The socio-political context for deploying carbon capture and storage in China and the U.S

Together, the U.S. and China emit roughly 40% of world's greenhouse gas emissions, and these nations have stated their desire to reduce absolute emissions (U.S.) or reduce the carbon intensity of the economy (China). However, both countries are dependent on coal for a large portion of their energy needs, which is projected to continue over the next several decades. They also have large amounts of coal resources, coal-dependent electricity production, and in China's case, extensive use of coal in the industrial sector, making any shift from coal socio-politically difficult. Both nations could use carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies to simultaneously decrease greenhouse gas emissions and continue the use of domestic coal resources; however, the socio-political context for CCS deployment differs substantially between the two countries and potentially makes large-scale CCS deployment challenging. Here, we examine and compare the political and institutional contexts shaping CCS policy and CCS deployment, both for initial pilot projects and for the creation of large-scale CCS technology deployment, and analyze how the socio-political context for CCS in China and the United States aligns with national climate, energy security, and economic priorities.     

碳捕获和封存技术认知、政策现状与减排潜力分析

在综合大量相关资料的基础上,研究总结了碳捕获和封存（CCS）技术的发展现状、示范项目进展和相关的国际法规政策,分析了其大规模应用的障碍,并将CCS技术与提高能效、发展可再生能源等减排技术方案进行了对比。分析认为,一方面我国需审慎评估CCS技术推广使用可能产生的负面影响;另一方面我国也需要适当加大对CCS关键技术的研发投入,避免在技术上受制于人。此外,有关CCS推广的财税政策的推出,需要视CCS技术的实际发展情况而定。我国还需要根据现实情况,重点考虑如何对现有火电厂进行改造,为CCS技术未来的大规模推广打下基础。     

碳捕获与封存技术潜在的环境影响及对策建议

作为减缓气候变化行动的选择方案之一,碳捕获与封存（CCS）技术受到国际社会特别是发达国家的格外关注,但是能否得到广泛应用,除了要取决于其技术成熟度、成本,在发展中国家的技术普及和转让及其应用技术的能力,政策法规等因素外,其潜在的环境影响及其管理也是目前备受关注的一个问题。因此,针对CCS技术潜在的环境影响以及目前发达国家关于CCS技术环境影响的管理进行了分析,并对我国未来CCS技术的环境管理提出了一些对策建议。     

A low-carbon society: global visions,pathways, and challenges

The feasibility of two low-carbon society (LCS) scenarios, one with and one without nuclear power and carbon capture and storage (CCS), is evaluated using the AIM/Enduse[Global] model. Both scenarios suggest that achieving a 50% emissions reduction target (relative to 1990 levels) by 2050 is technically feasible if locally suited technologies are introduced and the relevant policies, including necessary financial transfers, are appropriately implemented. In the scenario that includes nuclear and CCS options, it will be vital to consider the risks and acceptance of these technologies. In the scenario without these technologies, the challenge will be how to reduce energy service demand. In both scenarios, the estimated investment costs will be higher in non-Annex I countries than in Annex I countries. Finally, the enhancement of capacity building to support the deployment of locally suited technologies will be central to achieving an LCS.

Policy relevance

Policies to reduce GHG emissions up to 2050 are critical if the long-term target of stabilizing the climate is to be achieved. From a policy perspective, the cost and social acceptability of the policy used to reduce emissions are two of the key factors in determining the optimal pathways to achieve this. However, the nuclear accident at Fukushima highlighted the risk of depending on large-scale technologies for the provision of energy and has led to a backlash against the use of nuclear technology. It is found that if nuclear and CCS are used it will be technically feasible to halve GHG emissions by 2050, although very costly. However, although the cost of halving emissions will be about the same if neither nuclear nor CCS is used, a 50% reduction in emissions reduction will not be achievable unless the demand for energy service is substantially reduced.     

