3. 221129 Amsterdam CDR Report EN (1)
Tekst van het document
Quick scan on the carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Final Report August 2022
Prepared for: Hannah de Valk, Project Leader CO₂ Reduction and CCUS Industry Municipality of Amsterdam
Prepared by: South Pole Carbon Asset Management Ltd. (South Pole) Technoparkstrasse 1 · 8005 Zurich · Switzerland southpole.com and Bellona Europa aibsl (Bellona) Rue d'Egmont 15 · 1000 Bruxelles · Belgium bellona.org
Project Manager: Dylan Marks Specialist, Climate Investments – South Pole d.marks@southpole.com Project Co-leaders: Dr. Samantha Eleanor Tanzer
Christiaan Gevers Deynoot
CDR Technology and Research Manager
Senior Manager, Carbon Removal Platform –
(Consulting) – Bellona
South Pole
tanzer@bellona.org
c.geversdeynoot@southpole.com
Project Collaborators: Francisco Koch
Mark Preston Aragonès
Associate Director, Climate Policy, Finance and
Policy Manager – Bellona
Carbon Markets – South Pole
mark@bellona.org
f.koch@southpole.com
Contact person: Dylan Marks, Specialist, Climate Investments d.marks@southpole.com
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
BELLONA
E U R O P A
About South Pole:
About Bellona Europa:
South Pole, recognised by the World Economic Forum as a Social Enterprise, has been at the forefront of decarbonisation since 2006. With its global climate solutions platform, South Pole develops and implements comprehensive strategies that turn climate action into long-term business opportunities for companies, governments and organisations around the world.
Founded in 1994, Bellona Europa is an independent, non-profit organisation that meets environmental and climate challenges head-on. We are result-oriented and have a comprehensive and cross-sectoral approach to assess the economics, climate impacts and technical feasibility of necessary climate solutions. To do this, we work with civil society, academia, governments and polluting industries.
South Pole is also a leading project developer, and has provided nearly 1,000 projects in over 50 countries with climate finance to reduce over a gigaton of CO2 emissions, and to provide social benefits to less privileged communities who are particularly vulnerable to climate change.
For more information, visit www.bellona.org, or find us on Twitter and LinkedIn.
For more information, visit www.southpole.com or follow us on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook.
3
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Table of contents List of acronyms and abbreviations
5
Executive summary
6
Introduction
12
Context
13
What is CDR?
13
National and local policy context
15
Preconditions for carbon dioxide removal
18
Ensuring physical removals
18
Ensuring permanent storage
19
Ensuring net removals
22
Quick scan: BioCCS
23
Overview of sources
24
Overview of sinks
30
Overview of transport options
35
Summary of bioCCS pathways
36
Barrier analysis
37
Potential enablers for bioCCS development
39
BIOCCS options summary
40
Quick scan: Standalone CDR
41
Direct Air Capture and storage
44
Enhanced weathering
45
Soil carbon storage
46
Biochar
47
Afforestation
48
Standalone CDR options summary
49
Conclusion and recommendations
50
Key takeaways
50
High-level recommendations
51
Call to action
52
Annexes Methodology
53 53
Data collection protocol
53
Assessment criteria
54
Guiding questions for interviews
55
Questionnaire for CO₂ sources
55
Questionnaire for CO₂ sinks
55
Comparative analysis
56 4
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
List of acronyms and abbreviations AMA
Amsterdam Metropolitan Area
BioCCS
Biomass with carbon capture and storage
CCS
Carbon capture and storage
CCU
Carbon capture and utilisation
CCUS
Carbon capture, utilisation or storage
CDR
Carbon dioxide removal
CNI
Carbon Neutral Initiative
CO₂
Carbon dioxide
CO₂eq
Carbon dioxide equivalent
CRCM
Carbon Removal Credit Mechanism
DAC
Direct air capture
DACS
Direct air capture and storage
ETS
Emissions Trading Scheme
EU
European Union
GJ
Gigajoule
Gt
Gigatonne
ha
Hectare
IPCC
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
kg
Kilogram
kt Kilotonne kWh
Kilowatt-hour
LCA
Life cycle assessment
mm
millimetres
MRV
Monitoring, reporting and verification
Mt
Megatonne
NSCA
North Sea Canal Area
OCAP
Organic Carbon dioxide for Assimilation of Plants
PM
Particulate matter
SCS
Soil Carbon Storage
SDE++
Stimulation of sustainable energy production and climate transition
t Tonne TRL
Technology readiness level
UK
United Kingdom
WWTP
Wastewater treatment plant
5
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Executive summary Introduction Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is the physical, permanent, and net removal of carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere. CDR is an integral part of a net-zero transition – it is estimated that 1.9–16.1 GtCO₂ of removals will be required annually by 2050 to reach net zero. While CDR cannot replace emission reductions, it fulfils three crucial roles: i) reducing CO₂ emissions levels in the short-term; ii) neutralising residual emissions from hard-to-abate sectors in order to reach net zero CO₂ in the medium-term; and iii) achieving net negative CO₂ emissions in the long-term. This report aims to map and assess the potential of CDR, as well as biogenic emission sources and storage opportunities in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area (NSCA). It also provides a set of high-level recommendations on what is needed to exploit such opportunities. CDR technologies can be deployed at the urban scale, with the potential to capture emissions from industrial processes and municipal services. Each CDR solution
presents its own benefits and limitations. For example, storage of CO₂ in geologic sinks (e.g. depleted oil and gas reservoirs, saline aquifers) requires investment in infrastructure and careful surveying and injection, but has a large capacity, is easily monitored and has a low risk of re-emission. Storage of CO₂ in biologic sinks (e.g. soils, biomass) is easier to implement and may have co-benefits (e.g. increased climate resilience of cities and agriculture), but has a higher risk of reversal (e.g. due to forest fires, disease, erosion), can be more difficult to effectively monitor, and the rate of carbon removal and the potential positive and negative coeffects are dependent on the exact environment and practices. Biomass with carbon capture and storage (bioCCS) is the storage of CO₂ from biogenic sources, which constitutes a CDR process. BioCCS comprises three necessary steps, from carbon source to carbon sink, namely the capture of biogenic CO₂ (e.g. from industrial processes), transport (e.g. via pipeline, truck, rail or ship) and permanent storage (e.g. in geological storage) of CO₂.
