CCS Roadmap in China
Kejun Jiang, Energy Research Institute, National Development and Reform
Commission (NDRC)
Background and introduction
With the rapid development of energy technologies in the 20th century, fossil
energy plays an important role in the survival and evolution of human society.
Utilization of fossil energy brings conveniences to human beings, but at the same
time, it badly destroys the global ecological environment. Heavy exploitation and
utilization of coal and other energy resources not only destroy the ecological
environment of exploitation areas (energy resource bases), but also contaminate the
atmosphere of consumption areas (terminals). Since the 1990s, facing global climate
warming and frequently abnormal climate phenomena, such as floods, droughts and
typhoons, people have realized the importance of climate. Abnormal climate
phenomena are mainly attributed to greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O, fluorides etc.)
emission. And the sustained increase of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere mostly
stems from unreasonable use of fossil resources, which has already attracted wide
international attention. Generally, pollutant emission control pertains to the method
of ‘polluting primarily and controlling subsequently’ that a pollutant is produced in
energy utilization and controlled after energy utilization. However, the traditional
chain-mode of resource, energy utilization and environment in series brings
profound lessons on luxurious waste of resources, low efficiency of energy utilization
and intolerable environmental pollution.
To the present, China’s economic development was basically at the cost of
excess depletion of resources and indulgence of environmental pollution in the
above two stages. Exorbitantly relying on exploiting and utilizing fossil fuels (coal,
petroleum and natural gas etc.) and natural resources (water, soil and biomass etc.),
then converting them into energy by simple means, e.g. combustion, ultimately
utilizing the energy in forms of heat and work, the contradiction among resource,
energy and environment is increasingly intensified under the situation of
superabundant population and relatively scarce resources in China. In China’s
present energy consumption structure, coal, petroleum and natural gas occupies 68%,
23.45% and 3%, respectively, which determines that the coal-dominating energy
consumption structure will be unchangeable in short order. Taking an example from
the coal-fired power generation industry in China, the installed capacity of power
generation is augmented annually to satisfy rapid economic development, and the
total installed capacity reached 500 million kilowatts in 2005, in which new installed
capacity exceeded 60 million kilowatts. Consequently, the emission of pollutants
remains at a high level. On the basis of the relational statistic, 70% of soot emission,
90% of SO2 emission, 67% of NOX emission and 70% of CO2 emissions come from coal
combustion. In addition to the pollutant emissions in the process of energy
consumption, a large number of harmful gases are also yielded in the processes of
exploitation, refining and supply, which badly impacts the ambient air quality. The
tenth Five-Year (2001~2005) Plan indicated that main pollutant emissions should
decrease 10% in the five years. However, according to 2005 statistics, a large amount
of pollutant mitigation, such as soot and chemical oxygen demand, did not achieve
anticipated goals. Among the most severely-polluted 20 cities listed on World Bank’s
development report, 16 are in China. According to the environmental sustainable
indexes promulgated by the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland，China
ranks 133rd among 144 countries and regions. The World Bank predicted 390 billion
dollars would be needed to treat diseases caused by coal-fired pollution in 2020,
which is the equivalent of 13% of China’s GDP. The social effects of pollution
appearing in the middle and late periods of industrialization in developed countries
have taken place in China as well, which induces greater polarization between the
wealthy and the poor and incites more sharp social conflict.
Greenhouse gas caused by human activities are mainly comprised of CO2
emission from combustion of fossil and biomass fuels, CH4 emissions and leakage
from exploitation of fossil resources, emissions from industrial production, emissions
(CH4) from agriculture and farming, and the reduction of CO2 absorbers such as
vegetation. In fact, fossil fuels are the dominant forms of energy utilization in the
world (86%), which account for about 75% of current anthropogenic CO2 emission
sources (IPCC, 2001c). Thus, the mitigation of CO2 released from fossil fuel
combustion will be the focus of CO2 capture and storage (CCS).
At present, the options for reducing net CO2 emissions to the atmosphere
include:
 Changing the energy structure, switching to low-carbon fuels, e.g. natural gas
instead of coal, increasing the use of renewable energy or nuclear energy, which
emits little or no net CO2;
 Technological solutions, involving reducing energy consumption by either
increasing energy conversion and utilization efficiency, or capturing and storing
CO2 with sequestration technologies;
 Sequestering CO2 by enhancing biological absorption capacity in forests and
soils.
As a key driver of development in modern society, fossil fuels (mainly including
coal, natural gas and petroleum) play an important role in supplying energy. Chemical
energy of fossil fuels can be converted into physical energy through combustion, and
then may be used in different forms like electricity and work. However,
accompanying the combustion process, a large amount of CO2 is produced because
most energy carriers in fossil fuels are carbon and hydrogen. Along with the
distinction in components, heat values and utilization technologies, the
characteristics of CO2 emissions from different fossil fuels are various. The carbon
content of coal is 0.024kg/MJ~0.026kg/MJ, which is the highest level among fossil
fuels. this means that 0.08kg~1.0kg CO2 is generated when coal is directly burnt
resulting in a release of 1MJ heat. Another important form of fossil fuel is which is
mainly composed of CH4. The carbon content of natural gas is about 0.015kg/MJ,
which is only about half of that in coal. Natural gas is much cleaner than coal from
the viewpoint of CO2 emission. In addition, the average efficiency of coal-based
power plants is about 40%; while the efficiency of natural gas-based combined cycle
can be as high as 58%. As a result, with 1kWh electricity output, 0.35kg CO2 will be
released in natural gas-based combined cycle, far lower than 1kg CO2 emission in
conventional coal-based power plants. Conclusively, conversion of high-carbon fuels
to low-carbon fuels will be cost-effective where an appropriate supply of natural gas
is available.
Known as zero-emission energy resources, nuclear energy and most renewable
energy do not emit any CO2 in their conversion and utilization processes. The
application of bio-energy, whose carbon element comes from atmosphere during the
growth of plants, will not increase net CO2 concentration in air. So bio-energy can
also be considered as a kind of clean energy resource. Furthermore, if CO2 produced
in a bio-energy utilization process can be captured and stored, net removal of CO2
from atmosphere can achieve. The overall effect is referred to ‘negative net emission’,
an innovative concept that has attracted wide attention among European policy
makers.
It is apparent that an energy structure adjustment using low-carbon fuels
instead of carbon-concentrated fuels, is a potential pathway to reduce CO2 emission.
However, it is restricted by many factors, including resource structure, technical level
and energy safety. China has nearly half of global coal reserves, while holding only
has 14.3% of the average global natural gas reserves. This limits the development of
natural gas-based combined cycle with high efficiency and low pollutant emission.
High costs and technical problems make it impossible that China’s energy structure is
shifted to mainly renewables in the short run. CO2 control by the use of energy
structure adjustments will be a long-term task.
Besides adjusting energy structure, another important pathway to control
greenhouse gases is to improve energy utilization efficiency as well as to exploit CO2
technologies of separation, storage and utilization. With an increase of utilization
efficiency, less fossil fuel will be consumed, which will lead to CO2 emission
mitigation. However, it will not become the fundamental solution in greenhouse gas
control. First, the contribution of the finite increment of efficiency is insignificant;
second, with economic development, the increase in energy demand will be much
greater than energy consumption reductions from efficiency promotion, which will
result in a net increase of CO2 emission. Accordingly, the technical exploitation of
separation, storage and utilization of CO2 will be the ultimate solution to achieve the
goal of greenhouse gas control.
