Monday 26 January 2009

Carbon capture at core of plans for fossil fuels

By Rebecca Bream
Published: January 26 2009 02:00

The aim of producing clean electricity in no way lacks public support from politicians and chief executives. After years of inaction, governments around the world are signing up to ambitious targets for raising the amount of energy coming from renewable sources and cutting carbon emissions, with the aim of slowing climate change.
But the question is how many of these targets will actually be met, and whether the current economic slowdown will hamper investment in cleaner forms of electricity generation.
After all, burning coal to produce electricity - which creates more CO 2 than any other method of power generation - is still the cheapest and most reliable option for most countries.
Burning natural gas is somewhat cleaner than coal, but as reserves of gas are more thinly distributed, a worldwide "dash for gas" looks unlikely.
Although the rapid growth of emerging economies such as China and India is now slowing, these regions will still need more generation capacity in the future and are unlikely to abandon coal. If climate change is to be reduced, however, they will have to embrace the idea of carbon capture and storage (CCS), which prevents the emissions from burning fossil fuels entering the atmosphere, and also invest in truly clean forms of power, such as wind, wave and solar.
Nuclear is another form of energy promoted as "clean". But the obvious problem is the hazardous radioactive waste produced as a by-product. Although scientists have credible solutions for how this waste can be safely stored and disposed of, the cost is likely to be enormous. And deciding where to site respositories for nuclear waste is controversial.
Many politicians and energy executives say that, to make a real dent in emissions, countries will have to invest in renewables, nuclear and carbon capture and storage projects, and that they should not be seen as rival causes.
Nevertheless, at a time when funds are harder to come by, it is common to hear the nuclear and fossil fuel industries undermining renewable energy, and for environmental campaigners to oppose "low carbon" energy such as nuclear and carbon capture for fear it would jeopardise wind and wave projects.
The issue of CCS is one of the most contentious in the electricity industry. Enthusiasts argue that, if the technology is proven to work on a commercial scale, it will provide a way of halting climate change while allowing countries to keep burning fossil fuels in the medium-term. But opponents say that pinning hopes on CCS lets energy companies off when it comes to investing in renewable energy.
Mike Farley, director of technology policy liaison at Doosan Babcock, which supplies CCS technology, says more investment in renewables will require more investment in conventional plants as back-up when weather conditions reduce the output of wind and solar projects.
He argues that coal- and gas-fired plants are better-suited to this than nuclear reactors. "Nuclear doesn't flex, it stays at a constant output. When output from renewables goes up and down, nuclear can't compensate in the way that fossil fuels can."
CCS is being pursued in Europe, North America and Australia, but has yet to gain much traction in emerging markets. Last year, the European Union passed directives on CCS, providing a framework for the regulation of the fledgling industry and outlining financial incentives to encourage projects. The aim is for between 10 and 12 CCS demonstration plants across Europe.
The UK government is offering funding for the country's first CCS demonstration project, with Eon, Scottish Power and a joint venture of RWE Npower and Peel Holdings competing for the cash. The government has stipulated that it will only fund a post-combustion CCS project, as it thinks this technology will have the widest international application. But other companies that have been promoting pre-combustion CCS projects, such as Centrica, Powerfuel and ConocoPhillips, may find that they are eligible for EU funding.
Mr Farley at Doosan Babcock says a consensus is forming among UK politicians that CCS will be one of the three main technologies - along with renewables and nuclear - needed to achieve "decarbonised electricity". He says: "What is emerging is the view that more needs to be done, and sooner."
He says that a big leap forward would be for the UK government to give consent only to new fossil fuel power plants that are "carbon capture-ready" - that is, suitable to have CCS technology fitted in the future.
"We need to recognise that CCS is going to be necessary and also be realistic that lots of power plants are going to be built before they can be fitted with CCS. So a good example to set would be to mandate that all new coal or gas plants should be carbon capture-ready."
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009