Different mitigation activities are not interchangeable Reduction of emissions
Avoidance of emissions
Removal of CO₂
occurs when: a change in a greenhouse gas emitting activity results in that activity emitting less greenhouse gases than it did before or in a reduction of the activity which emits greenhouse gases.
occurs when: an activity is assumed to result in less CO₂ being emitted compared to an alternative scenario, usually ‘business-as-usual’.
occurs when: greenhouse gases are physically and permanently removed from the atmosphere. (If the extracted atmospheric CO₂ is re-released into the atmosphere, it is not a removal, but rather a delayed emission).
has the net effect that: the amount of CO₂ in the atmosphere increases (as CO₂ is still emitted), but less quickly than it did before.
has the net effect that: the amount of CO₂ in the atmosphere is assumed to increase less than if the avoidance had not occurred. The net effect of emission avoidance is inherently unverifiable.
has the net effect of: The amount of physical CO₂ in the atmosphere decreases.
Source: Bellona (2022)
6
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Assessment: BioCCS Interviews were conducted with relevant companies along the bioCCS chain. These include: i) biogenic CO₂ emitters, such as from the combustion on biogenic waste, biofuel production and wastewater treatment; ii) CO₂ transport providers, namely by pipeline; and iii) CO₂ storage providers, through geological storage or carbon mineralisation in durable products. The below
tables provide an overview of the expected scale of biogenic CO₂ to be emitted, transported and stored with these various options. It also includes an indicative view of the potential of each option to generate CDR in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the NSCA, by 2030 and by 2050.
Overview of sources Type of source
Description
(Expected) scale of biogenic CO₂ supply for CDR
Potential to store biogenic CO₂ for CDR purposes by 2030
Potential to store biogenic CO₂ for CDR purposes by 2050
Combustion of biogenic waste
Combustion of waste or biomass for steam, heat and electricity. While ~60% of AEB’s carbon emissions are biogenic, it is the largest source of biogenic CO₂ identified in the region. Planned CO₂ capture unit. Also plans for biomass power plant.
~550,000 t CO₂/ year (expected to grow)
Promising
Very promising
Existing plans for carbon capture and storage (CCS) through the Aramis project could become operational by 2028–2029.
Geological storage could account for a greater part of the captured biogenic CO₂, as the business model is proved to be viable.
Biofuel production
Production of biogas, biomethane or biomethanol through fermentation of biomass. Biogenic CO₂ streams are separated and so can be captured. Advanced Methanol Amsterdam currently sending to greenhouses rather than for storage.
Unclear – use vs storage
Less promising
Very promising
Operation will start in late 2025, with initial biogenic CO₂ streams going to greenhouses.
Volumes of biogenic CO₂ are expected to increase, with increase of hydrogen production and the possibility of geological storage as more CCS projects come online.
Wastewater treatment
Waternet is the largest wastewater treatment plant in the Amsterdam harbour area. There are currently no plans to capture and store CO₂ before 2030, but they are piloting green gas installations.
Unclear
Not promising at present
Less promising
There are currently no plans to capture CO₂ before 2030.
Capturing biogenic CO₂ would require process changes, as streams are currently considered too small and too diluted to capture.
Note: Biomass is not inherently sustainable. While the sustainability of the upstream supply chains of biomass wastes is conventionally not considered, biomass in general should not be considered “carbon neutral”. In particular, the use of dedicated biomass, now or in the future, requires critical evaluation of its origin and supply chain sustainability to determine the net-removal potential of bioCCS.
Overview of transport options Type of transport Pipelines
Description Transport from CO₂ sources to permanent storage. Options include trucks, rail and ships for liquified CO₂ and pipelines for gaseous CO₂. OCAP is a transporter and supplier of CO₂, especially to greenhouses in the south of the NL, via its own pipeline. Delivery for other applications often proves to be difficult, given the small purchase volumes and the high quality CO₂ that is required.
(Expected) scale of CO₂ transport Transports 600,000 t CO₂/year, expected to reach 2,000,000 t CO₂/ year Unclear how much for storage vs use
Potential to store biogenic CO₂ for CDR purposes by 2030
Potential to store biogenic CO₂ for CDR purposes by 2050
Promising
Very promising
OCAP is the only existing pipeline network connecting Amsterdam to the CO₂ storage infrastructure in the Port of Rotterdam. As such, it is a central element of the CDR supply chain in the shortterm. It is already connected to sources of biogenic CO₂, but currently for use rather than storage. Smaller volumes of biogenic carbon could be rerouted to permanent storage.
With developing and expanding legislation and regulation on CDR, it can be expected that OCAP will expand its capacity to accommodate a larger share of its CO₂ to geological storage projects in the Port of Rotterdam.
7
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Overview of sinks (Expected) scale of biogenic CO₂ supply for CDR
Potential to store biogenic CO₂ for CDR purposes by 2030
Potential to store biogenic CO₂ for CDR purposes by 2050
CO₂ from industry is transported by pipeline to platforms in the North Sea, from which it is pumped into empty gas fields beneath the North Sea..
Unclear – expected in millions of tonnes of CO₂
Promising
Very promising
Porthos operational but sold out. Aramis should be operational and likely include biogenic carbon
Millions of tonnes of CO₂ per year will be stored in the North Sea, likely with additional projects coming online.
Various carbon mineralisation technologies, including: carbonates and aggregates from waste; readymix concrete from CO₂; and pre-cast concrete from CO₂. Not currently in operation in the Netherlands, but this technology is proven and can be rapidly implemented.
Unclear – expected in thousands of tonnes of CO₂
Less promising
Promising
Carbon mineralisation in building products can be implemented relatively quickly, if the biogenic CO₂ inputs can be sourced. However, the scale of CDR achieved is likely to be small
It is expected there will be more readily available sources of biogenic CO₂, though likely that only limited volumes would be used for mineralisation in building products in the project area.
Type of source
Description
Geological storage
Carbon mineralisation
BioCCS barriers From the interviews conducted, the following barriers were identified as hindering the development and deployment of bioCCS.
BioCCS enabling factors From the interviews conducted, the following enabling factors were identified as possible solutions or incentives to the above barriers to bioCCS.