National policy and SMEs in technology transfer: the case of Israel

Increasing the rate of climate technology transfer is a critical concern. The international community facilitates the development and deployment of climate technologies for the needs of the South in two primary ways: first, through the use of multilateral frameworks for technology transfer and, second, through in-country capacity building for research, development, and deployment in developing countries. However, scant attention is given to whether national-level frameworks in industrialized countries can support technology transfer. This issue may be of particular relevance to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in developed countries, due to their relative lack of experience in international markets. The barriers that prevent SMEs from developing and exporting more technologies to the South are identified, by using Israel as a case study. Although Israel is an important global source of climate technology innovation, it currently does not engage much with the developing world. Four principle barriers to greater involvement of OECD SMEs in technology transfer for climate mitigation in developing countries are: (1) lack of knowledge of market needs in developing economies, (2) lack of financial mechanisms to support R&D, (3) lack of opportunities for partnership building, and (4) lack of support for demonstration sites in developing countries.     

Capturing the stories of corporations: A comparison of media debates on carbon capture and storage in Norway and Sweden

The development and deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) are sensitive to public debates that socially frame the technology. This study examines the evolving CCS debates, focusing on the media's framing of firms. Corporations are central CCS actors, and we analyze them in light of the nation-state, which has been emphasized in previous research as the primary context of CCS politics. Empirically, we compare framings of Statoil and Vattenfall in the Norwegian and Swedish media, drawing on a qualitative dataset of news media articles published between 2005 and 2009. We conclude that firms make regular media statements either to foster legitimacy or to respond to criticism of CCS. We also conclude that framing is not necessarily linked to technological success or failure and that interpretations of the technology have different forms depending on whether the related activity occurs in domestic or foreign markets. Finally, we explain the media framings based on the domestic energy situation and politics.     

The politics and policy of carbon capture and storage: Framing an emergent technology

Over the past decade carbon capture and storage (CCS) has attracted increasing international attention as a climate change mitigation option and moved into the center of climate policy debates and negotiations. This special issue of Global Environmental Change brings together leading scholars to analyze the politics, policy and regulation of CCS in cross-country comparisons as well as in a global context. The aim is to contribute on two fronts: first, by applying concepts, theories and methodologies from the social and policy sciences, to elucidate how societies are engaging with CCS as a mitigation option; and secondly, to point toward a future research agenda which, while exploring basic aspects of technology development as situated in a social context, would also be aligned with the needs of the climate and environmental policy community. The contributions address at least one of three inter-related research areas; CCS and the emergence of long-term climate and energy strategies; regulation, policy instruments and public acceptance; and international politics and CCS in developing countries.     

Hype among low-carbon technologies: Carbon capture and storage in comparison

Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technology has become a crucial part of climate change mitigation strategies around the world; yet its progress has been slow. Some have criticised CCS as a distracting hype, even as mainstream support continues. This article adapts the literature on technological hypes to develop a framework suitable for technologies with limited media/public exposure, such as CCS. It provides a qualitative context and analyses seven quantitative indicators of hype that are largely internal to the CCS technology regime. Throughout, the article contrasts results for CCS with those of comparable technologies. The main findings, which support the view that CCS has been hyped, are as follows. “Expectations” mounted rapidly in the form of project announcements for electricity applications of CCS and deployment forecasts in influential reports. However, announcements soon plummeted. “Commitments” remained high, nonetheless, judging by allocations in public budgets and number of peer-reviewed publications. Meanwhile, “outcomes”—in terms of patents, prototypes and estimated costs—reveal few if any improvements for CCS. Considering these findings and the characteristics of CCS, its development is likely to be more difficult than initially expected. Accordingly, this article calls for decisively prioritising CCS for industrial and, potentially, bioenergy uses. Coal- and gas-fired power plants may be replaced by non-CCS technologies, so power CCS development is far less pressing.     