Storage and utilization of CO2 provide a receiving terminal for excessive CO2. The
CCS process is to separate CO2 from flue gas in a combustion system and to compress
it under high pressure, then to transport it to the site for storage. So far, a
considerable amount of CO2 needs to be captured and stored in order to alleviate
climate warming. Some geological reservoirs underground may provide room for CO2
storage, including former oil and gas fields which could make a contribution to
offsetting the cost of increasing the production of hydrocarbons. Considerable
potential CO2 storage exists under the sea, however there remain technological
problems to address and unpredictable factors to confirm with under sea storage. An
emerging and promising technique to recovery CO2 from bio-energy systems to reach
zero-emission is attracting increasing worldwide attention. Some chemical and food
industry processes also use CO2 as raw material. In most cases, CO2 should be used
and stored in high purity forms. Therefore, separating CO2 from other gases should
be the first step of CCS technologies.
About 56% of the CO2 emissions caused by fossil fuels combustion (which
accounts for 83% of total CO2 emission), comes from power plants, steel industries
and chemical production processes, and about 32% and 12% from transportation and
daily life, respectively. As the largest sources of emissions, power plants, steel
industries and chemical production processes, especially energy industries, which
provide steady and centralized sources for CO2 capture, will play a significant role in
greenhouse gas control.
According to the principle of “common but differential responsibility”, only
developed countries in Annex I have to implement a GHG emission reduction
commitment. However, increasing emissions caused by economic development, is
increasing the pressure imposed on developing countries. China also has a lot of
CH4 and N2O emissions. CO2 emissions were 823 million tons in China during the
period of 1990~2001, which accounted for 27% of the total global growth in
emissions. It is predicted that CO2 emissions in 2020 will be 132% greater than in
2001, exceeding the total global emissions from 1990~2001. Although the CO2
emission rate per capita in China is currently lower than the global average, this faint
superiority will be diminished by 2025. However, due to old equipment, out dated
techniques and high energy consumption intensity, CO2 emissions per unit of GDP in
China is higher than the average global level.
Greenhouse gas control will impose a significant international burden on the
future world. Although China is not required to commit to a CO2 emissions reduction,
China should be positive in finding technical solutions. Both the U.S. and EU have
presented their own technical routes to support their national strategies and
international negotiating positions. Comparatively, China will become passive in
negotiations without a clear strategic objective and technical route, which will
degrade its international standing, and will retard its sustainable development.
A suitable technical route of greenhouse gas control should be proposed as soon as
possible during the processes of industrialization, urbanization and modernization in
China, in order to offer a scientific foundation and theoretical support for policy
making, and contribute to abating global climate change.
1. CURRENT STATUS AND CHALLENGES
1.1 An assessment of present technology
At present, most research is seeking ways to capture CO2 from energy systems
with a focus on the CO2 separation process and system integration. For system
integration research, three types of approaches for integrating CO2 capture into
energy systems have been investigated: post-combustion capture, pre-combustion
capture, and oxy-fuel combustion. For example, Andersen and Bolland[8] studied the
pre-combustion capture option for a combined cycle using auto-thermal reforming of
natural gas. For a coal-based energy system, a pre-combustion capture scheme was
investigated by Chiesa and Lozza[9―11]. A comparison between the oxy-fuel
combustion cycle and post-combustion capture was presented by Bolland and
Mathieu[12]. An IGCC system adopting chemical-looping combustion has been
proposed and investigated by Jin and Ishida [13, 14].
Post-combustion capture is generally regarded as a more feasible approach
because it can be adopted by existing power plants, but since exhaust gas is diluted
by nitrogen, the concentration of CO2 in exhaust gas is rather low, causing
considerable energy consumption in the CO2 separation process. Consequently,
around 8.0 to 13.0 percentage points in efficiency will be lost due to the energy
penalty for CO2 capture in power plants adopting the post-combustion scheme[9,12].
To increase the CO2 concentration before separation, another important scheme,
which is pre-combustion CO2 capture, recovers the CO2 before it is diluted in air. To
achieve this, extra processes such as shift reaction should be employed.
Consequently, the energy penalty for pre-combustion capture is mainly composed of
three parts, including the energy consumption caused by the shift reaction, by CO2
separation processes, and the reduction in power output caused by the decrease in
the heating value of fuel gas. Most studies indicate that the thermal efficiency of a
system adopting pre-combustion capture will be decreased by 7.0 to 10.0 percentage
points.
As mentioned above, most systems have an overall thermal efficiency penalty of
nearly 7.0—13.0 percent points for CO2 capture. Therefore, it can be concluded that
the high energy penalty is one of the common problems of energy systems with CO2
capture.
An efficiency decrease of a quarter means that the power technology falls back
to the level of the last half century, which is unacceptable for a power system.
Furthermore, the rise in energy consumption due to CO2 emission control will add to
the rapid rising trends of energy consumption.
1.2 Current global efforts
China‘s CCUS development will be supported by the following basic conditions:
(1) China has many large scaled point emission sources suitable for CO2 capture,
mainly in the electricity, cement, steel, chemical industries, etc.; it has the potential to
reduce technical costs and facilitate deployment by scaling-up and integration; (2)
China has considerable theoretical storage potential. It is estimated from preliminary
studies that the potential for geologic storage of CO2 in China is approximately
hundreds of billion tons, consisting mainly of saline aquifers, oil and gas reservoirs,
coal seams and other geologic bodies; (3) there are multiple approaches for CO2
utilization in China, the potential profit of CO2 utilization may promote the
development of other aspects along the CCUS technology chain. Among which,
enhanced oil recovery (EOR) utilizing CO2 can improve the recovery and utilization
rate of several billion tons of low-grade petroleum resources in China, and it’s capable
of enhancing oil recovery by 10% or more, with a great deal of further development
potential.
Meanwhile, as a developing country, China faces challenges from its national
conditions and unique geological features in developing CCUS technology: (1)
China’s economic and social development level is still relatively low, and is difficult
to bear the enormous costs for multiple integrated full-scale CCUS demonstration
projects, not to mention the additional energy consumption and costs to scale-up
deployment; (2) there exists a matching dislocation between source and sink, the
imbalanced development between regions results in emission sources that are more
concentrated in the densely populated eastern region, however, the western region has
greater potential for storage; (3) the geologic conditions are complex in China,
resulting in more technical difficulties in CO2 storage. In China, the geologic
formations for CO2 storage are mostly continental deposits, the geologic formation is
complicated, with stronger lithologic heterogeneity and lower permeability, featuring
small average thickness and high fault density, therefore, additional storage
technology will be required; (4) the dense population will also require higher security
standards for transport and storage in China.
China has made significant progress in developing CCUS technology, and
launched successful industrial scale CO2 capture demonstrations in recent years. At
present, under the guidance of governments, China’s CCUS R&D activities are
basically implemented by enterprises, and are jointly participated in by research
institutes and universities.
The public funded R&D activities on CCUS are mainly administrated by the
Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), Natural Science Foundation of China
(NSFC) and other relevant Ministries. Since the tenth five-year plan period, through
many national science and technology programs, including the National Basic
Research (973) Program, the National High Technology Development (863) Program,
and the National Key Technology R&D Program, China has made systematic
advances in CCUS basic research, R&D and demonstrations, targeting the emission
reduction potential of CCUS technology, CO2 capture, bio-conversion and utilization,
CO2-EOR and geologic storage, which each involve different types of CO2 emission
sources, different capture technology paths, and different CO2 conversion and
utilization modes. China has also invested considerable funds on the technical
development and demonstration of CO2-EOR and CO2-ECBM through the National
Major Science and Technology Special Program for “the Development of Large-sized
Oil & Gas Fields and Coal-bed Methane”. Moreover, China has actively participated
in the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF), Clean Energy Ministerial
(CEM) and other multilateral frameworks for cooperation on CCUS technology, and
organized its research institutions and enterprises to participate in a number of
bilateral and multilateral cooperation projects, thus effectively promoting the
development in related fields. Table 1 shows some public-funded R&D projects and
related international cooperation projects.
Table 1 List of Main CCUS Technology R&D Projects and International
Cooperation Projects supported by Chinese Government
Funding
Project Name
Execution
Main Participating
Project
Sources
Time
Organizations
Type
Greenhouse Gas
National Basic 2006-2010
Institute of S&T Research,
Enhanced Oil Recovery Research
PetroChina,
Huazhong
and Underground
Program（973）
University of Science and
Storage
Technology,
Institute
of
Geology and Geophysics of
Basic
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Research
and China University of
Petroleum (Beijing), etc.
