Environmental Audit Committee: Personal submission to Sustainability and HM Treasury inquiry

On 25 November 2015, the UK Government issued a statement to the London Stock Exchange a few hours after the Chancellor's Autumn Statement, which withdrew the capital funding support for the CCS Competition in the UK. This abrupt and unexpected change of support led to immediate cessation of work on the two CCS projects underway in the Competition: Capture Power at Drax in Yorkshire, which has subsequently cancelled the project; and Peterhead to Goldeneye in Aberdeenshire, where the project is currently suspended. Confidence among investors in CCS has plummeted domestically and internationally. Government (DECC Ministers) have spoken about the UK being “still interested” in CCS, although there is no definitive information. Does the cancellation have a direct money impact? Recently ministers suggested that £222 million of public money has been spent to date on CCS. However, the full cost should also consider lost investment.On 25 November 2015, the UK Government issued a statement to the London Stock Exchange a few hours after the Chancellor's Autumn Statement, which withdrew the capital funding support for the CCS Competition in the UK. This abrupt and unexpected change of support led to immediate cessation of work on the two CCS projects underway in the Competition: Capture Power at Drax in Yorkshire, which has subsequently cancelled the project; and Peterhead to Goldeneye in Aberdeenshire, where the project is currently suspended. Confidence among investors in CCS has plummeted domestically and internationally. Government (DECC Ministers) have spoken about the UK being “still interested” in CCS, although there is no definitive information. Does the cancellation have a direct money impact? Recently ministers suggested that £222 million of public money has been spent to date on CCS. However, the full cost should also consider lost investment

Carbon capture and storage: UK's fourth energy pillar, or broken bridge?

CCS power is the only way to burn fossil fuel with lower emissions, and will be essential to fill in electricity generation gaps on weeks when wind does not blow across the EU. CCS is part of the UK plan for a low carbon future, but is progressing too slowly, to be commercially proven when needed. The UK is uniquely advantaged to exploit CCS, with interest from power, transport, and storage companies. Our group has made a comprehensive first evaluation of offshore UK storage, showing that 100 years of not just UK, but also European CO2, could be stored profitably. If this business charged pore space fees, that could be a revenue of £5Bn per year just from storage. Pilot injection could start immediately, and is a needed to solve longer-term capacity uncertainties.Mike Stephenson (BGS) and Stuart Haszeldine (University of Edinburgh) were speaking at the "Carbon capture and storage in the north sea: a national asset in a low carbon future" session at the 2009 British Science Festival in Guildford. Talk short summary: CCS power is the only way to burn fossil fuel with lower emissions, and will be essential to fill in electricity generation gaps on weeks when wind does not blow across the EU. CCS is part of the UK plan for a low carbon future, but is progressing too slowly, to be commercially proven when needed. The UK is uniquely advantaged to exploit CCS, with interest from power, transport, and storage companies. Our group has made a comprehensive first evaluation of offshore UK storage, showing that 100 years of not just UK, but also European CO2, could be stored profitably. If this business charged pore space fees, that could be a revenue of £5Bn per year just from storage. Pilot injection could start immediately, and is a needed to solve longer-term capacity uncertainties

Response to UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy consultation: Building our Industrial Strategy

