How NOT to kick the Carbon Can down the road
A few months ago, I participated in the School of Climate Change (SoCC), a student-led course at Oxford which aimed to teach participants the science behind one of the most complex problems of our times, climate change.
My interest in the subject has been a slow-burning one for several years, and very much rooted in an appreciation of the complexity and multi-disciplinary nature of it. But when I started delving deeper into the world of the Paris Agreement, IPCC, NDCs and the 2° / 1.5° celsius targets, I really did regret not having a more substantial foundation in the science behind climate change. SoCC seemed really appropriate to bridge that gap to a reasonable degree.
The course was indeed, fantastic. We had weekly seminars with some of the most eminent academics at Oxford; practitioners of fields as diverse as Astrophysics, Geography, Law, Public Policy and many more, all approaching the wicked problem that is climate change from an angle of their expertise.
Equally amazing was the network that SoCC provided. With the school being open to a wider universe thanks to its online nature, attendees included people from all over the world who brought their unique perspectives and stories.
For the Capstone Project that was to be the culmination of all that we learned over eight weeks, I was put in a group with four extremely talented climate enthusiasts from around the world. Between the five of us, we had perspectives from Denmark, the UK, Nepal, South Africa and India, all countries which have experienced at least one recent adverse event that is scientifically attributable to climate change. And all countries that stand to face more significant catastrophes if global temperatures rise by more than 2° celsius above pre-industrial levels (or in other words, if the 'easier' target of the Paris Agreement is not met).
Our task was to tackle an aspect of climate change which is presently a problem and work on an innovative solution. After brainstorming several ideas spanning water stress to carbon financing, we decided to do our project on Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage (CCUS). I can confidently say that I knew nothing about CCUS six months ago, and it has been amazing to learn more about this fascinating topic through the project.
The crux of CCUS is that polluting companies, or Carbon emitters, can capture Carbon from their emissions, using modern technologies. Subsequently, this Carbon can either be transported and sequestered away under the ocean floor, or utilised to create new carbon-based products.
The undeniable circular economy framework that the latter method implied instantly attracted us — new products made of recycled Carbon can be used in a number of ways; each more sustainable than the current method in use. For instance, some companies have the technology to convert captured carbon into building materials, the lifeblood of new cities and dwellings in the developing world.
Therefore, it was surprising to realise that the majority of CCUS projects around the world rely on the Storage and Sequestration method instead. Massive public-private partnership projects are currently underway, such as the Net Zero Teesside project in the UK, with large industrial clusters to be developed where carbon emitters are grouped together and their emissions whisked away to be stored in a safe place (usually under the sea). By developing such 'SuperPlaces', a significant boost to the local economy is also expected in the coming decades.
This sharp focus that the world seemed to have on the Storage part of CCUS gave us the idea to work on a potential Utilisation model for the technology, which could result in CCUS turning out to be a relatable option to small and medium-sized companies trying to achieve their Net Zero targets. Why store away something that can be utilised to create valuable products!
We set out to work and developed a simple 'assessment framework' that can be used by any company to assess the necessity of emitting Carbon, and which would subsequently serve as guidance to enable the company to decide what to do with the emitted Carbon. The framework looks something like this:
We wanted to test this framework with a company that operates in a hard-to-abate sector, and selected British Steel as a candidate. Not only is it incredibly hard to decarbonise steel production (no proven production process exists today that doesn't use carbon-based resources), but it is also a material that is difficult to be substituted in its intended use cases. Furthermore, British Steel is involved in one of the big CCS (Storage) projects (Zero Carbon Humber) that has been envisioned in the UK, and therefore, it was interesting to explore an alternate Utilisation pathway for the company.
We applied the framework to British Steel and considered three potential paths for them with three different 'converters' (companies that capture carbon and convert it into a usable product). The result was this:
Yes indeed, even fish feed can potentially be made out of captured carbon, and that could reduce stress on aquaculture — because 25% of all fish caught in the world today is used to produce feed for various species!
Once we developed the framework, it was evident that it could succeed only if supported by a marketplace; a transparent, interlinked grouping of producers, converters and consumers. Therefore, we created a potential model for such a marketplace that would underpin a CCU economy. Each party in this marketplace would have a clearly defined role and policymakers would play a key part in creating a conducive environment for each of them to operate efficiently.
The products that get consumed in such a marketplace could be certified as 'Captured Carbon' products, giving them the legitimacy and value that sustainably developed products can command.
The biggest obstacle that we expect in a model like this is probably the fact that many carbon conversion technologies are still at a nascent stage. Therefore, efficacy as well as cost would be significant hurdles to adoption.
CCUS projects seem to be taking off with real speed as nations begin to realise the inevitability of institutionalising a mechanism to capture Carbon. Energy transition is slow and complex, and to ensure a 'just transition', it's critically important to plan mechanisms that can support many more years of fossil fuel usage. The UK is one of the leaders in this respect, and a quick glance through their Energy and Decarbonisation policy documents can reveal the extent to which their strategy is dependent on CCUS succeeding.
Storage projects present a great way to move forward in this industry, but their usability seems appropriate to a cluster of companies or to big emitters. Models that can work for small and medium emitters, especially those located far away from a CCS cluster site and unable to afford the transport of waste Carbon to such a site, could really have a part to play in a Net Zero world. Even more so when they can promote a circular economy rooted in wasted carbon that is re-used.
Here's the full poster that we developed for the project:
