CCS The nifty ugly duckling of the energy transition

1 Introduction

The earth is certainly heating up. This increase is caused by the amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) humans have released into the atmosphere. These GHGs are becoming a heat blanket for the earth, resulting in climate change. Preventing disaster requires

1.??????? Stopping the increase in GHGs emitted into the atmosphere (net zero); and

2.?????? Potentially extracting CO2 from the atmosphere.

One of the most important GHGs is carbon dioxide. The growth of the carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere has increased rapidly over the past years, as shown in Figure 1.

According to Bill Gates (1), two numbers must be known about climate change. The first is 52 billion, and the second is zero:

• Fifty-two billion is how many tons of GHGs the world typically emits into the atmosphere every year. This adds to the GHGs already in the atmosphere.
• Zero is the number of tons of GHGs that should be emitted into the atmosphere per year. This is called the net-zero approach.

This essay focuses on carbon dioxide as the main GHG contributing to climate change; 52 billion tons is the carbon dioxide equivalent of all GHGs. Thus, the emission of, for instance, methane is calculated as a carbon dioxide equivalent in this figure of 52 billion tons.

?One of the most important sources of carbon dioxide (CO2) emission is the burning of fossil fuels, whether in production or transport.

Society has three pathways to the net-zero strategy:

1. Using other forms of energy (non-carbon dioxide emitting fuels; green energy)
2. Using less energy
3. Capturing and storing the CO2 to prevent its emission into the atmosphere

Climate change has become a so-called “wicked problem”. Such problems have no precise answer, such as “yes” or “no”. The problem is multidimensional, and ultimately, a dynamic optimum of all solution areas must be established. This requires pursuing all options (“and-and-and”-strategy) rather than an “or-or-or”-strategy. Thus, it is necessary to use green energy, use less energy and capture and store as much CO2 as possible.

1.1 Carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS)

This essay focuses on carbon capture, use and storage (CCUS or CCS).

The value chain of CCUS is as follows:

CO2 is captured from an energy or production installation using fossil fuels. This CO2 is then used or stored. The storage aims to store the CO2 permanently.

Some cases of CO2 use exist. One is feeding the CO2 into greenhouses to grow tomatoes, and some research concerns using CO2 as an energy source. Using CO2 in greenhouses has one disadvantage. The tomatoes that might be produced with the captured CO2 are eaten. The digestion of food releases CO2 and other GHGs. Thus, using CO2 in greenhouses is temporary CO2 storage.

However, some companies are using the captured CO2 in more permanent solutions, such as in building materials. An example of such a company is Paebbl,(2) which uses a mineralization process to store the captured CO2 in building material. Figure 3 shows how that process works:

The use of CCUS remains limited, especially in capacity. Some initiatives exist, but it is still not used on a large scale. In the future, it may be possible to build with materials that store CO2 and engines may be fuelled by CO2. However, considering the still limited use of CO2 as a means of pursuing the net-zero strategy, I focus on the capture and storage of CO2 in this essay.

1.2 Hydrogen and CCS

A wide colour spectrum is defined for hydrogen production. In the defined pathways for the net-zero strategy, two colours of hydrogen are important: green and blue.

The difference between these two is that green energy (non-fossil fuels) is used for green hydrogen production, and fossil fuel, in combination with CCS, is used for blue hydrogen production.

1.3 Why is CCS an “ugly duckling”?

For the three pathways to net zero, the use of green (non-fossil) fuels is one path that must be taken. Ultimately, fossil fuels should no longer be used. CCS is a pathway to net zero in which the CO2 produced from burning CO2 is captured and stored. This contradicts the green energy pathway. One might argue that CCS is a means of prolonging the use of fossil fuels, while another might argue that CCS is required to ensure a faster route to net zero.

The association of CCS with the use of fossil fuels does not add to the image of CCS. Here, the dynamic optimum solution of a “wicked problem” appears. Having established a situation where reliance on fossil fuels for energy is reduced, an optimum fit with that situation must be established. Meanwhile, the optimum solution involves a point where it is necessary to depend on CCS to meet the climate objectives. Even then, one might argue that direct air capture of CO2 will continue to capture CO2 from the atmosphere even without the association with fossil fuels. This may reveal the true “nifty” part of CCS.