CCS decarbonises fossil fuel power generation, is the only available method to address industrial emissions, and can enable the production of hydrogen as a low carbon vector for heating, energy storage and transport. Further, CCS in combination with biomass may potentially provide net-negative emissions to offset emissions which are too complex or expensive to directly mitigate. In the absence of CCS, full decarbonisation of power generation, heating and transport consistent with the UK's Climate Change Act 2008, and the recently agreed ambition for net-zero emissions in the UNFCCC Paris Agreement which UK ministers have endorsed, will likely be both extremely difficult and costly to achieve. The UK has unique and substantial strategic advantages in CCS. These include: - Excellent geological resources for CO2 storage in the North Sea basin. - Large and mature offshore hydrocarbon industry with skills and experience directly applicable to CCS delivery. - Existing onshore and offshore hydrocarbon pipeline infrastructure appropriate and available for conversion to use for CO2 collection and transport to offshore storage. - Successful industrial clusters located accessibly to pipeline and/or port connections to North Sea CO2 storage opportunities. - Potential for CO2-enhanced hydrocarbon recovery in North Sea oil fields to achieve both CO2 removal, and additional hydrocarbon production extending recovery and income from the North Sea. - World-leading academic and industrial research into CCS technologies - CO2 capture, CO2 transport and CO2 storage. These strategic advantages have been developed through sustained UK investment in CCS research and development, totalling in excess of £200 million investment over a period of more than a decade. The premature cancellation of the BEIS predecessor Department for Energy and Climate Change CCS Commercialisation programme was a substantial set-back to UK CCS development. However, the need and strategic advantages for CCS in the UK remain, and present a near-term opportunity for successful and profitable UK industrial development fulfilling the objectives of the 'ten pillars' of the proposed Industrial Strategy. As such, it is extraordinary that CCS appears absent from the Industrial Strategy Green paper, and BEIS is strongly urged to assess its omission. CCS is much more than just lower carbon electricity, and UK all-energy and industry decarbonisation require solutions beyond renewables.CCS decarbonises fossil fuel power generation, is the only available method to address industrial emissions, and can enable the production of hydrogen as a low carbon vector for heating, energy storage and transport. Further, CCS in combination with biomass may potentially provide net-negative emissions to offset emissions which are too complex or expensive to directly mitigate. In the absence of CCS, full decarbonisation of power generation, heating and transport consistent with the UK's Climate Change Act 2008, and the recently agreed ambition for net-zero emissions in the UNFCCC Paris Agreement which UK ministers have endorsed, will likely be both extremely difficult and costly to achieve. The UK has unique and substantial strategic advantages in CCS. These include: - Excellent geological resources for CO2 storage in the North Sea basin. - Large and mature offshore hydrocarbon industry with skills and experience directly applicable to CCS delivery. - Existing onshore and offshore hydrocarbon pipeline infrastructure appropriate and available for conversion to use for CO2 collection and transport to offshore storage. - Successful industrial clusters located accessibly to pipeline and/or port connections to North Sea CO2 storage opportunities. - Potential for CO2-enhanced hydrocarbon recovery in North Sea oil fields to achieve both CO2 removal, and additional hydrocarbon production extending recovery and income from the North Sea. - World-leading academic and industrial research into CCS technologies - CO2 capture, CO2 transport and CO2 storage. These strategic advantages have been developed through sustained UK investment in CCS research and development, totalling in excess of £200 million investment over a period of more than a decade. The premature cancellation of the BEIS predecessor Department for Energy and Climate Change CCS Commercialisation programme was a substantial set-back to UK CCS development. However, the need and strategic advantages for CCS in the UK remain, and present a near-term opportunity for successful and profitable UK industrial development fulfilling the objectives of the 'ten pillars' of the proposed Industrial Strategy. As such, it is extraordinary that CCS appears absent from the Industrial Strategy Green paper, and BEIS is strongly urged to assess its omission. CCS is much more than just lower carbon electricity, and UK all-energy and industry decarbonisation require solutions beyond renewables

Hydrogen energy futures – foraging or farming?

Exploration for commercially viable natural hydrogen accumulations within the Earth's crust, here compared to ‘foraging’ for wild food, holds promise. However, a potentially more effective strategy lies in the in situ artificial generation of hydrogen in natural underground reservoirs, akin to ‘farming’. Both biotic and abiotic processes can be employed, converting introduced or indigenous components, gases, and nutrients into hydrogen. Through studying natural hydrogen-generating reactions, we can discern pathways for optimized engineering. Some reactions may be inherently slow, allowing for a ‘seed and leave’ methodology, where sites are infused with gases, nutrients, and specific bacterial strains, then left to gradually produce hydrogen. However, other reactions could offer quicker outcomes to harvest hydrogen. A crucial element of this strategy is our innovative concept of ‘X’ components—ranging from trace minerals to bioengineered microbes. These designed components enhance biotic and/or abiotic reactions and prove vital in accelerating hydrogen production. Drawing parallels with our ancestors' transition from hunter-gathering to agriculture, we propose a similar paradigm shift in the pursuit of hydrogen energy. As we transition towards a hydrogen-centric energy landscape, the amalgamation of geochemistry, advanced biology, and engineering emerges as a beacon, signalling a pathway towards a sustainable and transformative energy future

SCCS response to Energy and Climate Change Committee inquiry into 2020 renewable heat and transport targets