•
Regulatory: lengthy processes for permitting and end-of-waste status
•
•
Policy: absence of CDR-specific targets and legislation
Legislative and regulatory: streamlined permitting process; CDR-specific policy and targets for clear role and use
•
•
Financial: insufficient incentives to deploy bioCCS at scale
Financial: infrastructure development; subsidies; valuation of CO₂
•
•
Infrastructure: lack of accessible networks and long lead time
Others: stronger political support; pilot projects support; transparency
•
Public perception: public awareness and acceptance, e.g. on mitigation deterrence; sustainability credentials of biomass
transport
higher
8
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Assessment: Standalone CDR Similarly to bioCCS, interviews were conducted with companies involved in standalone CDR solutions, which combine the capture, transport and storage of CO₂, namely: i) direct air capture and storage; ii) enhanced weathering; iii) biochar; iv) soil carbon
storage; and v) afforestation. The table below provides an overview of findings and indicative potential of these options to generate CDR by 2030 and 2050, specifically in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and NSCA.
Overview of standalone CDR solutions Potential for largescale CDR by 2030
Potential for largescale of CDR by 2050
Key determinants of potential
Chemical extraction of CO₂ from the atmosphere paired with geologic storage.
Not promising
Promising
Very energy intensive
1+ Mt per year but entirely dependent on competition for resources.
• •
Spreading of ground minerals that dissolve atmospheric CO₂ into soil.
Not promising
Less promising
•
Uptake takes years to decades; Environmental uncertainties. Further evidence through CO₂ uptake monitoring could change assessment
~ Potential cumulative 1 Mt in Amsterdam region
•
Less promising
Less promising
•
Scalable but many remaining uncertainties
If used in soils, ca. 1–3 Mt cumulative removal in greater Amsterdam region
•
CDR option
Description
Direct air capture and storage (DACS)
Enhanced weathering
Biochar
Soil carbon storage
Afforestation
Stable form of charcoal that is then added to soil or buried.
•
•
Land management practices to increase organic carbon in soils.
Not promising
Less promising
Management must be tailored to regional soils
Ca. 35 kt per year in greater Amsterdam region
Cultivation of dedicated long-rotation biomass.
Less promising
Less promising
Uptake takes years to decades; Typically popular
10’s–100’s kt per year in greater Amsterdam region
• • • •
• •
Rate of technological learning Availability of low-carbon energy Access to geologic storage Legal status and methodology availability Size of ground mineral → speed of CO₂ uptake Availability of land for spreading
Availability of sustainable biomass Development of robust monitoring and verification Legal status Uptake by farmers Quality of continuous management Development of reliable and low-cost monitoring and verification Availability of land for planting Quality of continuous management
Standalone CDR barriers The interviews conducted highlighted the following barriers to the development and deployment of standalone CDR solutions.
Standalone CDR enabling factors Similarly, the following enabling factors were identified as possible solutions or incentives to the above barriers to standalone CDR solutions.
•
Regional uncertainties: impacts of land-based CDR are location-specific
•
Siting flexibility: not limited to industrial areas or (except DACS) access to geologic storage
•
Competition for resources: including land, energy, and biomass
•
•
Regulatory ambiguity: including land use and ‘foreign substance’ restrictions
Potential co-benefits: such as reduced heat island effect, urban greening, improved crop yields, soil water retention, etc
•
•
Lack of financial incentive: neither carbon storage nor ‘ecosystem services’ are currently valued
Support for pilots: to assess region-specific scaling and MRV potentials
9
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Conclusion Key takeaways → There is no net zero without CDR – CDR should be an integral part of a municipal and regional climate strategy. However, this should not come at the expense of deep emission reductions. → Individual CDR solutions each have their own merits and limitations, and should not be considered equivalent. → While there is potential for CDR in Amsterdam and the NCSA, the development and deployment of these processes are hindered by a number of factors, as addressed in this report.
Key recommendations → Set a CDR-specific target and roadmap. ♦ Including volumes per year and timeline, to enable focused approach ♦ Identifying CDR achievement
mix
that
enables
target
♦ This enables the development of solutions conducive to target, including financial support → Dedicate more resources to research development and accounting of CDR.
for,
♦ Conducting more comprehensive studies for quantitative CDR potential ♦ Developing reporting requirements for biogenic emissions ♦ Evaluating sustainability of biomass use → Take a more active role in supporting CDR activities at the municipal and regional scales. ♦ Streamlining regulation processes ♦ Supporting pilot projects for proof-of-concept ♦ Designing funding pathways for CDR ♦ Raising awareness for social legitimacy and commercial interest ♦ Promote CDR activities at the national level, incl. through lobbying national government
10
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Call to action Cities are a critical arena for climate action. Urban areas will account for over half of global increase in carbon emissions by 2030. They concentrate economic, political and cultural activity, and are motors of change and innovation, able to transform human structures, and design, facilitate and implement concrete actions. Cities are a critical actor in the multi-level governance of climate politics, at times acting independently from their national government. The city is therefore an important scale for climate and removals action, particularly when considering the ubiquitous and inclusive approaches needed to deploy CDR. Although a large number of cities have committed to net zero, they may not have the knowledge, capacity or network to integrate removals in their strategies or implement city-scale removal solutions. It is crucial that the municipality of Amsterdam and the NSCA deepen their knowledge, build their capacity and expand their network to reach their climate goals. The municipality of Amsterdam is already at the forefront of climate change action, having committed to ambitious climate goals and taking part in initiatives such as the EU Mission for Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities.
It is also taking steps to develop its understanding of the potential for emissions reductions and removals, through this study and a similar quick scan conducted on CCU potential. Its proximity to biogenic emission sources in surrounding industrial areas and potentially massive storage potential in the North Sea makes it a prime candidate to explore CDR at a large scale. By being an early adopter and promoter of CDR, the region also stands to become a hub for CDR solutions and industry, attracting businesses and stimulating a sector increasingly recognised as essential to mitigating climate change.
The municipality of Amsterdam and NSCA should contribute to driving the acceleration toward the deployment of CDR, thereby catalysing private sector action, rather than the opposite. CDR, as essential to reach climate goals, must be considered a public good, rather than a purely commercial or industrial undertaking. In the same way that local governments provide waste management services (e.g. for sewage and water), the provision of – or promotion of – CO₂ management services could be foreseen to be an essential public service. Next steps for the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and North Sea Canal Area → Address the end-of-waste regulation, which must be streamlined to facilitate the capture of both biogenic and non-biogenic CO₂. → Comprehensively identify and quantify the opportunities for the capture, transport and storage of biogenic emissions, and for the use of standalone CDR solutions. → Explicitly address the role of CDR envisaged in municipal and regional climate strategies. → Set a CDR-specific target to catalyse investment in and development of CDR activities. → Take an active role in innovation, e.g. by showcasing demonstrations and pilots. → Convene a multi-stakeholder group to inform a CDR deployment roadmap. → Advocate with other Dutch and international cities for national CDR policies and funding.