According to Bloomberg News (3), the European Union will publish a draft carbon management strategy on 6th February in which they announce that capturing and storing CO2 ?is required for climate neutrality. By 2050, around 450 million tons of CO2 per year must be captured. This is more than nine times the capacity available in 2022. According to the commission,

“Reaching economy-wide climate neutrality by 2050 will require carbon removals to counter-balance residual emissions from hard-to-abate sectors within the EU at the latest by 2050 and to achieve negative emissions thereafter.”

The European Union takes a stand here. It is no longer an option to exclude solutions from the equation. Thus, the European Union is treating the climate problem as a wicked problem, a problem requiring a systematic approach.

2 Aims of this essay

Due to its association with fossil fuels, CCS is an unpopular topic. In my opinion, this is not entirely fair. Unless the demand for energy can be completely fulfilled with green energy (electrons and molecules), CCS is required to approach the net-zero objective.

This essay has the following aims:

1. To discuss the various roles of CCS in the energy transition
2. To discuss the historic and future growth perspectives on CCS
3. To discuss the role of CCS in the provision of energy and the associated perspective on CCS regarding that role
4. To discuss the role and importance of CCS in the Netherlands
5. To discuss the role and importance of CCS in Norway
6. To discuss the role and importance of CCS in Iceland

3 Current and future perspectives on CCS

3.1 Introduction

While the energy transition is ongoing, it must be remembered that the number of people living on this planet is still increasing and that, overall, they require more energy. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that energy demand could increase by as much as 45% by 2030. Decarbonizing the non-renewable portion of that energy generation is essential while navigating the green transition. CCS is also the only technology that can decarbonize critical industrial sectors, such as cement and metal production and waste incineration.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) found that to meet the challenging targets of the Paris Agreement, global CO2 emissions must be reduced by 50%–85% by 2050. IEA findings state that to meet these targets, 14% of the total emissions reduction by 2060 must originate from CCS (4).

IEA makes this requirement for CCS more explicit:

“CCUS can be retrofitted to existing power and industrial plants, allowing for their continued operation. It can tackle emissions in hard-to-abate sectors, particularly heavy industries like cement, steel or chemicals. CCUS is an enabler of least-cost low-carbon hydrogen production, which can support the decarbonization of other parts of the energy system, such as industry, trucks and ships. Finally, CCUS can remove CO2 from the air to balance emissions that are unavoidable or technically difficult to abate.” (5)

The currently held COP28 (6) has emphasized CCS for the first time as an essential pillar for reducing CO2 emissions. This is an important step because it means that CCS is now an important part of the energy transition.

3.2 Different types of carbon capture

3.2.1 Trees

“We all know that cutting down large portions of forest is contributing to the climate change, because trees can take up CO2. A tree can absorb around 4 tons of carbon dioxide in the course of 40 years” (1). The disadvantage of this is that the same tree will release all its stored CO2 when it is burned.

Thus, many trees are required to capture a single gigaton (250 million), and these must be maintained forever. Thus, a tree can be considered a temporary storage for CO2, and only when the CO2 is captured on burning the tree and stored permanently does it contribute to the net-zero strategy.

However, trees also provide shade; thus, it remains important to plant them. Ultimately, the net-zero strategy aims to decrease the speed at which the temperature on earth is rising.

?3.2.2 Capturing CO2 from chimneys from energy or industrial plants

?CCS attached to high-energy-consuming production facilities using fossil fuels is a frequently used approach for capturing CO2. This CO2 is then transported (liquid or gas) to permanent storage facilities, often depleted gas fields.

The same process applies to blue hydrogen production. At the end of the process, the CO2 is captured and transported for permanent storage. Blue hydrogen is and will remain cheaper at present than green hydrogen and is the only form of hydrogen that directly reduces CO2 emissions. Sufficient natural gas is available to last for years, and residual gases from refining or biogas, for example, can be similarly split into hydrogen and CO2.

