Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP The information in this document is the property of Energy Technologies Institute LLP and may not be copied or communicated to a third party, or used for any purpose other than that for which it is supplied without the express written consent of Energy Technologies Institute LLP.This information is given in good faith based upon the latest information available to Energy Technologies Institute LLP, no warranty or representation is given concerning such information, which must not be taken as establishing any contractual or other commitment binding upon Energy Technologies Institute LLP or any of its subsidiary or associated companies.
Unlocking CCS’ value for UK decarbonisation
George Day, Head of Economic Strategy, ETIPlatts European Carbon Capture and Storage conference, BrusselsFebruary 2014
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
How things might be in 2040…
CCS key part of power sector
Industrial applications
Gasification – production of hydrogen
With biomass – to generate negative emissions
UK has invested around £60 bn in CCS facilities and infrastructure
Storing over 100 m tonnes of CO2
Integrated transport and storage network ~ 6 onshore hubs
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Overview
The value of CCS for UK decarbonisation
The characteristics of CCS
How to unlock CCS’ value?
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
ETI’s leading capability to model the UK national energy system
Power
Buildings
Transport
Industry
Infrastructure
Demand scenarios
Energy resources
Technologyprofiles
Global parameters
Energy system
blueprints
A national energy system design tool
• Least cost optimisation• Spatial and temporal
representation• Peer reviewed• Increasingly credible and
influential
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Deploying CCS cuts cost of meeting UK carbon targets by £billions
-20.0
-10.0
-
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
2030 2040 2050
Transport
Fuel / resources
Power &conversionInfrastructure
Industry
Buildings & heat
Net saving~ £13bn
Net saving~ £20bn
Net saving~ £32bn
↑Cost Savings£bn(ESME v3.1)
↑
Fuel costs are higher, but there is less need for expensive low carbon vehicles, building retrofits, (intermittent) generation capacity & transmission infrastructure resulting in net savings which grow over time.
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Does CCS still make sense if costs are higher than expected?
-
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
2030 2040 2050
Energy system cost savings £bn/yr
Core scenario
CCS costs +50%
CCS costs +100%
The value CCS delivers to the energy system is remarkably robust to more pessimistic views about future CCS costs
(ESME v3.1; 2013)
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Why is CCS so valuable?
ETI energy system modelling points to ‘energy system-wide’ value of CCS extending beyond low carbon electricity generation
‘Negative emissions’
Enables continued use of fossil fuels where very expensive to replace
Low carbon electricity from
fossil fuels
CCS with biomass
Gasification applications
Flexible low carbon fuels (hydrogen, syngas)
Low carbon energy diversity, portfolio of flexible low carbon energy vectors, option value & robustness in meeting carbon targets
CCS on industrial emissions
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
£ / MWh is the wrong metric!Simple comparisons misleading guide for policy
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Offshore wind / solar Early power sector CCS
~ £ / MWh
Plus: • Reliable capacity• Unlocking industrial
CCS• Valuable future
options for bio CCS (-ve emissions) & low carbon gas fuels
Intermittent power generation capacity
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Overview
The value of CCS for UK decarbonisation
The characteristics of CCS
How to unlock CCS’ value?
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Characteristics of CCS make it challenging!
• £ billionsLarge size of investments
• Dependent on policy to deliver rewardsPolicy dependence
• Long term uncapped liabilitiesLiabilities
• Mostly mature, but untried integrationTechnology maturity
• Requires new integrated value chainComplexity of value chain
• Critical mass to realise economies in storage and transportEconomies of scale
• Higher marginal costs than competitors (renewables)Cost structure
• Future applications in gasification & bio creditsOption value
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Value chain components – differing characteristics
Capture
Competing capture technologies and multiple applications served by a global supply chain
Transport
Geographically specific, integrated transport networks Shared access to infrastructureMay require co-ordination, regulation or governance
Storage
Geographically specific, high risk, geological externalities. Interaction with hydro-carbons (EOR & decommissioning) Eventual state liabilityMay require strategic shaping
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
UK CO2 storage potential
Ample storage for UK needs
A few strategic stores & simple integrated network can meet needs
Up front costs, then economies of scale
Path-dependency – high premium from taking a strategic approach
Need co-operation or regulation
Southern and eastern UK dominate emissions
Shortage of appraised options for storage.
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Need storage capacity to be available for projects to be bankable
Bankable capacity (P99) required at FID
Appraisal requirementto deliver bankable capacity(some sites may fail)
Cumulative CO2 storage need
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Storage and transport – multiple market failures and challenges for first movers …
Access to capital
Constraints on balance sheets and access to
funds
High risk & low
rewards?
Higher risks for first movers
first movers may not
capture all benefits
risk of future
regulatory intervention (e.g. price or access regulation)
Imperfect market information
Lack of clear price signal for storage services
Lack of legal clarity
over liabilities, third party
access etc.
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Overview
The value of CCS for UK decarbonisation
The characteristics of CCS
How to unlock CCS’ value?
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
CCS investment needs
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 2048
£m/yr
Year
Outline investment profile for CCS development in the UK(total approx £65 bn to 2050)
Storage
Transport
Capture
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
How a CCS sector could mature Potential evolution of a UK CCS sector
Pre-commercial• Full chain• Power sector
Early roll out• Follow on projects• Industrial emitters• Emerging
infrastructure networks & clusters
Mature• Integrated networks• Clusters• Storage hubs• Cross border
movement
The profile of projects likely to evolve as a CCS sector develops to maturity – needs a strategic approach to policy and business models/structures likely to evolve.
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Support for CCS demonstration & deployment in UK
• For R&D and for full chain demonstration (capex grant)Public expenditure support
• But only for power sector (Feed in tariff contracts, carbon price floor)
• No driver for industrial or biomass applications• EOR?
Rewards & incentives
• Some aspects clarified, but so far limited appetite for active government role or building future framework
Policy & regulatory framework
• Key aspects of risk allocation remain unclear• Lack of clear pipeline of projects
Overall policy commitment
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
CCS strategy options
• rely on feed in tariffs contracts• projects compete on simple £/MWh basis• EOR as possible driver?
No strategy?
• ‘retro-fit’ strategic considerations onto existing policy
• E.g. take strategic factors into account in allocating feed in tariff contracts?
‘Implicit’ strategy
• more active government leadership role in shaping development of sector
• enable coherent development of infrastructure
‘Explicit’ strategy
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
Creating an enabling market, policy and regulatory framework
Allocate Feed in Tariff contracts to drive early ‘post-competition’ roll-out• target strategic value
to CCS sector not simply lowest £/MWh
• Create confidence in project pipeline
Attract investment into storage appraisal & derisking• Make the storage
opportunity more attractive
• Address market failures (public or pooled investment)
Strategic shaping of sector• Active leadership • Rewardindustrial
applications• Infrastructure• Governance, risk
sharing, insurance etc.
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
For more ETI insights…
http://www.eti.co.uk/technology_programmes/carbon_capture_and_storage
©2013 Energy Technologies Institute LLP - Subject to notes on page 1
For more information about the ETI visit www.eti.co.uk
For the latest ETI news and announcements email [email protected]
The ETI can also be followed on Twitter at twitter.com/the_ETI
Energy Technologies InstituteHolywell BuildingHolywell ParkLoughboroughLE11 3UZ
For all general enquiries telephone the ETI on 01509 202020.