→ Convene a citizen assembly on removals to start building social legitimacy.
11
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
1. Introduction The ongoing climate crisis requires the rapid reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, at all scales and sectors, to near-zero in the coming decades. This transition requires aligning efforts not only by nations and citizens, but also industries and municipalities. So as the global commitment to ‘net zero’ implied by the ambitions of the Paris Agreement is reflected in the national climate policy of the Netherlands, so too is it reflected in the ambitions of regions such as the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area (NSCA).
This report represents the first efforts at positioning CDR in the overall municipal and regional climate policy. It will provide a basis for the development of an integral vision on the role of carbon removal in the city’s long-term climate strategy and associated municipal policies. The goal of this report is to assess potential CDR options based on currently available regional data, as well as key drivers and barriers to CDR implementation, and to recommend initial actions for both evaluation and implementation of promising CDR options.
A large number of cities have committed to net zero, but may not have the knowledge, capacity or network to integrate removals (an integral part of the net-zero transition) in their strategies or implement city-scale removal solutions. The Amsterdam municipality has stated in its Climate Neutral Roadmap the objective to reduce carbon emissions by 55% in 2030 and 95% in 2050, compared to 1990 levels. The more recent Coalition Agreement 2022–2026 has set the more ambitious goal of reducing CO₂ emissions by 60% in 2030. Currently foreseen interventions, however, would be insufficient to meet these objectives.
This report is divided into five parts:
Against this background, this ‘quick scan’ focuses on one aspect of the transition to a net-zero society, namely the role of carbon dioxide removal (CDR), which is needed to supplement emission reduction efforts and, in the long term, to balance out any residual emissions of greenhouse gases. It intends to assess the carbon removal potential in the wider cosmopolitan area, including the industrial area in the Zaanstreek. A national quick scan on negative emissions was conducted, which found additional progress must be made on: i) central government policy development aimed at negative emissions; ii) research focused on the CDR value chain; and iii) research aimed at developing and implementing CDR-related policy. It recommended that similar scans are conducted along carbon value chains at a regional level.
Context, which first defines CDR and presents a summary of the wider policy context surrounding Amsterdam’s role in the net-zero transition. Preconditions for CDR, which provides a more indepth explanation of how CDR can be achieved. This is followed by an explanation of the necessary preconditions for achieving CDR. Quick scan: BioCCS, which focuses on the potential for focus on ‘biomass with carbon capture and storage’ options for the industry in the NCSA, and local drivers and barriers, informed primarily by interviews with relevant stakeholders. Quick scan: Standalone CDR, where other CDR options are also described and discussed, including direct air capture and storage, enhanced weathering, biochar, soil carbon storage, and afforestation. Conclusion and recommendations, which concludes the report with a series of recommendations for future research and policies on CDR in the Amsterdam region.
12
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
2. Context 2.1 What is CDR? Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is the extraction of carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere with the specific purpose of reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, thereby leading to the reduction in global warming. The variety of CDR methods are presented in Figure 1. To qualify, a CDR activity must satisfy four minimum criteria, summarised by Tanzer and Ramirez (2019): 1. Physical greenhouse gases are removed from the atmosphere.
3. Upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions associated with the removal and storage process, such as biomass origin, energy use, gas fate, and co-product fate, are comprehensively estimated and included in the emission balance. 4. The total quantity of atmospheric greenhouse gases removed and permanently stored is greater than the total quantity of greenhouse gases emitted to the atmosphere.
2. The removed gases are stored out of the atmosphere in a manner intended to be permanent.
Figure 1: CDR is the physical, permanent, and net removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Once emitted, CO₂ may remain in the atmosphere for hundreds of years. A variety of options to remove and store atmospheric are available, but ensuring that these activities result in true CDR requires managing storage to prevent or compensate for any potential re-emissions, and to ensure that the quantification of CDR accounts for the greenhouse gas emissions in the removal and storage processes and their supply chains.
Source: IPCC AR6 WGIII, Chapter 12 (Box 8, Figure 1)
13
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
The latest IPCC report sees CDR as a necessary part of limiting global warming, with three sequential roles, as follows (Figure 2).
2. Net zero: Then, to maintain net compensating for residual emissions
1. Net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions: As a supplement to rapid massive-scale reductions to get to net zero faster
This implies that there can be no net zero or net negative emissions without the use of CDR.
zero
by
3. Net negative: Finally, to remove historical emissions
Figure 2: The sequential roles of carbon dioxide removal over time
Source: Bellona (2022), adapted from: IPCC AR6 WGIII, Chapter 12 (Box 8, FIgure 2)
While CDR is the only activity that can physically extract CO₂ from the atmosphere, an effective climate policy portfolio minimises the need for resourceintensive CDR by reducing existing greenhouse gas emissions and avoiding new additional greenhouse gas emissions. Reduction, avoidance and removals
are all necessary forms of climate mitigation but are not interchangeable (Table 1). Avoiding new emissions does not slow how fast existing emissions enter the atmosphere and reducing existing emissions does not remove already-emitted CO₂ from the atmosphere.
14
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Table 1: Different mitigation activities are not interchangeable Reduction of emissions
Avoidance of emissions
Removal of CO₂
occurs when: a change in a greenhouse gas emitting activity results in that activity emitting less greenhouse gases than it did before or in a reduction of the activity which emits greenhouse gases.
occurs when: an activity is assumed to result in less CO₂ being emitted compared to an alternative scenario, usually ‘business-as-usual’.
occurs when: greenhouse gases are physically and permanently removed from the atmosphere. (If the extracted atmospheric CO₂ is re-released into the atmosphere, it is not a removal, but rather a delayed emission).
is measured in: kg CO₂eq not emitted, compared to a measured historical baseline .
is measured in: kg CO₂eq that are assumed would have been emitted otherwise (estimated emission avoidance is wholly dependent on the selected counterfactual).
is measured in: net kg CO₂eq removed from the atmosphere (kg removed minus kg emitted in the removal and storage process and supply chains).
has the net effect that: the amount of CO₂ in the atmosphere increases (as CO₂ is still emitted), but less quickly than it did before.
has the net effect that: the amount of CO₂ in the atmosphere is assumed to increase less than if the avoidance had not occurred. The net effect of emission avoidance is inherently unverifiable.
has the net effect of: The amount of physical CO₂ in the atmosphere decreases.