However, it is expected that towards 2050, the supply of green electricity will increase, and electrolyzers will become cheaper through innovation and mass production. (7)]

3.2.3 Direct air capture (DAC)

Direct air capture is an interesting technology for removing CO2 from the air. Therefore, it is not connected to the chimney of an industrial or energy plant. Essentially, it draws in air and removes CO2 from it. The CO2 is then transported to a permanent CO2 storage location. This is reversing CO2 emission. Therefore, it is a crucial element in the net-zero strategy because it removes from the atmosphere CO2 emitted by industries which struggle to decarbonize.

In the IEA Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario (8), DAC technologies capture more than 85 Mt of CO2 in 2030 and around 980 Mt CO2 in 2050, requiring a large and accelerated scale-up from almost 0.01 Mt CO2 today. Currently, 18 DAC facilities are operating in Canada, Europe and the United States. The largest plant – commissioned in Iceland in September 2021 – is capturing 4,000 t CO2/year for storage (via mineralization). The first large-scale DAC plant for up to 1 Mt CO2/year is in advanced development and is expected to be operating in the United States by the mid-2020s.

Direct air capture is an amazing technology because it reverses existing damage. Thus, with a proper scale-up, it might be possible to achieve the net-zero objectives; however, it may also enable a further step. Klaus Lackner is the intellectual godfather of this technology. He runs the Center for Negative Carbon Emissions at the Arizona State University.

Lackner calculated that several thousand carbon-removal plants worldwide would suffice to reduce the global CO2 back to the levels that would prevent climate change from causing catastrophic damage. The total space required for these plants would be as large as Arizona. This requires a steep increase in the number of DAC facilities; however, this remains within reach. (9)

Direct air capture requires considerable energy; thus, a DAC facility is normally located near an energy plant. The other partner a DAC facility requires is a CO2 storage location. Figure 4 shows an overview of DAC facilities and potential CO2 storage locations. This clarifies why the North Sea is such an interesting location.

Currently, few DAC facilities exist. Figure 5 shows some of the leading companies in DAC.

3.3 Future perspective on CCS

In Europe alone, the momentum for CCS (10) is continuing to build; 119 commercial-scale CCS facilities are in various stages of development. This represents a 61% increase in the number of projects in 2023 since the 2022 Global CCS Status report25. These CCS facilities are shown in Figure 6.

Bellona and E3G (11) together created a CCS ladder for Europe. This ladder is intended to assist decision-makers regarding CCS. Evidently, not every industry is suitable for CCS. Based on four criteria (competition from alternative technologies, mitigation potential, feasibility, and CO2 source), they argue that CCS is most valuable for industrial processes aligning with all the following conditions:

1. Limited alternatives exist for deep decarbonization/defossilization;
2. CCS has a significant emissions reduction potential;
3. CCS has (relatively) limited feasibility challenges to scale and deliver emission reductions based on costs, location and/or size of individual CO2 sources; and
4. CCS has limited negative side effects, such as fossil fuel lock-in.

Bellona and E3G created ladders for 2030 and 2050 (see figure 7). The important points from this are as follows:

1. The climate value of CCS is lowest in the power sector and is expected to decrease considerably over time.
2. The climate value of CCS is greatest for industrial applications with significant process emissions, particularly in non-metallic mineral sectors such as cement and lime.
3. It is generally expected that the climate value of CCS for most applications will decrease over time while becoming increasingly important for helping achieve negative emissions through direct air capture.

4 Various roles and importance of CCS

4.1 Introduction

?Different countries have different perspectives on the energy transition and thus different perspectives on the role and importance of CCS. As mentioned above, the generic consensus is growing that CCS plays a crucial role in the energy transition, specifically in the net-zero strategy.

This chapter explores how different countries address and apply CCS in their overall energy transition strategy. Norway, the Netherlands and Iceland are considered. Norway is one of the largest natural gas-owning and producing countries worldwide. The Netherlands has changed from a natural gas exporting country to a natural gas importing country. Iceland has much geothermal energy.

