|
市場調查報告書
碳回收•儲存(CCS)動向
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) - current situation and future potential
| 出版商 |
Datamonitor |
| 出版日期 |
2009年04月 |
商品編碼 |
86515 |
| 內容資訊 |
英文 23 pages |
| 價格 |
|
|
碳回收•儲存(CCS)動向 是由出版商Datamonitor在2009年04月所出版的。
這份英文市場調查報告書包含23 pages 價格從美金2795起跳。
此報告書除了批評為了促進對歐洲新化石燃料設備導入碳回收與儲存(CCS),歐洲委員會所告知的規定與政策結構之外,同時還彙整了EU「綠色」政策的展望等。報告書之內容摘要如下所示。
第1章 DATAMONITOR的見解
第2章 分析
- CCS相關技術並非是新的,但到目前為止與商業化石燃料發電所之間的關聯尚未被證實
- 捕捉碳是在燃燒前、燃燒後、燃燒氧化物燃料時產生
- CO2的運送與運送天然氣一樣,是利用已成熟的可利用在商業上的技術
- 儲存CO2目前有3個方法
- CCS是不會帶給氣候變動不好的影響,為了將化石燃料持續使用在電力發電上,在現時點上唯一可使用的技術
- 與可再生能源的記錄性成長無關,預測長期性化石燃料發電會佔據絕大部分,而排放等級也會持續上升
- 課題:為了促進長期性的減碳,需緊急進行的便是調整化石燃料的使用
- EU對於新化石燃料設備擬將採用CCS的規定與政策結構導入
- 燃燒設備的全新建設規定須以「碳回收對應」為基準
- 規定結構專案存在著幾項缺點,預測CCS的導入將會延遲
- 要對環境導入安全的CCS,迫切需要的是技術、經濟、規定的結構
- EU「綠色」政策展望切缺信用,並提供CCS不適當規定上的援助
- 無法否定CCS的潛在性,利害關係者已準備在技術面進行領導上的競爭,但沒有CCS的費用與規定結構對於想要廣泛導入一事將會形成障礙
- 目前的投資環境並不會促進CCS的導入
- 雖然綠色「New Deal」是必要的,但轉移至CCS大眾市場則不夠充分
- 政府的行動與規定是對CCS投資最適當的簽署
- EU Climate Package中有列入CCS的展示機建設資金
- CCS計畫正在全球各地進行中,但幾乎都是研究或小規模平行測試機的階段
- 3個大規模CCS測試機在現時點上很傑出
- 基於煤發電等級,CCS潛在性高的是波蘭、捷克共和國、丹麥、希臘
- 其他也是一樣,若是沒有強力的法律或規定的變更,則CCS便無法有確實的貢獻
- 對專家提問
- Datamonitor的諮詢
- 免責事項
Abstract
Introduction
The scientific evidence for climate change is abundant and irrefutable, as is
the role that carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology can play in reducing
emission levels. Despite calls to the contrary, CCS does not present
insurmountable technical barriers. Only issues surrounding its commercial
viability and the lack of credible policy incentives stand in the way of its
wide-scale deployment.
Scope of this research
- A critique of the regulatory and policy framework proposed by the European
Commission to drive the deployment of CCS across new fossil-fuel plants.
- Analysis of the wider EU ' green' policy landscape, how it lacks
credibility and provides inadequate regulatory support for CCS.
- Reasons why the green ' New Deal' is a necessary but insufficient condition
to drive a mass market transition to CCS.
- An objective review of the perceived limitations of CCS and the type of
adaptive regulatory framework required to secure CCS' commercial deployment.
Research and analysis highlights
Despite record growth in renewables, global emission levels will rise as
fossil fuel power generation continue to dominate. CCS is the only technology
option currently available that could allow abundant, flexible and entrenched
fossil fuels to continue to be used for electricity generation without adding
to the damaging effects of climate change.
The potential for CCS is undeniable and stakeholders are competing to take the
technological lead. However, the costs and risks of CCS - made more apparent
by the lack of regulatory framework - stand in the way of its widespread
deployment. It is unlikely that CCS will make a credible contribution without
strong legislative and regulatory change.
The potential for CCS is highest in Poland, Czech Republic, Denmark and
Greece, based on annual levels of coal-powered generation. The benefits of CCS
outweigh the liabilities, however, to implement CCS safely and economically
requires an adaptive regulatory framework encompassing safety, investment,
operation and responsibility elements.
