Implementation of the EU CCS Directive in Europe: results and development in 2013

Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament on the geological storage of carbon dioxide, entered into force on June 25th 2009. By the end 2013 the CCS Directive has been fully transposed into national law to the satisfaction of the EC in 20 out of 28 EU Member States, while six EU countries (Austria, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Sweden and Slovenia) had to complete transposing measures. In July 2014 the European Commission closed infringement procedures against Cyprus, Hungary and Ireland, which have notified the EC that they have taken measures to incorporate the CCS Directive into national law. Among other three countries Sweden has updated its legislation and published a new law in their country in March 2014, permitting CO2 storage offshore. The evaluation of the national laws in Poland, which were accepted at national level in November 2013, and Croatia, which entered the EU on 7 July 2013 and simultaneously transposed the CCS directive, is still ongoing in 2014. The first storage permit under the Directive (for the ROAD Project in the offshore Netherlands) has been approved by the EC. While CO2 storage is permitted in a number of European countries, temporary restrictions were applied in Czech Republic, Denmark and Poland. CO2 storage is prohibited except for research and development in Estonia, Finland, Luxembourg, two regions in Belgium and Slovenia due to their geological conditions, but also forbidden in Austraia, Ireland and Latvia. The size of exploration areas for CO2 storage sites is limited in Bulgaria and Hungary. In Germany, only limited CO2 storage will be permitted until 2018 (up to 4 Mt CO2 annually)

Laser Additive Manufacturing of Bulk Silicon Nitride Ceramic: Modeling versus Integral Transform Technique with Experimental Correlation

A semi-analytical-numerical solution is theorized to describe the laser additive manufacturing via laser-bulk ceramic interaction modeling. The Fourier heat equation was used to infer the thermal distribution within the ceramic sample. Appropriate boundary conditions, including convection and radiation, were applied to the bulk sample. It was irradiated with a Gaussian spatial continuous mode fiber laser (λ = 1.075 µm) while a Lambert-Beer law was assumed to describe the laser beam absorption. A close correlation between computational predictions versus experimental results was validated in the case of laser additive manufacturing of silicon nitride bulk ceramics. The thermal field value rises but stays confined within the irradiated zone due to heat propagation with an infinite speed, a characteristic of the Fourier heat equation. An inverse correlation was observed between the laser beam scanning speed and thermal distribution intensity. Whenever the laser scanning speed increases, photons interact with and transfer less energy to the sample, resulting in a lower thermal distribution intensity. This model could prove useful for the description and monitoring of low-intensity laser beam-ceramic processing