Source: Bellona (2022)
The Netherlands has set targets to reduce its emissions by 49% (compared to 1990) by 2030 and 95% by 2050 (Figure 3). Numerous solutions are needed to achieve the goals, such as the transition to sustainable energy sources, energy savings, reuse of materials and the capture, transport and geologic storage of CO₂ (Carbon Capture and Storage [CCS]). CCS in particular is a fundamental component of both mitigating industrial fossil emissions and for the capture and storage of atmospheric CO₂. The Netherlands is ideally suited for CCS, namely because: •
The energy-intensive industry with large CO₂ emissions is concentrated in a few places;
•
Those clusters are close to the coast, which is favourable for offshore storage;
•
The Netherlands has considerable storage capacity under the North Sea in the form of empty oil and gas fields;
•
The oil and gas infrastructure is ideal for reuse for transport and storage of CO₂; and
•
The Netherlands has excellent logistical advantages for CO₂ transport.
Figure 3: Netherlands greenhouse gas emissions – historical reality and future ambitions 300
250
millions tonnes Co2eq
2.2 National and local policy context
200
150
All GHGs
CO2 only 2020 is likely an outliner year do to the COVID pandemic
100
The rate of emission reduction needs to quadruple to reach net-zero by 2050.
50
0 1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Currently, there is a strategy on CCS in the Netherlands but not yet on CDR. There are large CCS projects that are part of the Climate Agreement such as Porthos, Aramis and the now-suspended Athos. The Netherlands could further play a pioneering role in deploying CDR and CCS, given the favourable starting position in the field of storage, knowledge and companies.
15
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
National instruments that are relevant to CDR and CCS include the following. •
Climate Agreement: part of the Dutch climate policy, setting out long-term targets to reduce emissions by 55% by 2030 and to net-zero by 2050. It lays out emission reduction commitments in five specific sectors (built environment; mobility; industry; agriculture and land use; electricity) as well as cross-sectoral sectors, including biomass and market financing. Such commitments include the provision of subsidies, development of standards and increased taxation of emissions. It does not explicitly mention CDR but includes provisions for CCS and CCU, and alludes to the concept of negative emissions.
•
Stimulation of sustainable energy production and climate transition (SDE++): subsidy for companies and organisations in sectors such as industry, mobility, agriculture and the built environment. Subsidised processes include biomass combustion, biomass gasification and fermentation, CCS and carbon capture and utilisation (CCU). The subsidy horizon for fossil-based CCS is capped at 2035, but this should not apply to carbon removal solutions – these are currently not explicitly eligible under the subsidy instrument.
•
Topsector Energy, Multi-annual Mission-driven Innovation Programme (MMIP) 6 ‘Closing Industrial Chain’: This MMIP is an innovation agenda which focuses on CCS and a range of CCU applications, including in combination with BECCS and DAC, as well as the development of biochar.
•
Demonstration of Energy and Climate Innovation scheme (DEI+): subsidy scheme focused on pilot and demonstration projects, with CCUS as one of the themes. CCUS is also mentioned in the context of realising negative emissions in the long term.
•
National CO₂ tax: carbon levy announced in the Climate Agreement. It applies to fossil CO₂ emissions already under the EU ETS, but also to waste incineration plants which are currently outside the ETS.
Reflecting the wider ambitions of the Netherlands and the EU, the NSCA also intends to be climate neutral by 2050, including reducing emissions by nearly half in 2030. This is an undertaking of a grand scale, and is envisioned by the 'Cluster Energy Strategy 1.0' to involve a tripling of electricity demand and a halving of gas demand by 2030. Additionally, CCS is anticipated to play a large role in the decarbonization potential of the region, to be 1.8 Mt captured and stored in 2025, up to 5–8 million tonnes in 2030.
The Municipality of Amsterdam is situated in the North Sea Canal Area (NSCA), which includes the industrial centres of Ijmond and the Amsterdam Port. In 2018, the North Sea Canal Area emitted 18.3 MtCO₂ (representing ~13% of national CO₂ emissions) of which 12.6 Mt are associated with steel production at Tata Steel in Ijmuiden (both direct and indirect emissions).
16
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
EU policy context The EU aims to reach climate neutrality by 2050, primarily
CO₂ Storage Directive
by preventing greenhouse gas emissions, of which CO₂ is
This directive establishes a legal framework to regulate the
the most significant. However, not all CO₂ emissions can be
storage of CO₂ in geological formations. The Commission is
easily prevented, particularly in the near term. In addition
planning to update the guidance documents, which should
to CO₂ emissions from combusting carbon-based fuels,
facilitate the transposition of the directive into national law.
carbon is also a raw material for industry and is used to make medicines, chemicals, plastics and food. The EU recognises this continued need for carbon in the 'Sustainable Carbon Cycles' communication of December 2021. Since then, a rethink of carbon cycles has been high on the agenda, with the first action point being to reduce reliance on carbon, the second to recycle carbon from waste streams and biomass and the third to scale up solutions that remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. The basis of this are two pillars, namely: 'Carbon Farming' and 'Industrial CCUS'. The first focuses on the role of land to capture and store carbon and the second on the role of industry to shift towards sustainable (biogenic and atmospheric) CO₂ and the development of geological
EU ETS The EU Emission Trading System is a cap-and-trade system and is the foremost climate instrument in the bloc. In establishing a price and a limit for polluting, the system encourages polluters to handle their emissions, or to pay someone else in the system who can handle their emissions more cost-effectively. The ETS only covers fossil emissions. Innovation Fund This fund is financed by some of the revenues generated by the EU ETS, approximately €10 billion (depending on the
storage.
price of CO₂ allowances). This money is spent on innovative
In order to highlight the role of ‘Industrial CCUS’ to help
bring a particular process to market scale. A handful of full
achieve the EU's climate neutrality target, it has drawn up
chain CO₂ capture and storage projects received funding in
the following 'Industrial Sustainable Carbon Challenge':
the latest round. Previous rounds supported the Stockholm
•
By 2028, every tonne of CO₂ captured, transported, used and stored by industry must be reported and its origin (biogenic, fossil, atmospheric) recorded.