Key reasons to purchase this research
- Gain knowledge of the various stages of the CCS value chain and the role
that the technology can play in the fight against climate change.
- Understand the reasons why the proposed regulatory framework is plagued by
several key limitations which will delay the introduction of CCS.
- Benchmark the relative appeal of CCS across the 27 EU Member States based
on their respective annual coal-powered generation levels.
Table of Contents
DATAMONITOR VIEW
ANALYSIS
- The technologies involved in CCS are not novel, but have not yet been
demonstrated together as a chain or at the scale necessary for a commercial
fossil fuel power station.
- CCS is the technical term used to refer to the process chain involved in
separating out and storing carbon dioxide
- Carbon capture can occur pre-combustion, post-combustion and in oxyfuel
combustion
- The transportation of CO2 is similar to that of natural gas and employs
mature and commercially available technologies
- There are currently three ways to store CO2, but geological formations
are considered the most promising sequestration sites
- CCS is the only technology option currently available that could allow
abundant, flexible and entrenched fossil fuels to continue to be used for
electricity generation without adding to the damaging effects of climate
change.
- Despite record growth in renewables, emission levels will continue to
rise as fossil fuel power generation dominates in the long term
- The challenge: reconciling the use of abundant and flexible fuel sources
with the urgent need to drive long-term carbon abatement
- The EU intends to provide the regulatory and policy framework to deploy
CCS across new fossil fuel plants
- New combustion plant construction will be regulated on a ‘carbon
capture ready' basis
- The proposed regulatory framework is plagued by several key limitations
which will delay the introduction of CCS
- Technical, economic and regulatory frameworks are urgently needed to
bring environmentally safe CCS to deployment
- The wider EU ‘green' policy landscape lacks credibility and
provides inadequate regulatory support for CCS
- The potential for CCS is undeniable and stakeholders are already competing
to take the technological lead. However, the costs and risks of CCS made more
apparent by the lack of regulatory framework stand in the way of its
widespread deployment.
- The current investment environment is unlikely to facilitate the uptake
of CCS
- The Green ‘New Deal' is a necessary but insufficient condition to
drive a mass market transition to CCS
- Government action and regulation will be the best signal to invest in CCS
- The EU Climate Package allocates funding for the building of CCS
demonstration plants, yet it will fail to completely tame king coal
- Although many CCS projects are underway across the world, most of them
are in the research and small-scale pilot phase
- Three large scale CCS demonstration plants currently stand out
- Based on levels of coal-powered generation, the potential for CCS is
highest in Poland, the Czech Republic, Denmark and Greece
- All other things equal, it is unlikely that CCS will make a credible
contribution without strong legislative and regulatory change
- Ask the analyst
- Datamonitor consulting
- Disclaimer
FIGURES
- Figure: The CCS lifecycle calls on a number of technologies and processes,
all at different levels of technical, commercial and political maturity
- Figure: Carbon capture can occur pre-combustion, post-combustion and in
fuel combustion
- Figure: In this illustration, a CO2 capture plant is added to a coal power
plant to remove CO2 flue emissions. In the most likely scenario, the CO2 is
then transported in a pipeline to a suitable storage site deep underground.
- Figure: CCS is widely recognized as the only technology able to largely
de-carbonize widespread fossil fuel power generation
- Figure: CCS speaks to issues such as security of supply and significant
carbon abatement in a way renewable power generation cannot
- Figure: The choice of new combustion plant CCR is unlikely to be left to
plant operators
- Figure: Perceived limitations of CCS
- Figure: The wider EU ‘green' policy landscape lacks credibility and
provides inadequate regulatory support for CCS
- Figure: The eventual economic recovery will bring about conditions that
benefit the introduction of CCS coal power generation
- Figure: The Stern Review - summary of climate change and global economic
growth
- Figure: The Green ‘New Deal' is a necessary but insufficient
condition to drive a mass market transition to CCS
- Figure: The good , the bad and the ugly - the climate change directive
fails to address 3 key areas
- Figure: Although many CCS projects are underway across the world, most of
them are in the research and small-scale pilot phase
- Figure: Three large scale CCS demonstration plants currently stand out
- Figure: Coal-powered generation output in 2006 (as a proportion of total
power generation) puts Poland far ahead of other Member States
|