Carbon capture and storage, bio-energy with carbon capture and storage, and the escape from the fossil-fuel lock-in

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is increasingly depicted as an important element of the carbon dioxide mitigation portfolio. However, critics have warned that CCS might lead to “reinforced fossil fuel lock-in”, by perpetuating a fossil fuel based energy provision system. Due to large-scale investments in CCS infrastructure, the fossil fuel based ‘regime’ would be perpetuated to at least the end of this century.In this paper we investigate if and how CCS could help to avoid reinforcing fossil fuel lock-in. First we develop a set of criteria to estimate the degree of technological lock-in. We apply these criteria to assess the lock-in reinforcement effect of adding CCS to the fossil fuel socio-technical regime (FFR).In principle, carbon dioxide could be captured from any carbon dioxide point source. In the practice of present technological innovations, business strategies, and policy developments, CCS is most often coupled to coal power plants. However, there are many point sources of carbon dioxide that are not directly related to coal or even fossil fuels. For instance, many forms of bio-energy or biomass-based processes generate significant streams of carbon dioxide emissions. Capturing this carbon dioxide which was originally sequestered in biomass could lead to negative carbon dioxide emissions.We use the functional approach of technical innovations systems (TIS) to estimate in more detail the strengths of the “niches” CCS and Bio-Energy with CCS (BECCS). We also assess the orientation of the CCS niche towards the FFR and the risk of crowding out BECCS. Next we develop pathways for developing fossil energy carbon capture and storage, BECCS, and combinations of them, using transition pathways concepts. The outcome is that a large-scale BECCS development could be feasible under certain conditions, thus largely avoiding the risk of reinforced fossil fuel lock-in.     

The social and political complexities of learning in carbon capture and storage demonstration projects

Demonstration of a fully integrated power plant with carbon capture and storage (CCS) at scale has not yet been achieved, despite growing international political interest in the potential of the technology to contribute to climate change mitigation and calls from multiple constituents for more demonstration projects. Acknowledging the scale of learning that still must occur for the technology to advance towards deployment, multiple CCS demonstration projects of various scales are emerging globally. Current plans for learning and knowledge sharing associated with demonstration projects, however, seem to be limited and narrowly conceived, raising questions about whether the projects will deliver on the expectations raised. Through a comparison of the structure, framing and socio-political context of three very different CCS demonstration projects in different places and contexts, this paper explores the complexity of social learning associated with demonstration projects. Variety in expectations of the demonstration projects’ objectives, learning processes, information sharing mechanisms, public engagement initiatives, financing and collaborative partnerships are highlighted. The comparison shows that multiple factors including the process of building support for the project, the governance context and the framing of the project matter for the learning in demonstration projects. This analysis supports a broader conceptualization of learning than that currently found in CCS demonstration plans - a result with implications for both future research and practice.     

Efficiency of policy instruments for CCS deployment

Policy instruments for carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology investment during the learning phase are analysed and compared. The focus is on specific barriers to investment in learning during early commercial deployment. Imperfections in the carbon price signal and market failures from barriers indicate a need for support during the learning investment phase and the initial roll out of CCS in electricity generation. Different ways for CCS technology to cross the so-called investment ‘death valley’ are analysed and compared: a command and control instrument (CCS mandate), investment support (grant, tax credit, loan guarantee, subsidy by trust fund) and production subsidies (guaranteed carbon price, feed-in price, etc.). Three criteria are used in this comparison: effectiveness, static efficiency and dynamic efficiency. Policy instruments need to be adapted to the technological and commercial maturity of the CCS system. Mandate policies require handling with much care, and subsidization mechanisms must be designed to be market-oriented.     

White Knights: will wind and solar come to the rescue of a looming capacity gap from nuclear phase-out or slow CCS start-up?