The question here is as follows: To what extent are these countries applying CCS in their energy transition strategy, where do they apply this, what are interesting CCS projects and what is their generic approach towards CCS?

4.2 Norway

?Norway is well-known for owning enormous amounts of natural gas and producing this gas for the rest of Europe. Norway is a highly electrified country but is aware that large portions of the world depend on oil and gas for heating and production. The welfare of Norway is strongly dependent on these natural resources. (12)

Norway has a long history of over 20 years of capturing and storing CO2. In September 2020, the Norwegian Government launched Longship (“Langskip”) (13) for carbon capture and storage in Norway. The intention was to start implementing carbon capture at Heidelberg Materials’ cement factory in Brevik. It was also intended to establish carbon capture at Hafslund Oslo Celsio’s waste incineration facility in Oslo, but this project was stopped due to a lack of funds. (14)

The Heidelberg Materials Brevik cement plant began operating in 2021. On 28th November, Heidelberg Materials announced the production of evoZero, the world’s first carbon capture net-zero cement. (15)

According to Heidelberg, installing a carbon capture installation in a working facility is a meticulous operation because the CCS plant must be integrated into the cement plant with no disruption to the ongoing cement production. (16)

Within Longship, a programme (17) was started to develop an open-access infrastructure with the intention and capacity to store significant volumes of CO2 from across Europe. Norway is also expressing an ambition to be at the forefront of developing a technology decisive in achieving the climate objectives.

According to the Norwegian Government’s hydrogen strategy, (18)

• “If hydrogen is to be a low or zero emission energy carrier, it must be produced with zero or low emissions. This can be achieved either through electrolysis of water using renewable electricity, or from steam reforming processes involving natural gas or other fossil fuels combined with CCS. In this strategy, low and zero emission hydrogen is described as clean hydrogen or simply hydrogen. ”
• Both in the EU and in several of its member countries, the regulation of various types of clean hydrogen is discussed. One discussion topic concerns whether any regulatory consequences will occur if hydrogen is produced by electrolysis based on renewable energy production (often called “green hydrogen”) or through natural gas reforming combined with carbon capture and storage (often called “blue hydrogen”). Around 90% of the hydrogen produced in Europe is currently based on natural gas reforming without CCS. In large-scale production, it is estimated that natural gas reforming combined with CCS will have lower costs than hydrogen produced from water electrolysis. Therefore, natural gas could become an important source of clean hydrogen.

Equinor, Shell and TotalEnergies are investing in the Northern Lights project – Norway’s first licence for CO? storage on the Norwegian continental shelf and a major part of the initiative that the Norwegian government calls Longship.

The Northern Lights CCS project (19) off the coast of Norway, which will begin operation by 2024, has sufficient storage for the equivalent of 750,000 car emissions every year in the first phase. Equinor’s Smeaheia storage site, located to the south of Northern Lights, has the potential to increase the storage capacity many times over.

4.3 The Netherlands

In the Dutch Climate Agreement, the government takes a wicked-problem, broad approach towards reducing CO2 emission. This has resulted in a wide spectrum of initiatives, such as the sharp increase in renewable energy, the use of residual heat and geothermal energy, increased insulation for buildings, electric vehicles, process industry efficiency and recycling. However, an important choice was also made in this Climate Agreement to develop the capture, transport and storage of CO2.

Currently, with 50 million tons of emitted CO2, the Dutch industry is responsible for roughly a third of the total CO2 emission in the Netherlands. To meet the climate goals of 2030, this industry must reduce its CO2 emission by 24 million tons per year. Based on this, the Dutch government believes half of this can be established through CCS.

Approximately 14% of all CO2 emissions in the Netherlands occurs in the Rotterdam port area, where much energy is concentrated. This area has become the target for the contribution to the Dutch Climate Agreement. With this in mind, it became clear that for a selection of industries, CCS was the fastest way to substantially reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere at relatively low costs. CCS is an important technique for the chemical sector, hydrogen producers and refineries to significantly reduce their production process impact in the short term while working on fundamental and structural innovations to production processes. The long-term objective continues to be sustainability. (20)

In this Dutch approach, CCS is aimed at the industry in a specific geographic location to rapidly reduce CO2 emissions.