•
•
projects which can substantially reduce emissions and
Exergi BioCCS project. Horizon Europe The EU’s eminent research programme has dedicated
At least 20% of the carbon used in chemical or plastic
streams for the decarbonisation of industry, targeting
products must be of biogenic or atmospheric origin by
industrial clusters which could benefit from CO₂ transport
2030.
and storage infrastructure.
By 2030, 5 MtCO₂ per year must be removed from the atmosphere and permanently stored.
The EU already recognises the significance of bioCCS. The EU Energy Roadmap 2050 states that 'for all fossil fuels, Carbon Capture and Storage will have to be applied from around 2030 onwards in the power sector in order to reach decarbonisation targets', as well as '[CCS] combined with
Carbon Removal Certification Mechanism (CRCM): This mechanism is effectively a carbon accounting mechanism which will be used to quantify and verify the quantity of carbon that is stored and how long that carbon is stored. The eventual outcome is expected to be a certificate that can demonstrably prove that CO₂ is being removed from the
biomass could deliver ‘carbon negative’ values.'
atmosphere and permanently stored. Criteria are currently
The main European instruments that influence CDR and CCS
of the CO₂ storage, the potential for reversals, application
projects are:
of the certificates, etc. These criteria will determine which
being drawn up for the definition of 'removal', the duration
solutions are in the scope of the mechanism, but will not Renewable Energy Directive:
yet determine how and where these certificates will be used.
The RED establishes targets and general criteria for Member States to subsidise the deployment of renewable energy, including the types of biomass feedstocks which can be used for bioenergy.
17
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
3. Preconditions for carbon dioxide removal From a physical perspective, effective carbon dioxide removal (CDR) must entail physical removal of CO₂ from the atmosphere; permanent storage of the removed CO₂ (ideally for hundreds of years or more), and must not emit more than is removed.
Figure 4: CDR requires physical extraction of atmospheric carbon.
3.1 Ensuring physical removals CDR requires that CO₂ is physically extracted from the atmosphere (Figure 4). CO₂ can be extracted from the atmosphere via natural processes, including photosynthesis of biomass and the weathering and carbonation of certain types of minerals, as well as by artificial processes, such as chemical absorption via a solvent or solid sorbent. If a system involves only fossil carbon (e.g. natural gas, oil, limestone, coal), it cannot result in CDR, even if combined with carbon capture and storage (Figure 5). Preventing the release of fossil emissions, such as via CCS, is a vital component of climate change mitigation, but is a reduction activity, not a removal (see Table 1).
A CDR system requires that CO₂ is physically extracted from the atmosphere, such as via photosynthesis of biomass or direct air capture with chemicals. If a system only contains fossil carbon, it cannot result in CDR.
Figure 5: Only systems that pair physical atmospheric removals with permanent storage can potentially be CO₂ negative.
CO2 source
Carbon capture and Utilisation (CCU)
Carbon capture and Storage (CCS)
Fossil source
C
CO2
Materials
C BioCCS
Biomass
Power-to-X
C Carbon mineralisation/ biogas
CO2
Directly from atmosphere
DAC + CCS
Carbon mineralisation
CO2
The final carbon balance depends on the source of energy, other supply chain emissions, and permanence of storage. Potentially CO2 neutral or CO2 negative
Towards CO2 neutral
Always CO2 positive (emissions)
Source: ClimateWorks Foundation
18
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Removals happen at different speeds. Natural weathering and carbonation processes operate on the scale of decades to millennia, though they can be accelerated by human intervention. Photosynthesis of biomass occurs on a scale of months to decades, depending on the life cycle of the biomass. Chemical absorption operates on a timescale of minutes to days. Speed comes with a cost: generally, the faster the CO₂ is removed from the atmosphere, the more energy the removal process requires.
Some mechanisms of removals CO₂ can be removed from the atmosphere by a variety of processes that capture the diluted CO₂ into a material or chemical. Note that these processes can also be used to capture non-atmospheric CO₂ (e.g. fossil flue gases) but only count as removals if they are used to capture atmospheric CO₂. Photosynthesis is the process by which plants uses energy from sunlight to convert CO₂ from the atmosphere and water from the soil into sugars and oxygen. The sugars are then used for growth, storing the carbon in the plant, while the oxygen is released into the atmosphere. The speed of photosynthesis is dependent both on the type of biomass and environmental conditions.
3.2 Ensuring permanent storage Once removed, the CO₂ must be kept out of the atmosphere permanently. When CO₂ is emitted to the atmosphere, it remains there for 300–1000 years. Therefore, if at any point in that timeframe, the CO₂ is re-emitted to the atmosphere, it is not a removal, but rather a delayed emission. In particular, if the CO₂ is reused in short-lived products such as fuel, fertiliser, paper, or plastics, this will result in re-emission and is not CDR. Even for long-term storage options, the potential for re-emission, or ‘risk of reversal’, is one of the key concerns of any CDR activity. Different storage media have different risks of reversals that must be managed (Figure 6). Storage in geologic reservoirs is effectively permanent, with negligible risk of reversal after injection has stopped. Still, the geologic storage site must be carefully chosen, prepared, and monitored to prevent the risk of leakage. Storage in standing biomass (e.g. forests) has a higher risk of reversal due to the possibility of fire, disease, drought, and mismanagement. Storage in higher-risk sinks, such as biomass and soils requires planning – and financing – for ongoing maintenance and mitigating potential reversal, in perpetuity. The cost of CDR is not only the price of extracting CO₂ from the atmosphere, but also the cost of maintaining the removal.
Weathering is the process by which certain rocks interact with water and atmospheric CO₂, dissolving the rock with CO₂ bound in it. The dissolved rock sinks into the soil and,
Figure 6: Geologic and biologic sinks are fundamentally different.
eventually, to underground aquifers or the oceans. Natural weathering occurs over decades to millennia, and can be sped up by increasing the surface area exposed to air. Mineralization is an adsorption process, by which CO₂ binds to the surface of certain materials, such as lime (CaO) and magnesium oxide (MgO). The CO₂ could then either be left in the material itself, or the material could be heated, releasing the CO₂ gas to be transported and stored elsewhere, and the material can then be reused. The speed of mineralization depends on the available surface area of the material, slowing
Storage of CO₂ in geologic sinks requires investment in robust surveying, infrastructure, and controlled injection. Geologic storage is effectively permanent, with a near-zero risk of reversal after the site has been closed.
down considerably when needing to permeate below the mineral’s surface. Absorption is a process by which CO₂ is captured into a chemical, such as a liquid solvent. The CO₂ is then released from the absorbent in a concentrated stream that can be more easily transported and stored, and the absorbent can be reused. Many modern CO₂ capture units use amine-based solvents to absorb CO₂.
