CO2%20Retrofit%20From%20Existing%20 Plants%20Revised%20November%202007.pdf CSIRO Media Release, Carbon Capture Technology moves a step closer, 29 March 2012, http://www.csiro.au/en/Portals/Media/Carboncapture-technology-moves-a-step-closer.aspx Massatchusetts Institute of Technology, 2007, The Future of Coal. http://web.mit.edu/coal/ Details of the HRL proposal can be found in the Triple Bottom Line report on the website of their subsidiary company, Dual Gas, http:// www.dualgas.net.au/www/609/1001127/ displayarticle/1001306.html Details available on the Victorian Department of Primary Industries website: http://www.dpi. vic.gov.au/energy/sustainable-energy/carboncapture-and-storage/the-carbonnet-project/factsheet-carbonnet-project Low Emissions Technology Demonstration Fund Expert Panel Meeting Minutes, 13-14 July 2006, revealed to Greenpeace through Freedom of Information Laws and available at http://www. greenpeace.org.au/assets/2006_07_expert_ panel_minutes.pdf Testimony from Drew Clarke, Federal Resources, Energy and Tourism Department Secretary to Senate Estimates Economics Committee, 31 May 2011. Transcript available at http://www.aph. gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/ Senate_Committees?url=@Hansard/s80.pdf As per reference #39, section 5.1.5 Response given from the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism to question on notice from Senator Scott Ludlam during senate estimates 19 October 2011, confirms CarbonNet were advanced $26.5 million from CCS Flagships and some of this money was passed through to HRL Dual Gas Pty Ltd. As per reference #39 Dual Gas media release, 16 April 2012. http:// www.dualgas.net.au/www/609/1001127/ displayarticle/1001311.html As per reference #38 Details available at http://www.cleanenergyfuture. gov.au/ Australian Treasury, Strong Growth, Low Pollution: modelling a carbon price, Chapter 5, Chart 5.18, http://www.treasury.gov.au/carbonprice modelling/content/report/09chapter5.asp Australian Industry Group, 2011, Energy shock: confronting higher prices http://www.aigroup. com.au/portal/binary/com.epicentric.content management.servlet.ContentDeliveryServlet/ LIVE_CONTENT/Publications/Reports/2011/ Energy_shock_confronting_higher_prices.pdf See, for instance, The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation, Chapter 10. Available at http://srren.ipcc-wg3. de/report/IPCC_SRREN_Ch10 The Energy [R]evolution scenario report can be found on the Greenpeace website - http:// www.greenpeace.org.au/climate/assets/docs/ energyrev2010/energyrev2010-summary.pdf 37.
2. 3.
22.
38. 39.
4.
40.
5.
24.
6. 7. 8. 9.
41.
10.
27.
43. 44.
11.
28.
12. 13.
14. 15.
31.
16.
32.
50.
17.
18. 19.
20.
52.
April 2012
11
Greenpeace Australia Pacific GPO Box 3307, Sydney NSW 2001 L 2, 33 Mountain Street, Ultimo NSW 2007 Ph: +61 2 9281 6100 Fax: +61 2 9280 0380 Email: support.au@Greenpeace.org www.Greenpeace.org.au 12
Join Greenpeace. We do not accept funding from governments or corporations; instead we rely on the goodwill and generosity of people like you to continue our work. Call 1800 815 151 or visit www.Greenpeace.org.au/join