TY - JOUR
T1 - Carbon capture utilization and storage in review
T2 - Sociotechnical implications for a carbon reliant world
AU - McLaughlin, Hope
AU - Littlefield, Anna A.
AU - Menefee, Maia
AU - Kinzer, Austin
AU - Hull, Tobias
AU - Sovacool, Benjamin K.
AU - Bazilian, Morgan D.
AU - Kim, Jinsoo
AU - Griffiths, Steven
N1 - Funding Information:
All of these hurdles and challenges in efficiency manifest in a high cost of removal per ton of CO2, $100 to $600/ton of CO2 removed. This, coupled with an underdeveloped CO2 market, makes the economics of DAC challenging [47,48] As with many technologies, the cheapest way to meet the heat and electricity demands is often the most emission and water intensive. Using renewables or waste heat increases the overall net CO2 removal but can also greatly increase costs. Improvements to sorbent technology and heat recovery could help reduce operating costs and increase net removal by lowering the energy demand [40]. Currently, DAC relies on the carbon market more than other NET's because it produces pure CO2 [47]. The most profitable use of CO2 is currently EOR, but existing markets in EOR will not be sufficient to drive commercial DAC deployment [48]. Government support will be essential to the future large-scale deployment and market development of DAC (Fig. 12) [49].In a very recent review of the state of CCUS in the context of carbon removal, i.e. when CCUS is coupled with Direct Air Capture or Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage, Sovacool et al. [240] noted many public perception barriers. Most research focuses on only a small sample of countries such as Germany, the United States, and United Kingdom, raisin questions about its generalizability. Many studies have inquired only on prior familiarity or knowledge on of CCUS, DACCS, or BECCS and perceptions of and concern about climate change. Another notable limitation is that most literature focuses on attitudes of the public instead of intention or behavior. Furthermore, there is a need at comprehending not just the support or opposition for CCUS technologies in a broad sense but also their particular fit in different national or policy contexts as well as the particular concatenations of how they will be rolled-out and deployed.Policies that allocate funding through grant support are relatively straight forward. Grants most often provide funding directly to projects or specific programs, usually to overcome high up-front costs. Government programs center around pilot and demonstration (P&D) projects and research and development demonstration (R&D) projects, and are usually awarded through particular funding agencies and a competitive proposal analysis processes [197]. CCUS has seen a recent influx of grant funding for various P&D and R&D projects, but is still off-track in deployment levels [197,198]. Which continues to encourage technological advancements that will bolster the industry. Nations within the EU for instance, have relied on grant funding through agencies such as the Innovation Fund (subsequently discussed in more detail).In the United States, political action surrounding CCUS began in earnest in 1997 with DOE funding allocated towards R&D for CCUS. In 2008, the 45Q tax credit was established, providing $20 per ton of CO2 captured and permanently sequestered. Soon after the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) allocated $3.4 billion for CCUS demonstration projects in 2009. There was a hiatus in both incentivizing policy and operator interest in CCUS project investment until 2018 when the 45Q tax credit was revamped to provide $50/ton of CO2 sequestered. This marks the beginning of increased interest and activity surrounding CCUS in the United States that is ongoing. Further progress was made in 2020 with the Energy Act, authorizing $7 billion for carbon management over the next five years and most recently, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that allocates $12 Billion to CCUS technologies. This incremental progress has tracked with increasingly aggressive greenhouse gas reduction targets and carbon neutrality commitments being set by both private industry and government agencies.The authors would like to acknowledge support from the Industrial Decarbonization Research and Innovation Center (IDRIC) in the United Kingdom, funded via the ESRC and EPSRC via Grant EP/V027050/1. The authors also acknowledge very helpful feedback on earlier drafts by Prof. Jochen Markard from ETH Zurich in Switzerland.
Funding Information:
Policies that allocate funding through grant support are relatively straight forward. Grants most often provide funding directly to projects or specific programs, usually to overcome high up-front costs. Government programs center around pilot and demonstration (P&D) projects and research and development demonstration (R&D) projects, and are usually awarded through particular funding agencies and a competitive proposal analysis processes [ 197 ]. CCUS has seen a recent influx of grant funding for various P&D and R&D projects, but is still off-track in deployment levels [ 197 , 198 ]. Which continues to encourage technological advancements that will bolster the industry. Nations within the EU for instance, have relied on grant funding through agencies such as the Innovation Fund (subsequently discussed in more detail).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors
PY - 2023/5
Y1 - 2023/5
N2 - The decarbonization of industry and industrial systems is a pressing challenge given the relative lack of low-carbon options available for “hard to decarbonize” sectors such as steelmaking, cement manufacturing, and chemical production. Carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) represents a promising and crosscutting solution to this formidable problem. This review takes a systematic and sociotechnical perspective to examine how CCUS can support industrial decarbonization and relevant associated technical, economic, and social factors. This includes a focus on the energy and climate impacts of carbon emitting activities, the role, and options for CCUS in global responses to climate change, technical aspects of capture, transport, storage, and utilization, as well as policy implications and areas requiring further research. In doing so, the Review examines hundreds of published studies on the topic over the previous twenty years to offer a state-of-the-art investigation on technical options for capture (including direct air capture), transportation (including pipelines, ships, and rail), storage (including biotic and abiotic), and utilization (including enhanced oil recovery and biochar). The Review also investigates the evidence base within the literature on enablers and barriers to CCUS, policy mechanisms, and international frameworks as well as themes such as geopolitics, trade, and future research gaps. We conclude with insights about future CCUS pathways and sociotechnical systems dynamics.
AB - The decarbonization of industry and industrial systems is a pressing challenge given the relative lack of low-carbon options available for “hard to decarbonize” sectors such as steelmaking, cement manufacturing, and chemical production. Carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) represents a promising and crosscutting solution to this formidable problem. This review takes a systematic and sociotechnical perspective to examine how CCUS can support industrial decarbonization and relevant associated technical, economic, and social factors. This includes a focus on the energy and climate impacts of carbon emitting activities, the role, and options for CCUS in global responses to climate change, technical aspects of capture, transport, storage, and utilization, as well as policy implications and areas requiring further research. In doing so, the Review examines hundreds of published studies on the topic over the previous twenty years to offer a state-of-the-art investigation on technical options for capture (including direct air capture), transportation (including pipelines, ships, and rail), storage (including biotic and abiotic), and utilization (including enhanced oil recovery and biochar). The Review also investigates the evidence base within the literature on enablers and barriers to CCUS, policy mechanisms, and international frameworks as well as themes such as geopolitics, trade, and future research gaps. We conclude with insights about future CCUS pathways and sociotechnical systems dynamics.
KW - Carbon capture and storage
KW - Carbon capture utilization and storage
KW - Clean coal
KW - Climate policy
KW - Industrial decarbonization
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85149403987
U2 - 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113215
DO - 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113215
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85149403987
SN - 1364-0321
VL - 177
JO - Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
JF - Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
M1 - 113215
ER -
SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy
SDG 8 Decent Work and Economic Growth
SDG 9 Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
SDG 13 Climate Action
SDG 17 Partnerships for the Goals