Storage of CO₂ in biologic sinks, such as forests or soils, has a high risk of reversal and requires continuous management to prevent and replace any losses due to drought, fire, disease, pests, or human activity. Source: Bellona Foundation (2022) 19
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Another key issue is the monitorability of storage. CO₂ stored in static, concentrated reservoirs, such as geologic formations or forests have existing methodologies and tools to physically verify the amount of carbon stored. CO₂ stored in products, with the potential exception of buildings and other static infrastructure, is unlikely to be effectively monitorable, due to the dispersed nature of the storage. Dispersed storage is also a challenge for some natural sinks, such as soils and oceans, which also require distinguishing stored removed carbon from pre-existing carbon stocks. Besides differences in reversal risk and monitorability, different sinks have different capacities. Geological reservoirs will be able to store much more CO₂ in a more permanent and verifiable manner than biological reservoirs. One solution is sink separation (Figure 7): geological CDR balancing geological (fossil) emissions and biological CDR balancing biological emissions.
Figure 7: Concept of separation of sinks
Emissions of fossil carbon balanced by capture from the air to geological storage
Emissions from land use balanced by capture in land-based sinks
Source: Bellona Foundation (2022)
20
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Types of storage of CO₂ CDR requires that the atmospheric CO₂ is stored permanently. There are several options for CO₂ storage, with varying risk of
of years, but there are still many uncertainties and limited possibilities to track and monitor ocean-stored CO₂, which is
reversal and ease of monitoring.
often disperse.
Likely to be permanent, easy to monitor
Requires continuous management to maintain storage
Geological storage is CO₂ injected underground in geological formations such as retired oil and gas reservoirs, saline aquifers, or basaltic rock is effectively permanent, with a low risk of re-release. While the injection process needs to be controlled and monitored, underground gas injection and storage is a commercialised technology Mineralized CO₂ is bound into minerals such as basalt, or manmade materials such as concrete, and is only rereleased if exposed to temperatures above 500C (e.g., fire, re-firing in kilns). If the materials are used in buildings, subsurfaces, or other stationary and large-scale applications, they are easily monitorable. Note: Most manmade materials suitable for mineralization, such as fresh concrete, demolition wastes, lime, slag, and fly ash are materials that originally contained carbon dioxide (e.g. limestone). This CO₂ was released from the material in a conversion process, e.g., steel production, cement production, and typically emitted to the atmosphere. Thus, storing CO₂ in these materials is a remineralization process, and cannot store more CO₂ than was originally released. The emissions from the production of mineralizable materials must be accounted for when calculating the net removal of CO₂ stored in mineralized products.
Potentially permanent but difficult to monitor Weathering results in CO₂ being dissolved into microscopic molecules, which then leach into the soil and eventually into the ocean or underground aquifers. The CO₂-containing molecules are stable and inorganic and can persist for hundreds or thousands of years as part of the slow geological carbon cycle (though some amount may be taken up by plants or animals). However, as the CO₂ dissolves and disperses, it is very difficult to accurately measure and track. Biochar stores carbon in pyrolyzed biomass–essentially a form of charcoal. Depending on how the biochar is made, over 90% of the stored carbon can be stable, and is unlikely to decompose for hundreds of years. However, biochar is combustible, and therefore fire represents a reversal risk. Ocean storage is not treated in this report. It is theorised that CO₂ stored in deep oceans (via weathering, injecting, or biomass sinking) is likely to become part of the ocean carbon cycle, thus storing carbon for hundreds or thousands
Soil carbon storage is the storage of carbon in soils, such as by application of compost or tilling cover crops into soil. Soil carbon is susceptible to erosion and continuous land management is needed to maintain stocks. Afforestation is the storage of CO₂ in standing biomass stocks, such as forests. Biomass intended for CDR needs to be managed in perpetuity to prevent re-release of stored carbon due to fire, disease, pests, drought, harvest, or mismanagement. Temporary durable storage (delayed emissions) Note: If emission delay is conducted in a controlled manner, where re-release is predictable and managed, it could have the benefit of 'flattening the curve' of emissions, and provide some breathing room on managing the climate crisis by reducing near-term emissions until it is possible to balance their rerelease with additional removals. However, the risks of delayed emissions is that the re-release could happen in an uncontrolled or unexpected manner and that temporary storage will be used to balance fossil emissions that have a permanent impact on the atmosphere. Therefore, delayed emissions should be treated separately to permanent CDR. Biogenic building materials such as timber, can store carbon for decades, and stationery buildings and infrastructure can potentially be easy to monitor, at least during its initial service life.
However, the stored carbon risks being re-released during decommissioning/disposal or during fire or other disasters. Soil carbon and afforestation can also fall into the category of 'delayed emissions', if they are not managed in perpetuity but instead managed for a set length of time (e.g. decades). Not CO₂ storage CO₂ reused in consumable products, such as fuels, fertilisers, foodstuffs, beverages, dry ice, precipitated calcium carbonate (used in cigarette papers and medications), solvents, sodium bicarbonate, and other short-lived chemicals and materials. These products emit their carbon as CO₂ when they are used. CO₂ reused in greenhouses is partially absorbed into growing plants, and partly re-released directly into the atmosphere. The carbon in plants is re-released as greenhouse gases (CO₂ and methane) during decomposition or after consumption.
21
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
3.3 Ensuring net removals
CO₂eq
CDR is resource intensive. Extracting CO₂ from the atmosphere almost always requires more energy and effort than preventing its initial release. CDR systems, particularly those involving biomass, can also have complex greenhouse gas emission profiles, including methane and nitrogen oxides (N2O). Therefore, it is fundamental to use a ‘cradle to grave’ system perspective when evaluating the performance of CDR activities, accounting for all upstream and downstream emissions associated with the supply chains of inputs needed for removal and storage (e.g. energy, mined minerals, chemical solvents, biomass, transport, waste processing), or, in other terminology, including scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.
