| 1. |
- Azar, Christian, et al.
(author)
-
Carbon capture and storage from fossil fuels and biomass - : Costs and potential role in stabilizing the atmosphere
- 2006
-
In: Climatic Change. - : Springer Nature. - 0165-0009 .- 1573-1480. ; 74:1-3, s. 47-79
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The capture and storage of CO2 from combustion of fossil fuels is gaining attraction as a means to deal with climate change. CO2 emissions from biomass conversion processes can also be captured. If that is done, biomass energy with CO2 capture and storage (BECS) would become a technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere and at the same time deliver CO2-neutral energy carriers (heat, electricity or hydrogen) to society. Here we present estimates of the costs and conversion efficiency of electricity, hydrogen and heat generation from fossil fuels and biomass with CO2 capture and storage. We then insert these technology characteristics into a global energy and transportation model (GET 5.0), and calculate costs of stabilizing atmospheric CO2 concentration at 350 and 450 ppm. We find that carbon capture and storage technologies applied to fossil fuels have the potential to reduce the cost of meeting the 350 ppm stabilisation targets by 50% compared to a case where these technologies are not available and by 80% when BECS is allowed. For the 450 ppm scenario, the reduction in costs is 40 and 42%, respectively. Thus, the difference in costs between cases where BECS technologies are allowed and where they are not is marginal for the 450 ppm stabilization target. It is for very low stabilization targets that negative emissions become warranted, and this makes BECS more valuable than in cases with higher stabilization targets. Systematic and stochastic sensitivity analysis is performed. Finally, BECS opens up the possibility to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. But this option should not be seen as an argument in favour of doing nothing about the climate problem now and then switching on this technology if climate change turns out to be a significant problem. It is not likely that BECS can be initiated sufficiently rapidly at a sufficient scale to follow this path to avoiding abrupt and serious climate changes if that would happen.
|
|
| 2. |
- Azar, Christian, 1969, et al.
(author)
-
The feasibility of low CO2 concentration targets and the role of bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)
- 2010
-
In: Climatic Change. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1573-1480 .- 0165-0009. ; 100:1, s. 195-202
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC 1992) calls for stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. We use three global energy system models to investigate the technological and economic attainability of meeting CO2 concentration targets below current levels. Our scenario studies reveal that while energy portfolios from a broad range of energy technologies are needed to attain low concentrations, negative emission technologies-e.g., biomass energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)-significantly enhances the possibility to meet low concentration targets (at around 350 ppm CO2).
|
|
| 3. |
- Bolin, Bert, 1925-, et al.
(author)
-
Climate Risk Management: Are we ignoring the obvious?
- 2004
-
Conference paper (other academic/artistic)abstract
- The climate problem can be characterized by a curious concurrence of phenomena: universal agreement that something bad or even catastrophic might be happening, and universal inability to manage risks ex ante. This dilemma can, in a nutshell, be attributed to the fact that substantial costs of reducing human forcing of climate change would start biting now, but evidence of benefits from early action will remain cloudy for decades and worst effects might not be felt for centuries. We argue that due to ignorance about Abrupt Climate Change (ACC) and Negative Emission Technologies (NET) in the assessment of climate risk management strategies, the scientific and political discussion has so far been socially constructed.We show that the only GHG concentration policy in conformity to the UNFCCC is to bring concentrations back to its stable bounds within which it oscillated for the past 420 thousand years. A low GHG concentration target will not only minimize the risk of irreversible extreme weather and abrupt climate events, but also reduce the associated uncertainties. We will illustrate this point by simulations of ecosystem collapse and economic underdevelopment induced by events of ACC.Despite enormous efforts in building emission scenarios, the attainability of such an obvious concentration target has never been assessed. We are able to show that NET, that have been so far ignored in GHG control assessments, are an additional option that could enable reduction of atmospheric CO2 concentrations to levels lower than what could otherwise have been achieved within certain time frames. In addition, NET can substantially reduce the cost of low-emission scenarios. NET can, thus, as a preventive mitigation technology help to control risk exposure and improve mankind’s ability to manage climate risks ex ante.
|
|
| 4. |
- Fridahl, Mathias, 1980-, et al.
(author)
-
Novel carbon dioxide removals techniques must be integrated into the European Union’s climate policies
- 2023
-
In: Communications Earth & Environment. - Stockholm : Springer Nature. - 2662-4435. ; 4:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Emissions reductions are crucial to mitigating climate change. However, in the past decade, the world community’s failure to reduce emissions at a sufficient speed to avoid dangerous climate change has become obvious4. This reality acutely necessitates the development of innovative sets of policies to spur the deployment of novel CO2 removals, an urgency that is further underlined by the long lead time for many novel removal methods. Disregarding the potential of novel removals is incommensurate with the scale of the challenge of achieving EU’s commitment to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.We argue that the current policy framework neither provides Union-wide economic incentives for novel CO2 removals, nor does it encourage EU Member States to develop national policy incentives. Our proposed solutions includes incentivizing removals through a conditional integration into the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), expanding the portfolio of removal methods in the Land-Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Regulation, and to manage anticipations regarding which residual emissions that need to be counterbalanced by removals.
|
|
| 5. |
- Grönkvist, Stefan, et al.