In the wake of the Fukushima nuclear accident, countries like Germany and Japan have planned a phase-out of nuclear generation. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has yet to become a commercially viable technology with little prospect of doing so without strong climate policy to spur development. The possibility of using renewable power generation from wind and solar as a non-emitting alternative to replace a nuclear phase-out or failure to deploy CCS technology is investigated using scenarios from EMF27 and the POLES model. A strong carbon price appears necessary to have significant penetration of renewables regardless of alternative generation technologies available, but especially if nuclear or CCS are absent from the energy supply system. The feasibility of replacing nuclear generation appears possible at realistic costs (evaluated as total abatement costs and final user prices to households); however for ambitious climate policies, such as a 450 ppm target, CCS could represent a critical technology that renewables will not be able to fully replace without unbearable economic costs.     

Modeling endogenous learning and imperfect competition effects in climate change economics

In this two-part paper we evaluate the effect of “endogenizing” technological learning and strategic behavior of agents in economic models used to assess climate change policies. In the first part we show the potential impact of R&D policies or demonstration and deployment (D&D) programs in the context of stringent stabilization scenarios. In the second part we show how game-theoretic methods can be implemented in climate change economic models to take into account three types of strategic interactions: (i) the market power of the countries benefiting from very low abatement costs on international markets for CO₂ emissions, (ii) the strategic behavior of governments in the domestic allocation of CO₂ emissions quotas, and (iii) the non-cooperative behavior of countries and regions in the burden sharing of CO₂ concentration stabilization. The two topics of endogenous learning and game-theoretic approach to economic modeling are two manifestations of the need to take into account the strategic behavior of agents in the evaluation of climate change policies. In the first case an R&D policy or a demonstration and deployment (D&D) program are put in place in order to attain a cost reduction through the learning effect; in the second case the agents (countries) reply optimally to the actions decided by the other agents by exploiting their strategic advantages. Simulations based on integrated assessment models illustrate the approaches. These studies have been conducted under the Swiss NCCR-Climate program.     

US institutional pathways to clean coal and shale gas: lessons for China

China's 12th Five-Year Plan (2011–2015) envisages that shale gas and coal will be central to its energy future. However, for China to meet the energy security and climate change objectives set out in its 12th Five-Year Plan it will be reliant on the widespread commercial deployment of two key technologies; hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling for shale gas, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) for coal. China is moving to acquire these technologies through technology transfer and diffusion from the US, but progress has been slow, and neither is currently available in China on a commercial scale. Drawing on interviews in the US and China, this article argues that China's expectation of technology from the US may well be disappointed because of factors unique to the US institutional environment that have made the development of fracking technology possible and hinder the development of CCS technology at a commercial scale.

Policy relevance

If China is to meet the energy security and climate change objectives set out in its 12th Five-Year Plan it will be reliant on the widespread commercial deployment of fracking and clean coal technologies. While China expects to acquire these technologies via technology transfer and diffusion from the US, progress has been slow. Because of factors unique to the US institutional environment the availability of both technologies on a commercial scale in China is unlikely in the coming years. As a result, Chinese policy makers would be well-advised not to count on these technologies to meet their energy and climate goals.     

Anticipating industry localization effects of clean technology deployment policies in developing countries

National ‘green growth’ strategies, which aim at decoupling economic development from adverse environmental impacts, have become a new paradigm for policymakers in developing countries. Many green growth strategies are based on policy instruments designed to incentivize the domestic deployment of relatively mature clean technologies and aim at fostering the formation of a local industry to develop and produce these technologies. While the empirical evidence on the localization effect of such policies in developing countries is mixed, there is a dearth of research systemically analyzing how differences between technologies affect patterns of localization, which could explain the observed variance. We address this gap and develop a typology which distinguishes four types of technologies requiring different types of capabilities. We do so by combining insights from the literature on technology transfer and catching-up of industries with insights from the literature on patterns of innovation across the technology life- cycle. We apply this typology to the case of low-emission development strategies and four exemplary low-carbon technologies, namely small and micro hydro power, wind turbines, electric cars, and solar cells, in order to analyze capability requirements, innovation patterns, and the effect of past deployment policies on industry localization. We synthesize these case studies and derive a heuristic to anticipate the localization effects of deployment policies for different types of technologies in countries with varying income levels. We argue that the heuristic can serve as starting point for policymakers aiming at clean technology industry localization. The paper concludes with a discussion of possible technology-specific green growth strategies for developing countries with different income levels and for international institutions supporting green growth.     