Not all greenhouse gases result in the same amount of
The accounting of CO₂ removal must include not only the physical amount of atmospheric CO₂ permanently stored but also the greenhouse gases (e.g. in CO₂eq) emitted to the atmosphere in the supply chains of the CO₂ removal, transport, and storage processes (Figure 8). This represents the net removal: permanently stored atmospheric CO₂ minus associated emissions, as this is the amount by which the CDR process decreases atmospheric greenhouse gases.
carbon dioxide on a 100-year time scale, but 86 times
global warming. For example, methane has 25 times the 100-year global warming potential than carbon dioxide. This means that for every kilogram of methane released, over the course of a century, it will cause the atmosphere to heat up as much as 25 kilograms of CO₂. To make it easier to understand and compare the impact of different greenhouse gases, global warming is typically characterised relative to carbon dioxide, in a unit called 'CO₂ equivalent', CO₂eq or CO₂e for short. Most commonly when you see CO₂eq, it is 'CO₂eq-100', which is the global warming impact compared to carbon dioxide on a 100year time scale. Timescale is important. As we noted, methane has 25 times the global warming potential of on a 20-year time scale. In contrast sulphur hexafluoride has a global warming potential of 22 800 times that of CO₂, kilogram for kilogram, on a hundred year timescale, but 16300 times on a 20 year time scale. This is because greenhouse gases, like many chemicals released into the environment, behave differently over different periods of time.
Figure 8: CDR must be based on net removals.
A CDR activity decreases atmospheric greenhouse gases not by the amount of CO₂ it extracted from the atmosphere, but by the amount of permanently stored atmospheric CO₂ minus the amount of greenhouse gases emitted in the complete supply chains of removal, transport, and storage processes. Source: Bellona (2022)
22
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
4. Quick scan: BioCCS
CCS CO₂ capture and storage (CCS) is a chain of commercialised technologies that separates CO₂ from a gas stream, transports that CO₂ to an appropriate storage site, such as
This section presents the main results of the data collection process, and assessment of the CDR potential in the wider Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and NSCA, applied to bioCCS options. Annex 7.1 describes the methodology under which the information and data was collected and assessed for the purpose of this report. More comprehensive data collected during interviews with players along the CDR chain are presented in Annex 7.3. The companies interviewed are representative of the types of players present in the area, but are not exhaustive. Biomass stores carbon from the atmosphere as it grows, but releases it when it decomposes, or is combusted. If the CO₂ is captured, transported and permanently stored, the result is that of a net removal of CO₂ from the atmosphere. Biomass with carbon capture and storage (bioCCS) are the processes in which CO₂ from biomass origin (i.e. biogenic CO₂ as opposed to fossil fuel origin) is captured and permanently stored (Figure 9). This can be from any industrial process which uses a biomass-based feedstock resulting in a CO₂ process stream. The CO₂ can then be captured and stored using similar technologies as those associated with conventional CCS (see Sidebar below). BioCCS requires both a source of biogenic CO₂ and a sink to store that CO₂ in. Currently in Europe, ~200 Mt CO₂ per year (5% of of 2018 EU emissions) could be mitigated with bioCCS.
With ambitious deployment, BioCCS could have the potential to remove up to 800 Mt CO₂ from the atmosphere every year in Europe by 2050.
a geologic reservoir, and stores the CO₂ permanently (Figure 10). CCS can be applied to different sources of CO₂, such as the combustion of fossil or biogenic fuels, the calcination of limestone, the fermentation of biomass, methane reforming for hydrogen production (e.g. used for ammonia production), and other chemical processes. A typical CCS process involves several steps: •
Gas cleaning: Depending on the composition of the gas stream and the separation technology. used, it may be necessary to remove impurities, such as NOX and SO2, prior to CO₂ separation. Otherwise, the separation equipment, chemicals, or transport vessel could be damaged.
•
CO₂ separation is needed to separate CO₂ from a mixed gas stream, such as an industrial flue gas (which are typically 5–25% CO₂). There are several methods to do this, but the most common is using a solvent or sorbent that binds with the CO₂, and then releasing the CO₂ from the solvent/sorbent, after which the solvent/sorbent can be reused. This releasing step is responsible for the high energy demand of CO₂ capture, which can range from 2–5 GJ/t CO₂, depending partly on technology but mostly on how dilute the CO₂ is (capturing more dilute CO₂ is more energy intensive). Some processes, such as fermentation, produce a pure stream of CO₂, so capture only requires isolating the CO₂ stream, without the need for separation.
•
Compression: CO₂ is compressed to make it easier to transport. Compressing CO₂ also removes any remaining water mixed in via condensation, which helps prevent corrosion of the transport vessels.
Figure 9: Overview of bioCCS pathway
•
Transport: Unless the CO₂ capture and storage sites are co-located, the CO₂ has to be transported. CO₂ transport can be by pipeline, boat, train, or truck.
•
Storage: CCS specifically implies geologic storage, which requires site selection, preparation, controlled injection, and monitoring. Empty oil and gas wells are often ideal storage sites, as they are well mapped, may have existing wellheads, and have proven capacity to store gas for millenia. Saline aquifers and basaltic formations are also used as stable storage sites. When properly carried out, geologic CO₂ storage is a safe and well understood process.
23
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Figure 10: CO₂ capture and storage involves a chain of technologies (Modified from Tanzer in DelftX 2022)
4.1 Overview of sources Table 2 below provides an overview of identified sources of biogenic CO₂, based on the interviews conducted in the scope of this project, also presented in Figure 11. These represent a cumulative ~900,000 t CO₂/year in Amsterdam and the NSCA, representing 5% of total NSCA CO₂ emissions (fossil and biogenic),
or 15% of non-Tata Steel related CO₂. It should be noted that this is not an exhaustive list of all the existing emitters of biogenic carbon in the region. More detailed information on each source identified is presented in Annex 7.3.
Figure 11: Maps of the interviewed sources of biogenic CO₂ in the Port of Amsterdam (Source: Google Maps 2022)
Cargill
Advance Methanol Amsterdam
BioEnergy NL
AEB (waste-to-energy)
Waternet
AEB (bioenergy)
24
Carbon removal potential in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area and the North Sea Canal Area
Table 2: Overview of interviewed sources of biogenic CO2 Note on headers: •
Scale of emissions: volume of biogenic CO₂ which is expected to be emitted, under specified time indication