Basic Research of CO2
2011-2015
Institute of S&T Research,
Emission Reduction,
PetroChina, etc.
Storage and Utilization
The Capture and
2008-2010
Tsinghua University, East
Storage Technology of
China
University
of
CO2
Technology and Institute of
Geology and Geophysics of
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
etc.
National High
Critical Technology
Technology
2009-2011
Institute of S&T Research,
R&D
Research on CO2
Development
PetroChina and Research
Enhancing Oil
Program（863）
Institute of Exploration and
Recovery and Storage
Development, Petrochina, etc.
New O2/ CO2 Cycle
2009-2011
Huazhong University of
Combustion Equipment
Science and Technology, etc.
R&D and System
Optimization
CO2- algae - Biodiesel
Critical
Technology
Research
Safe Development of
Natural Gas Reservoirs
with CO2and CO2
Utilization Technology
The Development of
Songliao
Basin
Volcanic
Gas
Reservoirs and CO2
Utilization
Demonstration Project
2009-2011
The
“11th 2008-2010
Five-Year”
National Major
Science
and
Technology
2008-2010
Program
of
"Large Oil and
Gas Fields and
Coal-bed
Methane
Development"
(Major Project)
CO2
Capture
and the 11th
2008-2010
Purification
Five-Year
Technology
with National Key
High-Gravity
and Technology
Application
R&D Program
Demonstration
（Key
Technology
Program）
Critical
Technology,
2011-2014
Equipment
Research
and Development and
Engineering
Demonstration
of
35MWth
OxyCombustion
Carbon
The 12th
Capture
Five-Year Key
Technology
2011-2014
Technology
Development and
Program
Demonstration of
300,000 tons CO2
Capture and Geologic
Storage of High
Concentrations CO2
from Coal-to-liquid
Project
Critical Technology
2011-2014
Development and
Demonstration of CO2
Emission Reduction by
ENN Group, Jinan University,
etc.
Institute of S&T Research,
PetroChina and PetroChina
Jilin Oilfield Branch, etc
PetroChina
Jilin
Oilfield
Branch and Institute of S&T
Research, PetroChina, etc.
Sinopec
Shengli
Oilfield
Branch, Beijing University of
Chemical Technology, Beijing
University of Technology and
China University of Petroleum
(East China), etc.
R&D
and
Huazhong
University
of
Demonst
Science
and
Technology,
ration
Dongfang Electric Group and
Sichuan
Air
Separation
Equipment Group, etc.
China Shenhua Group, Beijing
Institute of Low-Carbon Clean
Energy and Wuhan Institute of
Rock and soil Mechanics of
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
etc.
Chinese Society of Metals and
Iron and Steel Research
Institute, etc.
Blast Furnace Iron
making
Research and
Demonstration of CO2
Capture, Utilization and
Storage Based on
Integrated Gasification
Combined Cycle
(IGCC)
The Nationwide CO2
Geologic Storage
Potential Assessment
and Demonstration
Project
the 12th
Five-Year 863
Program
2011-2013
China
Huaneng
Group,
Tsinghua
University
and
Thermal Physics Institute of
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
etc.
The Ministry
of Land and
Resources
2010-2014
China
Geologic
Survey
Bureau, Wuhan Institute of
rock and soil mechanics of
Chinese Academy of Sciences
and Peking University, etc.
2011-2015
Institute of S&T Research,
PetroChinaI and PetroChina
Jilin Oilfield Branch, etc.
PetroChina Jilin Oilfield
Branch and Institute of S&T
Research, PetroChina, etc.
Critical Technology of
CO2 EOR and Storage
CO2 EOR and Storage
Technology
Demonstration Project
of Songliao Basin
Technology on Deep
Coal-bed
Methane
Development and its
Application
China-EU Near Zero
Emissions Coal
(NZEC) Cooperation
Project
2011-2015
“12
Five-Year”
Major Project
th
2011-2015
China United Coal-bed
Methane Company, etc.
MOST,
2007-2009
European
Union and UK
Defra
the Administrative Centre for
China’s
Agenda
21
(ACCA21), TPRI, Tsinghua
University
and
Thermal
Physics Institute of Chinese
Academy of Sciences, etc.
China-US Clean
Energy Research
Center
MOST,
DOE
China-Australia CO2
Geologic Storage
Cooperation Project
(CAGS)
Sino-Italy CCS
Cooperation Project
MOST
and 2009-2011
Australian
RET
Huazhong University of
Science and Technology,
Tsinghua University and China
Huaneng Group, etc.
ACCA21, China Geologic
Survey and Tsinghua
University, etc.
MOST
IMELS
US 2010-2015
and 2010-2012
ACCA21, ENEL, China
Huaneng Group, Tsinghua
University and Thermal
Physics Institute of Chinese
Internati
onal
Cooperat
ion
Academy of Sciences, etc.
Sequence
Project Name
Number
1
CO2-EOR
Research and
Demonstration,
PetroChina
Jilin Oil Field
CO2 Chemical
2
Utilization
Project of
Zhongke
Jinlong
Pilot-scale
3
Capture Project
at Beijing
Thermal Power
Plant,
Huaneng Group
CO2
4
manufacturing
Biodegradable
Plastic Project ,
China National
Offshore Oil
Corporation
Shanghai
5
Shidongkou
Carbon Capture
Demonstration ,
Huaneng Group
Chongqing
6
Shuanghuai
Power Plant
Carbon Capture
Demonstration,
China Power
Investment
Group
Sinopec Shengli
7
Oil Field
CCS-EOR
Demonstration
Location
Scale
Demonstration
Content
Current
Progress
Jilin Oilfield
Storage
Capacity:
about
100,000 t/a
CCS-EOR
Taixing,
Jiangsu
Province
Utilization
Capacity:
about 10,000
t/a
Chemical
Operational
Utilization of CO2 since 2007
Gaobeidian,
Beijing
Capture
Capacity:
3,000 t/a
Post-Combustion
Capture
Operational
since 2008
Dongfang,
Hainan
Province
Utilization
Capacity:
2,100 t/a
Chemical
Utilization of
CO2
Operational
since 2009
Shidongkou,
Shanghai
Capture
Capacity:
120,000 t/a
Post-Combustion
Capture
Operational
since 2009
Hechuan,
Chongqing
Capture
Capacity:
10,000 t/a
Post-Combustion
Capture
Operational
since 2010
Shengli
Oilfield
Capture and
Utilization
Capacity:
40,000 t/a
Post-Combustion
Capture ,
CCS-EOR
Operational
since 2010
Operational
since 2007
8
Lianyungang
Clean Coal
Energy System
Research
Facilities
9
Shenhua Group
Coal-To-Liquid
CCS
Demonstration
Capture
Capacity:
30,000 t/a (In
next phase,
Lianyungang,
the Capacity
Jiangsu
to be
Province
captured and
utilized will
be 500,000
t/a.)