Porthos is the name of the first major CCS project. Porthos stands for Port of Rotterdam CO2 Transport Hub and Offshore Storage, and it is a partnership between the Port of Rotterdam Authority, Gasunie and EBN. After a long legal battle, the project was finally given the green light in the third quarter of 2023. In this legal battle, the argument that CCS is merely an excuse to extend the use of fossil fuels is often heard.

The road towards this green light was long. Some private companies took the initiative to start CCS projects in the Netherlands a couple of years ago. Many people remember the discussion on storing CO2 under Barendrecht. A major reason why these private projects failed was the capital investments required for the necessary infrastructure (installation and transportation). Therefore the state-owned company Gasunie was asked to participate in the Dutch CCS initiatives by the Dutch government.

Porthos enables the infrastructure to be built to transport captured CO2 from the industrial area in the Port of Rotterdam to gas fields in the North Sea. The CO2 is then stored more than 3 km under the seabed. Porthos will capture and store 2.5 megatons per year. Porthos is expected to be operational in 2026.

The Aramis project (21) is a collaboration between TotalEnergies, Shell, Energie Beheer Nederland (EBN) and Gasunie. Aramis is an even larger CCS project in the Netherlands than Porthos. Aramis will build further on the infrastructure of Porthos but will also enable the transport of CO2 by ships to Rotterdam, where the Aramis pipeline begins. In the long term, this will amount to 22 megatons annually. (22)

Annemarie Manger, the director of the Aramis project, states that although resistance to CCS might occur from an environmental viewpoint, the green hydrogen economy is not growing fast enough. Thus, CCS enables companies to buy time to develop other economic solutions. According to Manger, “every tonne that we can keep out of the atmosphere is good for the climate.” (23)

In December 2023, the Dutch government presented the National Plan Energy System (Nationaal Plan Energie Systeem) (24). In this plan, the Dutch Government foresees an important role for blue hydrogen in the development of a market for green hydrogen.

In this National Plan Energy System (25), a role for CCS is foreseen for the short and long term. The first role of CCS is in the fast decarbonization of Dutch industry. Due to net congestion in the energy grid, the speed at which renewable energy projects can be connected is limited. Therefore, CCS is crucial for meeting the CO2 emission objectives in time.

In the long term, the Dutch Government aims for negative emissions with CCS to meet the climate objectives. These negative CO2 emissions are necessary to compensate for the emission of other GHGs (such as methane from livestock). In the introduction to this essay, I introduced the term carbon dioxide equivalent. The other GHGs have a CO2 equivalency, and the negative emissions should remove CO2 from the atmosphere so that the net sum of added GHGs to the atmosphere is zero.

The Dutch Government does not foresee a long-term future for CCS in the decarbonization of industry as such. The aim is to provide a transition path for industry to move towards the use of renewable energies. In the long term, the Dutch Government wants to minimize fossil CCS and ensure that the available CO2 storage can be optimized for societal benefit.

In my opinion, the Dutch government is offering an open invitation here to start projects aimed at these so-called negative emissions. Considering that the Netherlands is an agricultural country, it is reasonable that the Dutch Government wants to balance the emissions of other GHGs produced by this sector.

?4.4 Iceland

Iceland made me fall in love with CCS. Normally, my family visits an energy facility while on vacation. In Iceland, we visited the Geothermal Power Plant in Hellisheidi. The guided tour showed us what a small Icelandic company was doing with CCS. The company is called Carbfix.