(author)
-
Equal opportunity for biomass in greenhouse gas accounting of CO2 capture and storage : a step towards more cost-effective climate change mitigation regimes
- 2006
-
In: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. - : Springer Nature. - 1381-2386 .- 1573-1596. ; 11:5-6, s. 1083-1096
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Carbon dioxide capture and permanent storage (CCS) is one of the most frequently discussed technologies with the potential to mitigate climate change. The natural target for CCS has been the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil energy sources. However, CCS has also been suggested in combination with biomass during recent years. Given that the impact on the earth's radiative balance is the same whether CO2 emissions of a fossil or a biomass origin are captured and stored away from the atmosphere, we argue that an equal reward should be given for the CCS, independent of the origin of the CO2. The guidelines that provide assistance for the national greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting under the Kyoto Protocol have not considered CCS from biomass (biotic CCS) and it appears that it is not possible to receive emission credits for biotic CCS under the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, i.e., 2008-2012. We argue that it would be unwise to exclude this GHG mitigation alternative from the competition with other GHG mitigation options. We also propose a feasible approach as to how emission credits for biotic CCS could be included within a future accounting framework.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Johnsson, Filip, et al.
(author)
-
Mot nettonollutsläpp : hur kan koldioxidavskiljningbidra?
- 2023
-
Reports (pop. science, debate, etc.)abstract
- Avskiljning och lagring av koldioxid från fossila (CCS) och biogena (BECCS)utsläppskällor är av central betydelse för att nå Parisavtalets mål. Trots detta harincitament för koldioxidavskiljning hittills varit bristfälliga. EU:s utsläppshandelssystem(EU ETS) är huvudstyrmedlet för CCS, men tidigare låga priser påutsläppsrätter har begränsat teknikens tillämpning. BECCS saknar ännu styrmedel.Andra utmaningar när det gäller att få CCS och BECCS på plats inkluderar högauppstartskostnader, behov av samverkan kring infrastruktur och risk för bristandetrovärdighet som klimatlösning.För att öka trovärdigheten för CCS och BECCS krävs en tillräckligt starkklimatpolitik, så att de kompletterar – snarare än ersätter – utfasning av fossilabränslen. För att skapa bättre förutsättningar för CCS och BECCS kan det varaviktigt med statliga stöd i ett inledningsskede. Men på sikt behöver andrafinansieringsformer komma på plats, för att minska kostnaderna för staten och fåupp volymerna. Detta kan ske genom bland annat kvotplikt, EU ETS ochinternationell handel med negativa utsläpp, vilket kan kompletteras med frivilligklimatkompensation. För att kunna utforma väl fungerande styrmedel krävs enhelhetssyn på kolcykeln och att hänsyn tas till att biomassan är en begränsad resurs.
|
|
| 8. |
- Johnsson, Filip, et al.
(author)
-
Towards net-zero emissions – how can carbon dioxide capture and storage contribute?
- 2023
-
Reports (pop. science, debate, etc.)abstract
- The report describes the role that carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) might play in achieving climate-change mitigation goals. The report also describes and discusses potential incentives and financing schemes for CCS, with the focus on Swedish conditions. Suggestions as to how incentives can be strengthened in Sweden are presented, as well as the challenges and obstacles for implementation and how these can be handled. The report also discusses the interactions between CCS applied to biogenic emission sources (BECCS) and alternative uses of biomass – a limited resource – and the conflicts that may arise along the way. Another area that is addressed is the way in which policies could be designed to increase incentives for CCS while minimizing dependence on fossil-based energy sources.
|
|
| 9. |
- Möllersten, Kenneth, 1966-
(author)
-
Assessment of classes of CDR methods : Technology Readiness, Costs, Impacts and Practical Limitations of Biochar as Soil Additive and BECCS
- 2022
-
In: Proceedings 14th International Conference on Applied Energy.
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The paper presents a review of technology readiness, costs, impacts, and practical limitations of the Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) methods Biochar as soil additive and Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). TRLs, costs, practical limitations, and impacts of the considered CDR methods vary greatly depending on contextually appropriate technology choices and assumptions. The analysis shows that the CDR methods should be considered as classes of CDR methods with considerable variation rather than as two homogenous CDR methods.
|
|
| 10. |
- Möllersten, Kenneth, 1966-, et al.
(author)
-
Bioenergy with CO2 Removal and Disposal : An Approach to Negative CO2 Emissions in Energy Systems
- 2001
-
Conference paper (other academic/artistic)abstract
- In this paper, we present results from studies on bioenergy systems with CO2 removal and disposal (BCRD). CO2 removal and disposal that could prevent CO2 from fuel combustion entering the atmosphere is usually discussed in connection to fossil fuels. Even with very efficient CO2 removal in fossil fuel-based systems, there will always be positive net CO2 emissions. We show, on the other hand, that BCRD enables energy utilisation with a clearly negative CO2 balance. We present the first preliminary results from an economic assessment of BCRD, and review studies on the economics of CO2 removal in fossil-based systems for further guidance in estimating BCRD costs. We conclude that co-firing biomass and coal with end-of-pipe scrubbing technology promises to be one cost-effective BCRD option in the short term. In the long-term, systems with integrated biomass gasification promise lower additional CO2 removal costs, and black liquor gasification in chemical pulp mills is a particularly promising niche. Swedish and global CO2 reductions potential of this technology are estimated. Finally, some important policy-relevant questions related to the potential of BCRD are raised.
|
|