Capture
Capacity:
100,000 T/a
Erdos, Inner
Storage
Mongolia
Capacity:
about
100,000 t/a
Pre-Combustion
Capture
Coal Liquefaction
Plants Capture +
Operational
Saline aquifer
since 2011
Storage
10
ENN Group
Microalgae
Bio-fuel
Demonstration
Project
11
12
13
14
Dalate, Inner
Mongolia
CO2
Utilizing
Capacity :
about 20,000
t/a
Operational
since 2011
Biological
Utilization of CO2
Capture
Huaneng
Pre-Combustion
Binhai New Capacity:
Green-gen
Capture,
Area, Tianjin 60,000
to
IGCC CCS Pilot
CCS-EOR
100,000 t/a
35MWt
Yingcheng,
Capture
Oxy-combustion
Oxy-combustion
Hubei
Capacity:
R&D
project,
Capture
Province
50,000 t/a
HUST
CO2 Capture
and Utilization
Tanggu
Capture
Post-Combustion
Demonstration
District,
Capacity:
Capture
Project,
Tianjin
20,000 t/a
Guodian Group
Sinopec
Coal Gas
Capture and
Coal-to-Gas
Capture, Carbon
Shengli
Utilization
CO2 Capture
Capture and
Oilfield
Capacity:
and EOR
Storage-Enhanced
700,000 t/a
Demonstration
Oil Recovery
the First
Phase: Put into
Production;
the Second
Phase: under
Construction;
the Third
Phase: under
preparation
Launched
2011
in
Launched
2011
in
proposed
proposed
15
CO2 Capture
and Storage
Displacement
Demonstration
Project of
Sinopec Group
Shengli Oil
Field
2
Shengli
Oilfield
Capture and
Utilization
Post-Combustion
Capacity:
Capture,
0.5~1 million CCS-EOR
t/a
proposed
An assessment of readiness for CCS technology development in China
2.1 Specific conditions of China for CCS
By 2011, total primary energy use was 3.56 Billion tce, coal use was 3.6billion ton,
natural gas was 130BCM and oil was 460million ton. 55% of coal was used in the power
generation sector. Natural gas use in power generation is increasing quickly. China’s
large amount of fossil fuel use results in pressure to mitigate CO2 emissions.
Based on the study using the IPAC model, coal and natural gas use in China in 2030 will
be around 3.5billion tce and 380bcm. More than 65% of coal will be used in the power
generation sector and space heating supply and more than 40% of natural gas use will
also be in these sectors (Jiang et al, 2009; Jiang et al, 2012).
Recent studies on global emission scenarios suggest global CO2 emissions will have to
peak before 2020 if the global 2 degree target is to be achieved (IPCC, 2011; Jiang et al,
2012). This means CO2 emissions have to decrease quickly after 2020. Some scenarios
suggest overshooting by having CO2 emission decreasing rapidly after 2030 and negative
emissions after 2070.
In all of these cases, CCS will be an essential way to bring CO2 emission down with
relatively low cost. In China, CCS is a crucial option because of the large amount of fossil
fuel use and CO2 emissions.
CCS could be mainly used in power generation, cement manufacturing, steel making, the
petro-chemical industry and syn-fuel manufacturing. All of these industries are large
scale. China needs to try various CCS technologies in these different industries. Diversity
in the sector or areas where CCS is utilized means there will be a demand to try different
type of CCS technologies in China. Even in the same type of sector or area, there are
different CCS technologies that can be utilized. For example, with a natural gas fired
power plants, NGCC with CCS could be very different than CHP NGCC with CCS because
of different operational patterns.
Figure 1 presents future power plant capacity, which provides a picture of potentialCCS
utilization in the power generation sector.
Power Capacity by technologies in China, low energy scenario
250000
Hydro
Nuclear
Wind off shore
Wind on shore
Biomass IGCC
Biomass Direct
200000
Solar Thermal
Solar PV
10MW
150000
Oil
NGCC
100000
N.Gas
PFBC
IGCC-Fuel Cell
IGCC-68%
50000
0
2000
IGCC-20%
US-Critical
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
Year
2050
Super Critical
Large Coal Unit
Samll Coal
Figure 1 Installed capacity by technologies, LC
However CCS technology is not yet fully mature and still needs fundamental research.
The variety of energy use technologies in China which may be suitable for CCS, brings
much greater complexity to developing CCS in China.
Currently there are common global challenges for CCS development: high cost,
uncertainty on technologies, high energy penalty, risk for storage, and lack of regulation
and practices. A good way to improve this situation is to make use of pilot and
demonstration projects in various areas that have the potential to use CCS.
But another big challenge in China is many people still do not like CCS and do not want
put CCS on the national policy agenda. Right now we predict that CCS is a promising
technology for achieving near zero emissions from the use of fossil fuel in large
stationary emissions sources such as power stations and large energy intensive industrial
processes. However, CCS is not yet a commercially available technology although there
is considerable research and development underway, as well as plans for large scale
demonstrations, particularly in Europe, North America, Australia, Japan and now China.
In the broadest sense, the research and development is focused on reducing the costs
and improving the efficiency of capture technologies either through improvements to
those technologies that are ready for demonstration or through the longer term
development of alternative systems. Alongside this, there is work [underway/needed] to
address key issues such as mapping the CO2 storage capacities in numerous countries
and developing monitoring and verification techniques for safe overall operation.
There has been some progress on CCS development in China. The rationale and choices
for demonstration projects in China are strategic considerations (NZEC 2009). The
national context, technology status and other factors, such as feasibility, stakeholder
interest, timing and cost, will be taken into account by the Chinese authorities in
determining what is required. Several major large-scale demonstration projects are
already being considered in China. These include proposals for IGCC with CCS (Greengen
Phase 2), post-combustion CO2 capture (Huaneng large scale side-stream on a
pulverised coal power plant), CO2 capture at a Coal-to-Liquids demonstration plant with
either EOR or aquifer storage (Shenhua Corporation). Eventually a portfolio of
demonstration activities may be needed in China to cover different CCS applications,
storage options and regions.
Demonstration projects are critical to establishing the basis for the subsequent
deployment of CCS technologies. The goals of such CCS demonstration activities should
include: establishing the technology, including process integration and optimisation at a
scale that is large enough to allow subsequent plants to be built with confidence at
commercial scale.
2.2 Evaluation of existing policy/regulation experiences and assessing their
applicability to China
Policies and regulations will play an important role in establishing and implementing CCS
activities. Accordingly, this section will first identify and list emerging policies,
regulations and programs, to support CCS activities internationally, based on the EU and
member states, USA and Australian initiatives, together with the outputs arising from
the IEA Working Group on CCS regulation as well as previous work on this topic
supported by the ADB in a previous CCS capacity building TA in China.
As CCS is now under development in several countries, their experiences could provide
the basis for China to develop CCS. One of the key factors is how to provide legal and
regulatory framework for CCS in China. This section begins with a review of the
international legal and regulatory practices, and a review of experiences in China, and
concludes with suggestions for China to establish legal and regulatory framework for
CCS.
2.2.1 international policies and practices
Regulations will be needed to support the demonstration (and deployment) of CCS in
China, particularly for the storage of CO2 underground but also to address the safety of
the pipelines carrying CO2 and the environmental impact of CO2 capture plants. In
other countries, existing regulations are being extended to cover near-term (i.e. up to
ten years) CCS demonstration projects, There is also international cooperation amongst
several groups to attempt to establish a common approach to key issues.
For large-scale, longer-term deployment of CCS, additional regulations are being
formulated, for example in the EU and Australia, covering issues such as long-term
liability and financial responsibility post-closure of CO2 storage locations. China has an
opportunity to observe and draw lessons from the experiences of other countries in
deciding how it wants to proceed in developing regulations.
Some of these developments are amendments to existing international agreements to
ensure CO2 storage is not inadvertently prevented. This is because the legislation
concerned was not drafted originally with CCS in mind and so had appeared to be
ambiguous, or directly obstructive, to the deployment of CCS technologies. Consequently,
the international community has been active to modify the conventions and treaties
concerned.
-
The London Protocol
The London Protocol is an international agreement that seeks to ‘eliminate pollution
caused by dumping or incineration at sea of wastes or other matter’. Currently 86
members are signed up to this global agreement. It contains restrictive measures relating
to the dumping of waste in the marine environment, save for particular materials listed
in its Annex. As CO2 was not listed in this Annex, it was not clear whether the Protocol
prohibited certain CCS activities. In 2007, an amendment was agreed by the Contracting
Parties, which inserted a new category into the Protocol’s Annex, allowing permits to be
granted for ‘carbon dioxide streams from carbon dioxide capture processes for
sequestration’. This removed the uncertainty and introduced an obligation for regulation.