The Icelandic government, the Carbfix company and five PII companies declared the following in 2019:

“The above parties hereby declare their intent to investigate fully whether the Carbfix method developed by Reykjavik Energy in collaboration with the University of Iceland and foreign partners could become a realistic option technologically and financially to reduce the emission of CO2 from heavy industry in Iceland.” (26)

Carbfix imitates and accelerates these natural processes, where carbon dioxide is dissolved in water and interacts with reactive rock formations, such as basalts, to form stable minerals, providing a permanent and safe carbon sink. The technology provides a complete carbon capture and injection solution, where CO2 dissolved in water – a type of sparkling water – is injected into the subsurface, where it reacts with favourable rock formations to form solid carbonate minerals via natural processes over approximately 2 years. For the Carbfix technology to work, three requirements must be met: favourable rocks, water, and a source of carbon dioxide.

Carbonated water is acidic. The more carbon contained in water, the more acidic it becomes. Carbfix’s carbonated water reacts with rocks underground and releases available cations such as calcium, magnesium and iron into the water stream. Over time, these elements combine with the dissolved CO2 and form carbonates, filling the space (pores) within the rocks. The carbonates are stable for thousands of years and can thus be considered permanently stored. The timescale of this process initially surprised scientists. In the Carbfix pilot project, it was determined that at least 95% of the injected CO2 mineralizes within 2 years, much faster than previously thought. (27)

For me, the Carbfix case is inspiring. On writing this essay (beginning of 2024), the Carbfix website states that almost 100,000 metric tonnes of CO2 has been injected into the bedrock of Iceland (see www.carbfix.com to show the actual number).

Beside the geothermal powerplant and the Carbfix facility is the Orca CCS facility. The Orca facility captures CO2 directly from the air. This Orca carbon capture plant was developed and is operated by Climeworks from Switzerland. The air-captured CO2 is then mixed with water and pumped deep underground for natural mineralization and permanent storage in the form of rocks. Orca started capturing CO2 from the air in September 2021. Orca is capable of capturing 4,000 tons of CO2 per year. (28)

According to Edda Sif Pind Aradóttir, the CEO of Carbfix on CCS,

“It’s very clear to me that this is a solution to the problem, even if it’s not the solution. Basically, we are going to have to do this on top of everything else the world must do to decarbonize all the energy we use.” (29)

Nearly all CO2 now sequestered originates from nature and conventional nature-based solutions, such as planting trees and changing farming practices to improve the soil’s carbon retention. Currently, advanced technology such as the “direct air capture” plant that traps the carbon dioxide Carbfix shoots underground in Iceland counts for only 0.1% of CO2 removal.

Thus, besides a geothermal powerplant providing renewable energy and a permanent storage location for CO2 in a direct air capture facility, Iceland is now planning the Coda terminal. This terminal is planned for cross-border CO2 storage and transportation. Coda is scheduled to open in 2026 and will receive tankerloads of shipped CO2 from industrial sites in Northern Europe.

However, some of this CO2 will have a local origin. The first phase of Coda is built on the land of Rio Tinto, an international company with an aluminium facility in Iceland. (30)

5 Conclusions

The title of this essay is “CCS, the nifty ugly duckling of the energy transition”. This implies a beautiful and an ugly aspect to this topic.

Based on the challenges society faces regarding the climate, my primary conclusion is that every effort must be made to reach the net-zero objectives. Changes must be made towards renewable energies, less energy must be used and net-zero GHG emission must be reached. This is the result of the wicked problem society has created.

The solution for a wicked problem is a dynamic one, a solution which is an optimum solution at a certain stage of technology, society, economics and so on. This is occurring in the approaches of Norway, the Netherlands and Iceland. The shift from decarbonizing industry towards negative emissions to compensate for other GHGs is establishing a new optimum in the landscape of the climate challenge regarding CCS.

The examples from Norway, the Netherlands and Iceland indicate that CCS has much involvement from traditional oil and gas companies but often in combination with knowledge centres, carbon-intensive industry and government. This requires new business models, which provide an incentive for future development of the carbon CCS value chains.

It should be considered that the infrastructure used by oil and gas companies can be reused to a certain extent within the realm of CCS. Companies with ownership of this infrastructure and the associated knowledge have a primary role in the CCS industry. However, only in cooperation with carbon-intensive industries and innovative companies will a series of interesting commercial value chains arise.