Regulatory and social aspects related to well re-use in CO2 storage operations

Reusing hydrocarbon fields and wells for CO2 storage could mean substantial savings and a potential acceleration in the deployment of CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) technology. In addition to the technical suitability of the wells to be re-used for CO2 injection, the existence of a coherent regulatory framework to enable well re-use and stakeholder and public acceptance are essential for the implementation of real projects. Within the REX-CO2 project, the legal, environmental and social aspects related to well re-use in CO2 storage operations have also been investigated. Following an extensive data collection of all relevant regulations, we have made a first assessment of the regulatory frameworks for well re-use in the respective project partner countries (Netherlands, Norway, US, UK, France and Romania). Our assessment indicated that in the six participating countries, with the exception of the US, very little has been regulated specifically for the re-use of existing well infrastructure for CO2 storage operations, even though specific regulations for storage exists. In the US, the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program’s Class VI well regulations identify requirements for converting an existing oil and gas well into a well suitable for use at a CO2 storage site. Based on the initial assessment of regulatory frameworks, we have also made a comparative analysis which highlighted some points of special interest to be evaluated to enable reuse in the current legislation. These refer to transition from hydrocarbon production to CO2 storage (procedure for postponing decommissioning wells, simultaneous hydrocarbon production and CO2 storage, arrangements during mothballing/hibernation), hibernation/temporary abandonment of wells for further re-use (rules for mothballing and hibernation of wells, ownership of wells and costs), specific permitting for well re-use (rules for permitting, monitoring and testing) and policies for well re-use (promoting of well re-use and incentivization). The identified points of interest and periodic consultations with regulators and industry have been used to formulate several recommendations for potential improvement of current legislation to enable well re-use in CO2 storage operations. The first key recommendation is that regulators and governments should assume the role of actively minimizing and mitigating the risk of a gap occurring between hydrocarbon and CO2 storage operations and thus maximizing the potential re-use of oil and gas infrastructure for CCS. Another recommendation is that governmental bodies should supervise and stimulate the inventories of promising options for CO2 storage (e.g. national storage atlases) in order to avoid decommissioning of key assets in these areas. Furthermore, governments should support more open access to data required to identify potentially suitable sites and conduct re-use assessments. Apart from the regulatory framework analysis, we have also made an initial, first-of the kind assessment of the stakeholder and public perception and acceptance relating to re-use of wells for CO2 storage in the partner countries. This assessment was made through a survey reaching 333 respondents; predominantly stakeholders with some knowledge of CCS and targeted groups established at national level by the REX-CO2 project team. The general perception and attitudes of the survey participants towards CCS and re-use of wells for CO2 geological storage were positive. The overall survey trends were also visible at the national level with some minor deviations highlighted in the comments received. The main concerns raised by the respondents relate to the capacity of depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs to permanently store CO2 (France), the risk of leakage (the Netherlands) and the inadequacy of old wells in CO2 injection operations (Romania). The results of the survey and the past experiences from CCS projects were used to provide some guidance on the communication strategies to be implemented for future projects involving re-use in CO2 geological storage

Public awareness and perceptions of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) : insights from surveys administered to representative samples in six European countries

The representative survey studies provide a comprehensive database on the public awareness and perception of CCS in six selected European countries. Our results provide insights into the public understanding and knowledge of energy related issues and CCS topics. The embedded experimental research provides insights into how information affects CCS perceptions. The results discuss implications for CCS communication methods

A comparison of techniques used to collect informed public opinions about CCS: opinion quality after focus group discussions versus information-choice questionnaires

Both focus group discussions and information-choice questionnaires (ICQs) have previously been used toexamine informed public opinions about carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS). This paper presentsan extensive experimental study to systematically examine and compare the quality of opinions createdby these two research techniques. Depending on experimental condition, participants either participatedin a focus group meeting or completed an ICQ. In both conditions participants received identical factualinformation about two specific CCS options. After having processed the information, they indicated theiroverall opinion about each CCS option. The quality of these opinions was determined by looking at threeoutcome-oriented indicators of opinion quality: consistency, stability, and confidence. Results for allthree indicators showed that ICQs yielded higher-quality opinions than focus groups, but also that focusgroups did not perform poor in this regard. Implications for the choice between focus group discussionsand ICQs are discussed

Scrutinizing the impact of CCS communication on opinion quality : focus group discussions versus Information-Choice Questionnaires : results from experimental research in six countries

Previous research has shown that public knowledge and awareness of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) is very limited. As a result, traditional surveys designed to collect public opinions about CCS do in fact assess so-called pseudo opinions. Pseudo-opinions are of very low quality because they are mostly unstable and inconsistent. Therefore, they are not predictive for actual and future public support for or opposition against CCS. As compared to pseudo opinions, opinions expressed after the public has been provided with factual information about CCS are likely to be of higher quality. Focus group discussions and Information-Choice Questionnaires (ICQs) are two research techniques frequently used in the CCS literature that aim to collect such informed public opinions. In this study, we examined which of these two research technique leads to the highest quality opinions (i.e., to opinions that are consistent, stable, and that people are confident about). Our results showed that ICQs yielded higher-quality opinions than focus group discussions. Practical implications and recommendations are discussed