A second amendment provided criteria for the CO2 streams with regard to their purity
and a set of guidelines detailed the steps to be taken before the issue of a permit. Thus
the Protocol now states ‘carbon dioxide streams’ may only be considered for dumping, if:
 Disposal is into a sub-seabed geological formation,
 They consist overwhelmingly of carbon dioxide (incidental associated substances
derived from the source material and the capture and sequestration processes
are allowed), and
 No waste is added for the purpose of disposing this waste.
The protocol does not yet address issues of trans-border transport of CO2 within the
sub-seabed, which would require a further amendment.
-
The Ospar Convention
The Ospar Convention is a regional agreement aimed at protecting the waters of the
North-East Atlantic and North Sea, which regulates polluting activities in the sub-seabed
and subsoil, and also contains certain restrictive provisions regarding pollution from
land-based sources. Many of these provisions could have been interpreted to mean that
certain CCS activities would not have been compatible with the terms of the Convention.
In 2007, the parties to Ospar decided to make amendments to the Convention to allow
for CO2 storage in sub-seabed geological formations, subject to certain conditions. Thus
new paragraphs were inserted into the Convention’s Annexes allowing for the permitting
of sub-seabed storage of CO2 streams, provided the streams consisted ‘overwhelmingly’
of CO2 and no other materials or wastes were added for disposal. The amendments
require that specific CO2 guidelines be applied before issuing storage permits, while a
Framework for Risk Assessment and Management of CO2 Streams in Geological
Formations provides Parties to the Convention with an ‘iterative process’ to ensure the
continual improvement of a project throughout its lifetime (IPCC 2005 and 2006).
According to the European Commission, the amendment to the London Protocol on
dumping waste at sea and the amendment of the annexes of the Ospar Convention (on
protecting the marine environment in the North-East Atlantic) were successful
in resolving the treatment of CCS at international level such that the CO2 should not be
classified as waste anymore.
-
The EU Directive
The EU Directive 20099/31/EC on the geological storage of CO2, which was adopted by
the European Council on 6 April 2009, forms part of the EU's Climate Change Package.
This sets out a regulatory regime for the permitting of exploration and storage, and
establishes criteria for the selection of storage sites. Operational, closure and
post-closure obligations are defined, including monitoring and reporting requirements
and the immediate remediation of any irregularities or leakages. Operators are also
required to make financial provision to ensure that all the terms of the issued permit are
maintained. There is provision for the transfer of responsibility in the long-term from the
operator to the competent authority when all evidence indicates that the stored CO2 will
be completely contained for the indefinite future.
The Directive gave Member States until 25 June 2011 to transpose it into their respective
national laws. Accordingly, several European countries are adapting their existing laws to
facilitate CO2 storage. Poland is seeking to change its Mining Act. Germany will adapt oil
and gas exploration laws for offshore storage and its Mining Act for onshore storage.
-
The UK CCS regulatory initiatives
In 2008, the UK Energy Act was established to allow for the offshore storage of CCS. It
should be noted that the focus is on offshore applications since the UK is a small
crowded country but one that has significant potential CO2 storage sites offshore,
especially in depleted oil and gas wells. Thus the law introduces a regulatory framework
for the licensing of offshore storage of CCS, with the designation of an Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ), which is estimated at 200 nautical miles. For companies willing to
undertake CO2 storage within the EEZ, a lease or a rental payment will be required to be
paid to the Government.
The Act introduces a regime that complies with the EU Directive. All activities relating to
CO2 storage, including exploration and operation of the storage site, require a licence
from the relevant authority. The Energy Act provides details relating to storage permits,
including provisions relating to future financial obligations (operational, closure and
post-closure). It also introduces a detailed section relating to the assignment of
inspectors by the Secretary of State for inspection of storage sites. The Energy Act also
draws on the Petroleum Act 1998 concerning abandonment of offshore CO2 storage
installations. Plans and approvals are prescribed under the 1998 Act, which requires
persons seeking to abandon an offshore site to provide an 'abandonment programme'.
-
CCS regulation initiatives in The Netherlands
The Netherlands government is currently considering issues related to CO2 storage
regulation based on its existing regulatory system. The country has many depleted gas
reservoirs where production has ended and these offer potentially attractive storage
options for CO2. In order to store either gas or CO2 in any of these empty reservoirs, a
storage license is needed. However, granting a storage license for CO2 site operators
becomes problematic where gas companies still hold production licenses for these
reservoirs (IEA 2008).
One of the options being considered is to amend the Dutch Mining Act of 2003 so that
the government can withdraw some of the production licenses where there are no
further production activities. However, in most cases, the companies interested in CO2
storage will be gas companies who can inject CO2 in their existing gas fields.
Consequently, one option is to give storage licenses to existing gas producers. However, a
complex situation arises if these licenses should be given to different operators while the
production licenses is still active as the assessment of the value of remaining gas to
transfer licenses may be difficult.
-
CCS regulations in Norway
According to the Norwegian Pollution Control Act, CO2 emissions from industrial plants
are classified as a pollutant and so any company that emits large amounts of CO2 must
obtain an emissions permit (Government of Norway 1996). The ‘Pollution Control
Authority’ may impose conditions to prevent these emissions as with the new gas-fired
power plant at Mongstad, which is required to install CCS by 2014 (Hallenstvedt 2008).
However, currently, an emissions permit for fossil fuel companies does not include the
transport and storage of CO2. Thus, there is a need for dedicated legislation on the
storage of CO2 in Norway, which will form a basis for a permit system where authorities
can set conditions and regulate the responsibility regarding inspection and supervision of
leakage. It is a possibility that the existing Pollution Control Act can serve as a reference
for this new CCS regulation. It provides guidance on several topics relevant to CCS
regulation, including requirements in a permit application, withdrawal of permits, the
responsibility of the authority, duty to provide information, right of inspection, closure
and stoppage of operations and liability.
-
CCS regulatory activities in Australia
Australia has been active in introducing regulations to facilitate the deployment of CCS.
The Australian Regulatory Guiding Principles provide general guidelines for a CCS
regulatory framework in Australian provinces. The Offshore Petroleum Amendments
(Greenhouse Gas Storage) Act 2008 introduces modifications to the existing petroleum
regulations to accommodate GHG storage offshore. The Victoria Legislative Assembly
introduced the Greenhouse Gas Geological Sequestration Act 2008, which deals with
onshore storage. More recently, Queensland introduced the Greenhouse Gas Storage Act
2009.
-
CCS regulatory initiatives in the USA
In the United States of America, there are numerous strands of federal and state based
legislation being progressed (UCL 2009d).
The US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Proposed Federal Rule for CO2
Geological Sequestration Wells Under the Underground Injection Control (UIC), applies
to owners or operators of wells which inject CO2 into the subsurface for the purpose of
long-term storage. The proposal is based on the existing Underground Injection Control
(UIC) regulatory framework, which provides for the protection of underground sources
of drinking water. In order to address the unique nature of CO2 injection for geological
sequestration, a new category of injection well for compressed CO2 has been created,
covering the entire process of CO2 storage from site characterisation to post-injection
site care and closure.
The Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission Guidelines were published in 2007.
They provide guidelines based on existing EOR, acid gas injection and natural gas storage
regulations. The guidelines refer to a CO2 facility as the unit where CO2 is captured, a
geological storage unit (GSU) is defined as the subsurface reservoir and the CO2 storage
project (CSP) is defined as consisting of both the capture facility and geological storage
unit.
In terms of operational standards, worker safety plans must be provided, leak detectors
must be installed at all subsurface and injection wells (with semi-annual testing), and
inspection records must be kept for five years. Other recommendations include quarterly
operational reporting of pressures, temperatures and volumes as well as corrosion
monitoring.
