© OECD/IEA 2013

CCS & the global climate agenda

Juho LipponenHead of CCS Unit

IEA

GCCSI Annual Conference Abu Dhabi, 6 November 2014

© OECD/IEA 2013

Strong policy drives investment

Clean energy investment* between 2004-2013 (USD):

Sourc

e:

BN

EF

CCS:

20billion

All clean energy:

1929 billion

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

1900

2000

CCS All clean energy

USD billion

20

1929

* Includes technology development, projects, M&A. Source: BNEF.

© OECD/IEA 2013

3. Drivers and supportive policies are essential

Permitting framework

Technology RD&D framework

Incentive framework

Long-term vision for CCS deployment

Regulation for safe, effective storage

Efficient resource

management

Prices or limits on

emissions

Targeted deployment incentives

Demonstration funding

UNFCCC process critical for shaping policy environment for clean energy including CCS: Ambitious climate targets, Technology Mechanism, Green Climate Fund,

CDM, incl. modalities and procedures etc.

Research and development

policy and programmes

*

*

* ** *

*

© OECD/IEA 2013

UNFCCC & global climate policy

“Top-down”: UNFCCC mechanisms

“Bottom-up”: Intended Nationally Determined Contributions

NAMAs- Funds for CCS

- L&R frameworks- Storage expl.

Technology mechanism- Knowledge

sharing- Partnerships

Other multilateral

schemes- Cooperation on

CCS

CDM- Continue to include CCS

Enhanced pre-2020 action- Knowledge

sharing- Policy & regulation

Green Climate Fund

- Specific CCS window

INCLUDE CCS WHERE RELEVANT!

© OECD/IEA 2013

…As one of America’s governors has said, “We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and the last generation that can do something about it.” Remarks by President Obama at UN Climate Leaders’ Summit, September

2014  

© OECD/IEA 2013

Backup slides

© OECD/IEA 2013

- mechanisms under the negotiations - agreed mechanisms under

implementation

© OECD/IEA 2013

“Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” % of CCS in relevant regional energy scenario analysis Mt of CO2 captured and stored GW of power generation capacity equipped with CCS policy actions and mechanisms supporting CCS

Technology mechanism provide unbiased up-to-date information on CCS support international partnerships that already exist on CCS include consideration of CCS in technology needs assessments

of developing countries with high reliance on fossil fuels in their energy and industrial sectors.

© OECD/IEA 2013

NAMAs availability of funds for long-term large investments; include support for legal work to make CCS a legal

activity and define all necessary safety requirements; consider support for CO2 storage exploration consider policy support for

The Green Climate Fund actively highlight the availability of funds for CCS projects

and potentially include a specific earmarked funding window

for CCS.

© OECD/IEA 2013

Enhanced pre-2020 climate action government support for CCS pilots in industrial sectors government support for CCS large-scale projects that are

already in advanced stages of development; development of CCS-related regulations CO2 storage assessments work to identify specific CO2

storage sites relevant capacity building and support for pilot projects

in non-Annex I parties with high potential for CCS deployment

R&D work and international cooperation on CCS R&D.

© OECD/IEA 2013

Sleipner (Source: Statoil) Great Plains Synfuels(Source: Dakota Gasification)

Gorgon (Source: Chevron)Scotford Upgrader

(Source: Shell)

Kemper (Source: IEA) Taiwan Cement (Source: IEA)

Peterhead (Source: Shell)

Bio-CCS (Source: IEA)

Boundary Dam (Source: SaskPower)

© OECD/IEA 2013

CCS technologies exist and are in use

Capture technologies are well understood but

remain expensive.

Transport is the most technically mature

step in CCS.

CO2 storage has been demonstrated but

further experience is needed at scale.

• Technologies in use since 70s/80s• Today: 1/2 of early energy requirement

and 3-4 * scale!• Power: pre-, oxy and post-combustion• Gas processing, refining, cement, etc.

• 6000km existing pipelines• Existing technical

standards• Transport by ship

• 12 projects, 120+ EOR• Capacities and CO2 trapping

mechanisms better understood • Better storage engineering,

modelling & monitoring

© OECD/IEA 2013

To fulfil its role, CCS needs further improvement

Increased cost driven by need of additional capital investment +80% on power investment / kW (“nth plant”; first ones even more) Varying degree in other industrial applications

Increased cost also driven by energy penalty 10-12 %-point loss in power plant efficiency… …leads to 25-30% increase in fuel demand per unit of output

Penalty linked to energy requirements of capture Separation work 2,5 to 3,5 GJ / t CO2 today Compression 0,5 GJ / t CO2 today

Hence critical to accelerate technical learning and economies of scale to reduce energy penalty and capital costs

Examples of improvement targets: CSLF, US DOE: “2020”: gradual improvements, -30% energy penalty “2030 and beyond”: novel technologies, -50% energy penalty