Refine
Document Type
- Report (13)
- Peer-Reviewed Article (3)
- Contribution to Periodical (3)
Language
- English (19) (remove)
This paper presents the results of a collaborative project on public acceptance of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in Germany, commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi). The project "Socio-economic Research on Acceptance of CCS" (April 2006 to March 2008) analyzed various aspects of public acceptance of CCS mainly in the national context of Germany. It was the first project to handle this subject matter. Public acceptance is one of the crucial factors for the implementation of CCS in the future.
The representative survey studies provide a comprehensive database on the public awareness and perception of CCS in six selected European countries. Our results provide insights into the public understanding and knowledge of energy related issues and CCS topics. The embedded experimental research provides insights into how information affects CCS perceptions. The results discuss implications for CCS communication methods.
Considering the traditional coal-based energy infrastructure in the German state North Rhine-Westphalia the question arises how to face the needs of embanking climate change. To reduce greenhouse gas intensive electricity generation in the Ruhr area, the introduction of carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an option of particular relevance. The paper investigates and discusses possibilities of setting up a CCS infrastructure in NRW. It shall clarify whether, and possibly how, highly efficient conventional fossil fired power plants could be refitted with CO2 capture to flexibly react to potentially changing climate policy conditions and to keep up with the market.
For the option of “carbon capture and storage”, an integrated assessment in the form of a life cycle analysis and a cost assessment combined with a systematic comparison with renewable energies regarding future conditions in the power plant market for the situation in Germany is done. The calculations along the whole process chain show that CCS technologies emit per kWh more than generally assumed in clean-coal concepts (total CO2 reduction by 72-90% and total greenhouse gas reduction by 65-79%) and considerable more if compared with renewable electricity. Nevertheless, CCS could lead to a significant absolute reduction of GHG-emissions within the electricity supply system. Furthermore, depending on the growth rates and the market development, renewables could develop faster and could be in the long term cheaper than CCS based plants. Especially, in Germany, CCS as a climate protection option is phasing a specific problem as a huge amount of fossil power plant has to be substituted in the next 15 years where CCS technologies might be not yet available. For a considerable contribution of CCS to climate protection, the energy structure in Germany requires the integration of capture ready plants into the current renewal programs. If CCS retrofit technologies could be applied at least from 2020, this would strongly decrease the expected CO2 emissions and would give a chance to reach the climate protection goal of minus 80% including the renewed fossil-fired power plants.
CO2-capture and geological storage as a climate policy option : technologies, concepts, perspectives
(2007)
The idea of removing carbon dioxide from flue gas and industrial gas flows and putting it into suitable long-term storage sites is referred to as Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). This publication provides a close look at this new line of technologies, describing its current status and outlining the prospects for development. The approach is both diagnostic and analytical, identifying the questions a technology assessment poses and showing the steps that need to be taken to implement CCS.
CCS is currently moving to the centre of climate policy discussion. Nonetheless this line of technologies is still the subject of controversial discussion. On the one hand there is a clear hope that these technologies will open up opportunities to use fossil fuels without harming the climate and thus make it possible to continue using oil, natural gas and above all coal even under a stricter climate regime. Accordingly, numerous R&D projects have been initiated all over the world, and various demonstration projects are at the planning or implementation stage. On the other hand, CCS (especially the storage part) has given rise to considerable scepticism from an ecological point of view.
The CO2 utilisation is discussed as one of the future low-carbon technologies in order to accomplish a full decarbonisation in the energy intensive industry. CO2 is separated from the flue gas stream of power plants or industrial plants and is prepared for further processing as raw material. CO2 containing gas streams from industrial processes exhibit a higher concentration of CO2 than flue gases from power plants; consequentially, industrial CO2 sources are used as raw material for the chemical industry and for the synthesis of fuel on the output side. Additionally, fossil resources can be replaced by substitutes of reused CO2 on the input side. If set up in a right way, this step into a CO2-based circular flow economy could make a contribution to the decarbonisation of the industrial sector and according to the adjusted potential, even rudimentarily to the energy sector.
In this study, the authors analyse potential CO2 sources, the potential demand and the range of applications of CO2. In the last chapter of the final report, they give recommendations for research, development, politics and economics for an appropriate future designing of CO2 utilisation options based upon their previous analysis.
Both focus group discussions and information-choice questionnaires (ICQs) have previously been used to examine informed public opinions about carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS). This paper presents an extensive experimental study to systematically examine and compare the quality of opinions created by these two research techniques. Depending on experimental condition, participants either participated in a focus group meeting or completed an ICQ. In both conditions participants received identical factual information about two specific CCS options. After having processed the information, they indicated their overall opinion about each CCS option. The quality of these opinions was determined by looking at three outcome-oriented indicators of opinion quality: consistency, stability, and confidence. Results for all three indicators showed that ICQs yielded higher-quality opinions than focus groups, but also that focus groups did not perform poor in this regard. Implications for the choice between focus group discussions and ICQs are discussed.