The political economy of technology support: Making decisions about carbon capture and storage and low carbon energy technologies

This article reviews the political economy of government choice around technology support for the development and deployment of low carbon emission energy technologies, such as Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). It is concerned with how governments should allocate limited economic resources across abatement alternatives. In particular, it explores two inter-related questions. First, should government support focus on a narrow range of options or be distributed across many potential alternatives? Second, what criteria should be considered when determining which specific technologies to support? It presents a simple economic model with experience curves for CCS and renewable energy technologies to explore the lowest cost alternatives for meeting an emission abatement objective. It then explores a variety of economic and political factors that must be considered when governments make decisions about technology support.     

Role of renewable energy in climate mitigation: a synthesis of recent scenarios

The role of renewable energy in climate change mitigation is explored through a review of 162 recent medium- to long-term scenarios from 15 large-scale, energy-economic and integrated assessment models. The current state of knowledge from this community is assessed and its implications drawn for the strategic context in which policymakers and other decision-makers might consider renewable energy. The scenario set is distinguished from previous ones in that it contains more detailed information on renewable deployment levels. All the scenarios in this study were published during or after 2006. Within the context of a large-scale assessment, the analysis is guided primarily by four questions. What sorts of future levels of renewable energy deployment are consistent with different CO₂ concentration goals? Which classes of renewable energy will be the most prominent energy producers and how quickly might they expand production? Where might an expansion in renewable energy occur? What is the linkage between the costs of mitigation and an expansion of renewable energy?     

Uncertainty in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) deployment projections: a cross-model comparison exercise

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) can be a valuable CO₂ mitigation option, but what role CCS will play in the future is uncertain. In this paper we analyze the results of different integrated assessment models (IAMs) taking part in the 27th round of the Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) with respect to the role of CCS in long term mitigation scenarios. Specifically we look into the use of CCS as a function of time, mitigation targets, availability of renewables and its use with different fuels. Furthermore, we explore the possibility to relate model results to general and CCS specific model assumptions. The results show a wide range of cumulative capture in the 2010–2100 period (600–3050 GtCO₂), but the fact that no model projects less than 600 GtCO₂ indicates that CCS is considered to be important by all these models. Interestingly, CCS storage rates are often projected to be still increasing in the second half of this century. Depending on the scenario, at least six out of eight, up to all models show higher storage rates in 2100 than in 2050. CCS shares in cumulative primary energy use are in most models increasing with the stringency of the target or under conservative availability of renewables. The strong variations of CCS deployment projection rates could not be related to the reported differences in the assumptions of the models by means of a cross-model comparison in this sample.     

《巴厘行动计划》以来适应气候变化谈判进展及未来需求分析

回顾了《巴厘行动计划》以来形成的与适应气候变化议题相关的国际决议及谈判进展,分析了这些决议对推动发展中国家适应气候变化进程的可能作用和面临的障碍,综述了发展中国家和发达国家对“2015气候协议”的利益诉求和建议。作者认为：《巴厘行动计划》以来,《联合国气候变化框架公约》下适应气候变化方面的谈判取得了较明显的进展,建立了适应委员会、国家适应计划进程和应对损失与危害的国际机制等;资金、技术研发、推广和使用、政策法规、机构设置与能力、信息等是提高发展中国家适应气候变化的限制因素;资金、技术转让和能力建设仍是“2015气候协议”谈判的重点和难点。针对非洲集团和小岛屿国家联盟全球适应目标和应对气候变化造成的损失与危害的补偿的提议,作者建议加强科学研究,开发评估方法和工具,探讨气候自然变率和人类活动导致的气候变化影响的归因;同时建议中国进一步加强适应气候变化的南南合作。