Zukünftige Energie- und Industriesysteme
Facing the uncertainty of CO2 storage capacity in China by developing different storage scenarios
(2016)
China is very active in the research and development of CO2 capture and storage technologies (CCS). However, existing estimates for CO2 storage capacity are very uncertain. This uncertainty is due to limited geological knowledge, a lack of large-scale research on CO2 injection, and different assessment approaches and parameter settings. Hence storage scenarios represent a method that can be used by policy makers to demonstrate the range of possible storage capacity developments, to help interpret uncertain results and to identify the limitations of existing assessments. In this paper, three storage scenarios are developed for China by evaluating China-wide studies supplemented with more detailed site- and basin-specific assessments. It is estimated that the greatest storage potential can be found in deep saline aquifers. Oil and gas fields may also be used. Coal seams are only included in the highest storage scenario. In total, the scenarios presented demonstrate that China has an effective storage capacity of between 65 and 1551 Gt of CO2. Furthermore, the authors emphasise a need for action to harmonise storage capacity assessment approaches due to the uncertainties involved in the capacity assessments analysed in this study.
One of the factors decelerating a further diffusion of the carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology is the public's negative perception of early pilot or demonstration activities in Germany as well as in other countries. This study examined the public perception of CCS in more detail by looking into different options within the CCS chain, i.e. for the three elements capture, transport and storage. This was analyzed using an experimental approach, realized in an online survey with a representative German sample of 1830 citizens. Each participant evaluated one of 18 different CCS scenarios created using three types of CO2 source (industry, biomass, coal), two transport options (pipeline vs. no specification), and three storage possibilities (saline aquifer, depleted gas field, enhanced gas recovery (EGR)).
Overall, we found that the ratings of CCS were neutral on average. However, if the CO2 is produced by a biomass power plant or industry, CCS is rated more positively than in a scenario with a coal-fired power plant. The specifications of transport and storage interacted with each other such that scenarios including EGR or a depleted gas field without mentioning a pipeline were evaluated better than storing it in a saline aquifer or a depleted gas field and mentioning a pipeline as means of transport. Exploratory regression analyses indicate the high relevance of the respective CO2 source in general as well as the perceived importance of this source for Germany.