Nevertheless, this also means that countries with no history in oil and gas or no carbon-intensive industries are lagging in these new business models. Because climate change is a challenge for everyone, including these countries must be considered.

All three countries started with a single initiative to decarbonize a certain industry. A value chain was created that captured, transported and stored CO2. In most cases, this is a very simple value chain. Multiple initiatives now open the value chain to others (Aramis, Coda and Northern Lights). Thus, CO2 from other countries (or, better, companies outside the original value chain) can participate. This requires establishing a market in which commercial contracts for storing CO2 can be negotiated. With the necessary change towards renewable energies, a situation can be created in which negative emissions balance GHG emissions. Thus, an entire ecosystem arises.

Another aspect is the hydrogen colour spectrum. In my opinion, the non-system thinkers believe it is possible to move directly into a completely green hydrogen situation. The problem with energy is that the guarantee of supply and quality of the delivered energy is almost 100%. It is not the same as baking bread, where one can discard a portion of the production that is not meeting specifications or deliver an hour later.

I believe the Norwegian government’s position regarding hydrogen is interesting. They appear to steer the discussion away from the colour spectrum. They do not appear to distinguish between green and blue hydrogen. For them, both represent clean hydrogen because they have the means to store the by-product CO2 in gas fields. They foresee that it remains less expensive in the long term to produce hydrogen together with a CCS solution than producing hydrogen based on the use of renewable energy and electrolyzers.

This opens a new branch to the CCS value chain: the capture and storage of CO2 from hydrogen production. The latest energy plan of the Dutch government appears to adopt a similar approach. Blue hydrogen production should clear the path for sound (technological and economic) solutions for green hydrogen production and eventually use the CCS infrastructure for negative emissions of GHGs to reach the net-zero objective.

CCS opens many value chains that positively contribute to the net-zero objectives, whether from a decarbonization or a hydrogen production viewpoint. The association with the statement that CCS is a mere excuse to prolong the use of fossil fuels is, in my opinion, neither fair nor correct. Depending on new equilibriums in the energy transition, the role of CCS can and will change. That is niftiness.

To my amazement, while I was in Hellisheidi, I saw a piece of rock in which solid CO2 was captured, which opened my eyes to the beauty of CCS, a beauty enriched by the numerous opportunities CCS provides regarding the climate challenge towards net-zero emissions of GHGs.

?

Sources

(1) Gates, B. How to avoid a climate disaster. New York: Vintage Books

(2) Paebbl: We re-store captured carbon into industrial raw materials. Retrieved from: https://paebbl.com/

(3) EU Plans Big Scale Up of Carbon Removals to Reach Climate Neutrality. Retrieved from: EU https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-12/eu-plans-big-scale-up-of-carbon-removals-to-reach-climate-neutrality?utm_source=website&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=linkedin&leadSource=uverify%20wall Plans Big Scale Up of Carbon Removals to Reach Climate Neutrality - Bloomberg

(4) The Safety of CO? Storage. Retrieved from: https://blog.sintef.com/sintefenergy/ccs/the-safety-of-co2-storage/

(5) Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage. Retrieved from: https://www.iea.org/energy-system/carbon-capture-utilisation-and-storage

(6) COP28 Signalled Progress for CCS. Retrieved from: https://ccsknowledge.com/blog/cop28-signalled-progress-for-ccs

(7) From blue hydrogen to green hydrogen. Retrieved from: https://www.tno.nl/en/technology-science/technologies/blue-hydrogen/

(8) Capturing CO2 from the air can support net zero goals. Retrieved from: https://www.iea.org/reports/direct-air-capture-2022/executive-summary

(9) Another weapon to fight climate change? Put carbon back where we found it. Retrieved from: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/remove-carbon-emissions

(10) CCS IN EUROPE REGIONAL OVERVIEW. Retrieved from: https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/CCS-in-Europe-Report_updated-15-12-23.pdf

(11) Carbon Capture and Storage Ladder. Retrieved from: https://www.e3g.org/wp-content/uploads/CCSL_briefing.pdf