Regarding the closure phase, a monitoring plan must be submitted for the State Agency
for approval. The operator remains liable for ten years (or some other period) for the
storage site after injection stops. Each well is bonded and the bond is released when the
associated well is plugged. Responsibility for monitoring remediation is passed to a state
or federal agency CSP operator and the CO2 generator is then released from further
liability.
The American Clean Energy and Security Act, which became law in 2009, deals with
regulation related to the CO2 capture and storage (WRI 2009). The storage-related
details are:
 The Administrator must establish a coordinated approach to certifying and
permitting geologic sequestration of CCS.
 In achieving that, the Administrator must reduce redundancies with the
requirements of the Drinking Water Act.
 Within two years of enacting the Act, the Administrator must introduce
regulations to protect health and the environment by reducing the risk of
leakage.
 Regulation should include (i) a process to obtain certification, (ii) requirements
for monitoring, (iii) requirements for record keeping and reporting, (iv) public
participation in the certification process, and (v) sharing of data between states,
Indian tribes and the EPA.
 Evidence of ‘financial responsibility for remedial and emergency response, well
plugging, site closure, and post injection site care’ is required to be maintained.
 The Administrator may establish financial responsibility using several options
including insurance, guarantee, trust, standby trust, letter of credit, etc.
-
CCS regulations in Canada
In Canada there are well-developed EOR/EGR (enhanced oil recovery/enhanced gas
recovery) regulations, with several EOR operations that include CO2 flooding active in
Alberta and Saskatchewan (IEA 2007). In addition, there are regulations in place for gas
disposal in deep saline aquifers and depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs in Alberta and
British Columbia. There is extensive operational experience with the separation, capture,
transportation and injection of these gases and, there is a regulatory framework in place
for dealing with the permitting, operation and abandonment of these operations.
The federal and provincial governments in Canada are currently working towards
producing a coherent regulatory framework, building on what already exists. Thus it may
be appropriate to expand the existing EOR/EGR framework to cover the permanent
storage and the post-abandonment stage of CO2 storage operations, including
monitoring and remediation. In addition, there would be a need to consider how best to
address financial issues, incentives, liability and access rights.
2.1.2 Trends within emerging CCS regulatory frameworks
Although there is some way to go to establish comprehensive CCS regulatory frameworks,
considerable progress has been made on this critical topic in recent years. The following
key trends have been identified:
 Where possible, these regulations are based on existing legislation, which can be
amended to cover issues related specifically to CCS. This is particularly true for


CO2 capture and transport. Thus current regulations on air pollution control and
environmental impact assessment can be adapted to cover CO2 capture. Existing
transport pipeline legislation can be modified to cover CO2 transport.
Regarding CO2 storage, while some existing non-CCS regulations covering
permitting, construction, operations and abandonment of sites can be
adequately amended, issues related to post-closure (e.g. long-term liabilities and
financial responsibility), and monitoring and verification requirements are having
to be addressed with new regulations.
Existing EOR regulations are useful in dealing with issues related to exploration
permits for CO2 storage sites. Countries that have established oil and gas
extraction industries already have well-developed regulatory frameworks
covering pipeline transport, acid gas injection, disposal and storage, groundwater
protection as well as enhanced oil and gas recovery. The purity of the CO2 to be
stored is also important. The presence of impurities will affect the capture,
transport and, particularly, the storage processes. The current CCS regulatory
frameworks do not yet define allowable concentration of impurities.
With regard to permitting for demonstration projects in Europe, Australia and North
America, the intended approach appears to be to incorporate CO2 capture and transport
within existing regulation while amending existing regulatory frameworks to facilitate
CO2 storage. This offers an effective way to ensure progress in the short-term while
more comprehensive regulation is being developed to address all the issues applicable to
commercial deployment of CCS. In overall terms, for demonstration activities, in order to
ensure environmental integrity, CCS regulation should be based on a site-by-site
assessment and should include a risk assessment and site characterisation and
simulation, supported by monitoring. That said, there is a need to firm up requirements
for providing specific monitoring information (e.g. acceptable parameter ranges and
accuracy of instruments) and to establish the tolerable composition of the
transported/injected CO2 stream.
2.2.2 Relative policies in China
China has issued a series of policies, which relate to climate change and possible
mitigation approaches, in which it has publically recognized the potential importance of
CCS in order to establish near zero emissions fossil fuel power generation systems. Thus
the ‘Outline of the National Programme for Medium- and Long-Term Science and
Technology Development’ was issued by the State Council in February 2006. This
provided guidelines, objectives and the general layout for China’s science and technology
development for the next 15 years (MOST 2007). In particular, CCS was highlighted in the
Programme as an important but long term technology, while ‘the development of
efficient, clean and near-zero emissions fossil energy technology’ was listed as a key
component within the advanced energy area.
In June 2007, the State Council issued ‘China’s National Climate Change Programme’,
which set out the objectives, principles, priority areas and countermeasures, positions,
and need for international cooperation to address climate change (NDRC 2007). This
states that the strategic goal of China in order to respond to climate change includes
making significant achievements in controlling GHG emissions, and that it will pursue a
number of mitigation and adaptation approaches.
These principles were developed further by MOST and other ministries and then
published later in June 2007 as a listing of Scientific and Technological Actions on Climate
Change. In terms of technological development for GHG emission controls and climate
change mitigation, this included:
 CO2 capture, utilisation and storage technologies, namely through the
development of key technologies and measures for capturing, utilising and
storing CO2.
 The design of a technology roadmap for CO2 capture, utilisation and storage.
 The implementation of capacity building.
 The establishment of an engineering and technical demonstration project.
The demonstration project is starting to receive considerable attention. However, to date,
there has been limited consideration of subsequent technology deployment. As such,
even if the international initiatives described above should prove to be of considerable
benefit to the establishment of a viable framework for a demonstration project, they
cannot necessarily be utilised to develop a complementary Chinese regulatory system
since there is no declared intention for China to progress beyond this demonstration
activity. A further point is that ministers have stressed that there are more urgent energy
priorities for China than CCS. Thus, while they will actively participate in various CCS
initiatives, in many cases, they will only do so if international support and finance are
available to take forward the activities. This may raise some interesting policy related
challenges to establishing incentives for CCS in China.
- CO2 Capture
For both post-combustion and pre-combustion technologies, the CO2 capture process
will result in other non-CO2 environmental impacts including air emissions, water
consumption and solid waste generation (WRI 2008). Existing Chinese legislation might
be appropriate to address the relevant environmental impacts.
The Environmental Impact Assessment Law is a fundamental law in China for all projects
with potentially unfavourable impacts on the environment (PRC 2002). The Law states
that companies must submit an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) plan before
construction of, say, an industrial process commences. This shall include an assessment
of the atmospheric pollution the project is likely to produce and its impact on the
ecosystem, and shall also identify preventive and corrective measures for avoiding or
mitigating the unfavourable impacts and to ensure follow-up monitoring. It also states
that the EIA statement shall be submitted, according to the specified procedure, to the
administrative department of environmental protection concerned for examination and
approval. For offshore projects, the examination and approval of the reports of the
marine impacts are made according to the relevant provisions of the Law of the People's
Republic of China on Protecting the Marine Environment.
The purpose of the Prevention and Control of Atmospheric Pollution Law is ‘to prevent
and control atmospheric pollution, protect and improve China's environment and the
ecological environment, safeguard human health, and promote the sustainable
development of economy and society’ (PRC 1995). According to this Law, the
administrative department of environmental protection under the State Council must
establish national standards for the discharge of atmospheric pollutants. The provinces,
autonomous regions and municipalities should directly establish their local discharge
standards under this Central Government guidance. Provinces are also allowed to set
standards which are more stringent than those defined by the Central Government.
