Refine
Document Type
- Working Paper (3)
- Report (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Contribution to Periodical (1)
Language
- English (7) (remove)
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 Ernst Strüngmann Forum seeks to link justice, sustainability, and diversity agendas. In support, this chapter discusses how linkages between these three concepts have formed and changed in the climate change discourse, particularly in light of the recent Paris Agreement. As the latest addition to the portfolio of international climate change agreements, the Paris Agreement establishes a landscape in which nation-states, subnational actors, and transnational networks will be able to reconfigure existing linkages between sustainability, diversity, and justice, and perhaps improve upon them.
Here, three possible developments are identified which may substantially influence the reconfiguration process. Recognition is given to the sustainability and justice deficits that have plagued the "top-down" character of the international climate change discourse, and it is hypothesized that the Paris Agreement opens the door for "bottom-up" movements to claim a larger segment of climate change policy decision making and design. In turn, the "polycentric" landscape created by such "movement from below" appears to emphasize concepts such as inclusivity and transparency perhaps allowing for explicit climate justice commitments. Finally, to advance societal transformation and embrace diversity, it is hypothesized that the scientific endeavor needs to be transformed from a purely analytical pursuit to an effort that makes use of the wide range of scientific competences and provides support for transformative innovations to change unsustainable sociotechnical systems.
Will climate change stay below the 2 degree target in the 21st century on the basis of the COP 21 results? Looking into challenges and opportunities, this paper answers: To stay below the global 2dt is neither a real choice for the world society nor for businesses and civil societies in specific countries. It is a global guideline, scientifically developed for global negotiations, which should be broken down to national interests and actors. Key questions concerning the energy sector from the perspective of national interests are how to create and sustain a momentum for the inevitable energy transition, how to encourage disruptive innovations, avoid lock in effects, enable rapid deployment of energy efficiency and renewable energies etc. Or in other words: how to get to a competitive, economically benign, inclusive, low carbon and risk minimising energy system. With this background the paper argues that "burden sharing" is a misleading perception of strong climate mitigation strategies. It is more realistic to talk about "benefit sharing", using the monetary benefits and co-benefits of climate mitigation (e.g. energy cost savings, revenues from CO2-tax or emission trading systems) to help vulnerable national and international actors to adapt to the unavoidable climate risks. It has to be demonstrated on country level that the technologies and policy mix of strong climate mitigation and risk-minimising actions are indeed "benefit sharing" strategies which should be chosen anyhow, even if there was no climate change. For China and Germany this paper includes basic findings supporting this view.