(12) CCS: What is it and why do we need it. Retrieved from: https://blog.sintef.com/sintefenergy/ccs/ccs-what-is-it-and-why-do-we-need-it/

(13) The Government launches ‘Longship’ for carbon capture and storage in Norway. Retrieved from: https://www.regjeringen.no/en/historical-archive/solbergs-government/Ministries/smk/Press-releases/2020/the-government-launches-longship-for-carbon-capture-and-storage-in-norway/id2765288/

(14) The CCS chain. Retrieved from: https://ccsnorway.com/full-scale-capture-transport-and-storage/

(15) The future of construction: Heidelberg Materials launches evoZero?, the world’s first carbon captured net-zero cement. Retrieved from: https://www.heidelbergmaterials.com/en/pr-2023-11-28

(16) Brevik CCS – World's first CO?-capture facility in the cement industry. Retrieved from: https://www.brevikccs.com/en

(17) The Longship CCS Project. Retrieved from: https://ccsnorway.com/the-project/

(18) The Norwegian Government’s hydrogen strategy. Retrieved from: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/40026db2148e41eda8e3792d259efb6b/y-0127e.pdf

(19) [iv] The Northern Lights project. Retrieved from: https://www.equinor.com/energy/northern-lights

(20) [i] CO2 reduction through storage under the North Sea. Retrieved from: https://www.porthosco2.nl/en/

(21) A LARGE-SCALE CO? TRANSPORT AND STORAGE SERVICE. Retrieved from: https://www.aramis-ccs.com/

(22) Ten things to know about carbon capture and storage (CCS). Retrieved from: https://www.tno.nl/en/newsroom/insights/2023/10/ten-things-carbon-capture-storage/

(23) ‘Elke ton CO? die we uit de atmosfeer houden is goed voor het klimaat’. Retrieved from: https://fd.nl/bedrijfsleven/1502649/elke-ton-co-die-we-uit-de-atmosfeer-houden-is-goed-voor-het-klimaat?utm_medium=social&utm_source=app&utm_campaign=earned&utm_content=20240112&utm_term=app-ios&gift=6E69U

(24) Nationaal Plan Energiesysteem definitief vastgesteld. Retrieved from: https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/actueel/nieuws/2023/12/01/nationaal-plan-energiesysteem-definitief-vastgesteld

(25) Nationaal Plan Energiesysteem. Retrieved from: https://open.overheid.nl/documenten/2f5cbb52-0631-4aad-b3dd-5088fab859c5/file

(26) Status on CCS in Denmark. Retrieved from: https://www.ivl.se/download/18.19b39e311838a550c3ca632/1665754680949/CCS%20webinar%20all%20presentations_merged_28_sep.pdf

(27) How it works. Retrieved from: https://www.carbfix.com/how-it-works

(28) Hellisheidi Geothermal Power Plant, Hengill, Iceland. Retrieved from: https://www.power-technology.com/projects/hellisheidi-geothermal-power-plant/

(29) Another weapon to fight climate change? Put carbon back where we found it. Retrieved from: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/remove-carbon-emissions

(30) How Iceland's Carbfix is harnessing the power of turning CO2 into stone. Retrieved from: https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/how-icelands-carbfix-is-harnessing-power-turning-co2-into-stone-2023-10-30/

Figures

• Cover figure: Iceland turning carbon emissions into solid rock (rte.ie)
• Figure 1 https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide
• Figure 2 https://www.iea.org/energy-system/carbon-capture-utilisation-and-storage
• Figure 3 https://paebbl.com/ 2
• Figure 4 https://www.iea.org/reports/direct-air-capture-2022/executive-summary
• Figure 5 https://www.wri.org/insights/direct-air-capture-resource-considerations-and-costs-carbon-removal
• Figure 6 CCS-in-Europe-Report_updated-15-12-23.pdf (globalccsinstitute.com)
• Figure 7 https://www.e3g.org/wp-content/uploads/CCSL_briefing.pdf
• Figure 8 https://www.equinor.com/energy/northern-lights