The UK trajectory for decarbonisation has been predicated on the creation of very low- carbon electricity by 2030 and subsequent electrification of heat and transport. This seems increasingly unlikely to be delivered on time due to the very slow progress of CCS, slow progress on nuclear, uncertainty in future renewable electricity growth and underperforming demand reduction measures. In the UK, heat demand from gas supplies is about three times that of electricity demand. It is proposed that the UK should examine decarbonised heat much more closely. Instead of using electricity, heat can be provided by hydrogen. The least cost method of industrial hydrogen production is from gas or coal sources. Both these methods are very well proven. But both require CO2 capture at centralised sites, which could commence at industrial complexes, such as Grangemouth or Teesside, and transport to secure storage sites. These transport networks can be synergistic with CO2 transport to storage from industrial and power CCS projects. Hydrogen can be distributed locally through existing urban pipe networks where these have been upgraded to high standards. To enable this to operate as a market, the Renewable Heat Incentive needs to be adapted to admit heat derived from decarbonised fossil fuel, and not limited to renewables.The UK trajectory for decarbonisation has been predicated on the creation of very low- carbon electricity by 2030 and subsequent electrification of heat and transport. This seems increasingly unlikely to be delivered on time due to the very slow progress of CCS, slow progress on nuclear, uncertainty in future renewable electricity growth and underperforming demand reduction measures. In the UK, heat demand from gas supplies is about three times that of electricity demand. It is proposed that the UK should examine decarbonised heat much more closely. Instead of using electricity, heat can be provided by hydrogen. The least cost method of industrial hydrogen production is from gas or coal sources. Both these methods are very well proven. But both require CO2 capture at centralised sites, which could commence at industrial complexes, such as Grangemouth or Teesside, and transport to secure storage sites. These transport networks can be synergistic with CO2 transport to storage from industrial and power CCS projects. Hydrogen can be distributed locally through existing urban pipe networks where these have been upgraded to high standards. To enable this to operate as a market, the Renewable Heat Incentive needs to be adapted to admit heat derived from decarbonised fossil fuel, and not limited to renewables

Lined rock caverns:A hydrogen storage solution

The inherent intermittency of renewable energy sources frequently leads to variable power outputs, challenging the reliability of our power supply. An evolving approach to mitigate these inconsistencies is the conversion of excess energy into hydrogen. Yet, the pursuit of safe and efficient hydrogen storage methods endures. In this perspective paper, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the potential of lined rock caverns (LRCs) for hydrogen storage. We provide a detailed exploration of all system components and their associated challenges. While LRCs have demonstrated effectiveness in storing various materials, their suitability for hydrogen storage remains a largely uncharted territory. Drawing from empirical data and practical applications, we delineate the unique challenges entailed in employing LRCs for hydrogen storage. Additionally, we identify promising avenues for advancement and underscore crucial research directions to unlock the full potential of LRCs in hydrogen storage applications. The foundational infrastructure and associated risks of large-scale hydrogen storage within LRCs necessitate thorough examination. This work not only highlights challenges but also prospects, with the aim of accelerating the realization of this innovative storage technology on a practical, field-scale level.</p

Submission to Energy and Climate Change Committee inquiry: Leaving the EU - implications for UK climate policy

The UK has consistently played a leading role in supporting and delivering strong EU climate change action, including the creation of EU CCS development policy and supporting policies. • CCS deployment across multiple sectors is critical to meeting UK, EU and international objectives to mitigate climate change. The UK has a European-scale strategic asset in geological CO2 storage and subsurface industry expertise. • The EU Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS) is a key policy for supporting CCS deployment. The UK has been instrumental in guiding its improvement and creating direct funding for CCS from New Entrants' Reserve scheme revenues and the forthcoming Innovation Fund. The UK's exit from the EU-ETS would be hugely disrupting and would result in the loss of access to these substantial funds. We strongly advocate that the UK remains within the EU-ETS and retains eligibility for the Innovation Fund. • EU climate legislation largely complements and supports the UK's domestic climate legislation. Continued collaboration and coordination on climate policy is necessary and will bring substantial mutual benefit. Misalignment of UK and EU climate mitigation objectives would damage low-carbon developer and investor confidence, and the UK Government should be mindful to avoid any uncertainty with respect to UK legislation, which has been framed with reference to EU legislation.The UK has consistently played a leading role in supporting and delivering strong EU climate change action, including the creation of EU CCS development policy and supporting policies. • CCS deployment across multiple sectors is critical to meeting UK, EU and international objectives to mitigate climate change. The UK has a European-scale strategic asset in geological CO2 storage and subsurface industry expertise. • The EU Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS) is a key policy for supporting CCS deployment. The UK has been instrumental in guiding its improvement and creating direct funding for CCS from New Entrants' Reserve scheme revenues and the forthcoming Innovation Fund. The UK's exit from the EU-ETS would be hugely disrupting and would result in the loss of access to these substantial funds. We strongly advocate that the UK remains within the EU-ETS and retains eligibility for the Innovation Fund. • EU climate legislation largely complements and supports the UK's domestic climate legislation. Continued collaboration and coordination on climate policy is necessary and will bring substantial mutual benefit. Misalignment of UK and EU climate mitigation objectives would damage low-carbon developer and investor confidence, and the UK Government should be mindful to avoid any uncertainty with respect to UK legislation, which has been framed with reference to EU legislation