- CO2 Transport
Due to the potential risks associated with CO2 pipeline transport (including degradation
due to impurities, limits on operational parameters including temperature and pressure,
and pipeline design), safety regulations are required. The National Standards of CO2
composition for Industrial Uses sets the criteria for food additive liquid CO2 and for
industrial use in the chemical industry. These regulations refer to the volume of CO2 and
water content. While this might provide some guidance for CCS related CO2 transport, it
is not wholly applicable since the levels of purity required would be far too high for
storage applications.
Another regulation, which might be useful in relation to CO2 transport, is the “Safety
Management Regulation for Dangerous Chemicals”. According to this regulation,
dangerous chemicals include explosives compressed gases and flammable gases. The
regulation covers the transport of dangerous chemicals and, since, CO2 from CCS
processes falls under the category of compressed gas, this regulation may provide a legal
base for risk management related to CCS transport.
Both CO2 transportation pipelines and natural gas pipelines are categorized as pressured
pipeline in China. CO2 would be transported in a pipeline with a pressure of about 110
bar while natural gas is transported with a pressure of about 3.9 MPa. In China,
pressured pipelines are regarded as special equipment and have their own regulation
system. The following figures provide an overview of current regulation regime of
pipeline system in China:
- CO2 Storage
CCS regulations, in those nations that have established them, suggest that the more
difficult issue is that of CO2 storage, where there is less scope to amend existing
legislation because of the immaturity of this technology. The most obvious link with
existing regulation is through the use of CO2 for EOR applications. However, it is
important to recognise that the purpose of EOR is to drive oil out rather than to store
CO2 permanently as is the case with a true CCS applications. Consequently, the
management of the stored CO2 is not covered by existing EOR regulations and so the
definition of ‘CO2 storage’ needs to be clarified.
Storage of hydrocarbons in underground formations has provided useful insight for
underground CO2 storage. However, China still lacks a regulatory framework and
technical standards for underground hydrocarbon storage. In the construction of several
underground hydrocarbon storage sites, regulations and technical standards from
western countries have been reviewed and used as a reference during construction and
operation.
The Jintan Reservoir project is based mainly on Canada’s regulation Z341.2.02, other
similar projects also use this regulation as a reference. There is no national technical
standard or regulations for underground storage of hydrocarbons in China but the Energy
Bureau is preparing such regulations and technical standards based on experiences
gained from currently operating projects. The Energy Bureau administration issued a
new technical standard in 2009 for well construction for underground gas storage.
Nevertheless, China has well-established EOR regulations and within such a framework,
Chinese oil and gas companies have some experience in enhanced oil recovery (IEA,
2007). PetroChina has undertaken experiments on EOR in several oil fields in the Daqing,
Shengli, and Liaohe oilfield complexes (PetroChina 2007). It is known that the Chinese
Government is keen to encourage CO2 use for EOR applications, including CO2 captured
in the intended IGCC CCS related demonstration (although likely additional oil
production assessments arising from the NZEC, COACH and GeoCapacity projects are not
encouraging). If EOR is selected as the preferred option for the demonstration project,
there may be scope to use the existing regulatory framework. However, amendments
will be required in several areas including long-term liabilities, financial issues, injection
site locations, and injection criteria. These points are considered below.
2.2.3 What China can learn from international experience with regulation:
Seeing from above, there are is a lot of experience in other countries on the regulation
of CCS. There are also some regulations established in China that are being furthered
developed. The regulations adopted in other countries could provide a very good basis
for China to establish a whole regulatory framework and detailed regulations for the
implementation of China’s CCS development strategy.
Currently, the main authority responsible for permitting large projects in China is the
NDRC under the guidance of the State Council. However for CCS, the NDRC may choose
to seek assistance from several other organisations in China prior to issuing such
exploration and storage permits due to the complexity of such projects. Thus, overall,
the regulation of CCS in China may require input from both an energy authority and an
environmental authority. As part of the NDRC, the National Energy Administration (NEA)
has a major role on energy projects and could serve as the authority responsible for CCS
project approval, covering both exploration and storage permits. The Ministry of Land
and Resources (MLR) is expected to be responsible for land and sea exploration permits.
In China, regulations for CO2 storage are needed to specify: site selection criteria, well,
injection regulations, closure requirements, long-term monitoring and verification
requirements; and long-term liability obligations.
Uncertainty regarding the legal framework governing CO2 storage may hinder
investment in CCS. In particular, the government may have a role in assuming long-term
liability for stored CO2. For example, charges levied on injected CO2 could feed a CO2
Storage Fund that could assume long-term liability for stored CO2 from private-sector
entities.
2.3 Assessment of readiness for CCS technologies development in China
This work will be complemented with an assessment of the targeted initiatives to
promote and support CCS activities internationally and in China. This part will include
consideration of the CCS investment environment in China, possible funding sources and
funding mechanism for CCS, such as CDM, and the influences of CCS stakeholders. If
appropriate, the IPAC policy evaluation model will be applied, with MRV and the
experience in researching the climate change action plan to decide CCS policies and CCS
strategic matching points in relevant national plans and actions. Through these actions
the intention will be to identify the key stakeholders of the CCS chain and propose a
strategy suitable for China to develop CCS on urban gas fuelled CHP plants.
If look back at the development of CCS in China, seems we are not yet ready, mainly
because of following:
-
a very strong climate change strategy with tough emission reduction target is still
lacking. By implementing China’s commitment target from Copenhagen, the 40% to
45% carbon intensity reduction target, is not strong enough to push CCS into place.
This will reduce the incentives for national and industry investment on CCS
development.
-
There is no specific policy on investment and subsidy of CCS project to cover the cost.
So far all pilot phase project on CCS are still funded by government research funds
and industry investment.
-
There is not yet a well established law and regulatory framework to support CCS
implementation. This needs to be build at an early stage.
-
Deploying CCS requires large incremental investments in capital equipment and has
higher operating costs. A policy, such as cap and trade, that places a financial cost on
GHG emissions, or policies that otherwise limit GHG emissions, are crucial for
spurring firms to invest in CCS.
-
The demonstration of commercial-scale CCS projects integrated with power plants
will generate valuable information on the actual cost and performance of CCS as well
as the optimal configuration of the technologies. Large-scale, real-world CCS projects
will provide much-needed data to guide firms’ investments in CCS and will lead to
cost reductions via technology improvements.
This means CCS development in China is still in an initial stage, not yet ready to become a
national strategy or a key technology option. In this situation, CCS development and
funding could be done through the government’s technology R&D budget and/or
through industry’s own technology R&D investments. While the international
negotiation process progresses, CCS could be included in the CDM and emissions trading
regimes, which could be one of the way to cover the cost for CCS by defining a price for
CO2 emissions.
Funding for Initial CCS Projects
To foster the initial, large-scale CCS projects needed to fully demonstrate the technology,
the government can offer financial incentives for CCS. For example, the government
could create a trust fund that could competitively award money to CCS projects to help
them overcome financing hurdles.
A study prepared for the Pew Center found that coal power plant owners would require
between $300 and $650 million in funds to cover the investments in equipment and lost
capacity necessary for the initial commercial-scale deployments of CCS, depending on
the plant type and whether plants are newly built with CCS or are retrofitted.
Financial issues include insurance, the provision of funding for liabilities and costs in the
post-closure period in addition to changes in ownership during the operational phase.
Costs also include decommissioning costs, possible remediation costs and site
monitoring costs. Moreover, proof of financial security will be required to cover potential
liabilities arising from the possible leakage of CO2.
In the mining and petroleum industries, trust funds or bank guarantees are used to
cover liability costs. However, because of the long time horizons for CO2 storage, it is
currently impossible to obtain insurance for the entire post-closure project period. There
are no existing examples of insurance instruments that provide liability protection for
decades or centuries.
New power plants could be designed to incorporate CCS from the start of their operation,
and existing plants can be retrofitted for CCS. Retrofitting existing plants for CCS is
expected to be more expensive (in terms of dollars per metric tonne of CO2 avoided and
the incremental impact on the levelized cost of electricity) than building new plants to
incorporate CCS from the start. New coal plants built without CCS can include upfront
investments that lower the cost of later retrofitting the plants for CCS.
The incremental cost of CCS varies depending on parameters such as the choice of
capture technology, the percentage of CO2 captured, the type of coal used, and the
distance to and type of geologic storage.
For example, a 2007 study by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University estimated that,
compared to an IGCC plant without CCS, a new IGCC plant built with CCS that captured
90 percent of CO2 emissions would produce electricity at a 42 percent higher levelized
cost and reduce GHG emissions at a cost of $32 per metric ton of CO2 avoided
($32/tCO2) in 2005 dollars (with capture, transport, and storage accounting for 75, 9,
and 16 percent of this cost, respectively).
In the USA, several bills were put forward to promote and encourage CCS demonstration
and deployment. Thus the Carbon Capture and Storage Early Deployment Act, which was
introduced in March 2009, is designed to accelerate the development and early
deployment of CCS technologies by providing a funding mechanism for commercial-scale
demonstrations that is outside the traditional appropriations process in the USA. An
overview is set out below:
 The bill allows for the establishment of the Carbon Storage Research Corporation;
however, establishment is contingent on a referendum by a fossil-fuel based
industry organization (such as Edison Electric Institute or the American Public
Power Association), and state regulatory authorities maintain the right to oppose
the establishment of the corporation.
 This bill authorizes the Carbon Storage Research Corporation to collect $1-1.1
billion dollars from utilities, based on the amount of fossil-fuel generated
electricity delivered to ratepayers. The carbon dioxide emission rates of different
fossil fuels would be considered. The bill allows for use of average data and
regional differences in methodology.
 There are provisions that allow the utility to recover the full costs of
implementing the bill.
 This bill establishes the Carbon Capture and Storage Corporation as the
administrator for funding commercial-scale carbon capture and/or storage
demonstrations, with competitive awards and preference given for projects that
demonstrate an integrated approach to capture and storage.
 This bill specifies that information learned as a result of projects funded by the
Carbon Storage Research Corporation will be made publicly available and also
requires establishment of policies for intellectual property rights, peer-review of
program plans and publicly-accessible reports and meetings.
 The bill specifies that the Corporation would operate as a division or affiliate of
the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), and be managed by an appointed
board that includes primarily distribution utilities, along with one representative

each from publicly-owned utilities, rural electric cooperatives, fossil fuel
producers, non-profit environmental organizations, independent generators or
wholesale power providers, and consumer groups. The Secretary of Energy (or
designee) and two state regulatory authorities will sit on the board as non-voting
members, and an academic technical advisory committee will be established to
independently assess the program and provide recommendations to the board.
There are provisions specific to the Electric Reliability Council of Texas that
includes a more detailed assessment process for implementation in Texas. These
provisions include specific mention of renewable energy credits.
2.4 The general strategy to develop CCS in China
On the basis of the above analysis, a general strategy to develop CCS in China, including
questions such as how to identify early opportunities for demonstration, how to set
technical targets and how to promote the CCS research and development will be
proposed and discussed.
The following is a proposed strategic road map to develop and utilize CCS in China:
-
-
-
-
-
Establish a clear national climate change strategy with strong emission reduction
targets, to present a clear picture of CCS in China and the world. In recent studies,
global CO2 emission need to peak before 2020, and China’s CO2 emission need to
peak before 2025, and then decrease. If this is the future pathway, CCS’s role is
clearly defined and it could provide a large market for CCS.
A clear national CCS technology development roadmap with national R&D support
needs to be laid out. This is crucial in the early stages of CCS technology
development. It is necessary to have demonstration projects before 2020 in order to
make mature CCS technology available after 2020, when China will need
commercialized CCS for reaching national emission targets.
Government financial support on CCS pilot and demonstration projects needs to be
provided. Investment for construction of CCS pilot and demonstration projects needs
to come from government together with investment from industry.
Subsidies for the operation of CCS projects need to be provided CCS projects are
expensive to run and need a subsidy on electricity or heat manufactured by the
power plants or heat supply. Under this arrangement, a private company, or a
coalition of power generators, pipeline owners and oil companies, are given the
cost difference between the price of building a new conventional fossil-fuel
power station, and one with CCS. The difference in operating costs would also be
compensated. This is the approach the UK Government is using in the
competition to build the first UK CCS scheme.
Establish a price on CO2 emissions, which could provide a long-term incentive for
CCS development.
Enact legislation requiring all new power stations to have CCS installed and
operational.
-
Establish regulatory regimes to support CCS development in China. There are
specific instances where existing Chinese legislation might be adapted to
establish CCS regulations. Regulations would also need to address such issues
as the classification of CO2 because it will define which existing regulation might
be most relevant, depending on whether CO2 is defined as a waste or as an
industrial product. Impurities present in the CO2 stream may well influence its
definition. The European Commission is strongly of the view that CO2 should be
considered as an industrial product. This position could be adopted globally.
2.5 Summary
In this chapter, firstly the specific issues to develop CCS in China were reviewed. Energy
mix, technical and economic level, various technologies to utilize CCS, are the
preconditions for future development and implementation of CCS technologies. In the
second part the international regulation regime related with CCS development was
examined. CCS is now under development in several countries and their experiences
could provide the basis for China to develop CCS. One of the key determinants of the
future of CCS in China is the legal and regulatory framework. This issue was examined by
first reviewing international legal and regulatory practices, and the current situation in
China and then provided some suggestions for China to establish a legal and regulatory
framework. And finally, based on the above discussion, the policy gap was identified and
a strategic roadmap was presented for strategic and policy needs.
3
Role of CCS in urban heat and power plants in China
3.1 Scenario analysis with different energy mix and emission reduction targets
Scenarios that might exclude CCS (the baseline), those that might include CCS to
differing extents, and variations to the take-up of competing technologies, etc, will be
provided. Moreover, the impact of increased use of CCS in China under different
energy policy scenarios (no support, medium range support and full support) will be
evaluated.From a technical and economic view, the role of CCS on natural gas based CHP
plants in cutting carbon emissions will be assessed.
In December, 2009, The Copenhagen Accord declared that deep cuts in global emissions
are required “so as to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius”.
At the climate conference in Cancun one year later, parties decided “to hold the increase
in global average temperature below 2 °C above preindustrial levels” and made a
decision to consider “strengthening the long-term global goal on the basis of best
available scientific knowledge including in relation to a global average temperature rise
of 1.5 °C”. The Copenhagen Accord called for an assessment that would consider
strengthening the long-term goal. And the IPCC AR5 called research communities to
work on assessment by modeling the emission pathway and feasibility for the global
target(UNFCCC, 2009).
Recently several global emission scenario studies present emission scenarios focusing on
the 2 degree target, which requires global emission to peak at latest before 2020.
However the commitment in the Copenhagen Accord is not sufficient to meet the global
2 degree target scenarios (UNEP, 2010, 2011，2012，2013). Therefore further efforts
from countries are needed. It is essential to undertake more analysis at the country level
to see whether there is possibility to mitigate CO2 emission to follow the global 2 degree
target pathway. This paper presents the key factor for China to follow the global target
with modeling results based on the IPAC modeling team at Energy Research Institute
(ERI). IPAC is an integrated model developed by ERI, to analyze effects of global, national
and regional energy and environment policies. ERI has been doing long-term research in
developing and utilizing energy model since 1992 (Jiang et al, 2009).
Emission from energy in China passed those of the United States around 2006 and
accounted for around 29% of global emissions in 2013 (Oliver et al, 2011). And due to
rapid economy development, it is expected that China’s CO2 emissions would increase
significantly in the coming decades (IEA, 2011; Jiang, et al, 2009). These present China
with a very big challenge to peak CO2 emissions before 2025 and to start deep cuts after
2030. Much more ambition to reduce GHG emissions needed in China and around the
world.
In order to analyze global emission scenarios and China’s emission scenarios, we use
three models including a global model and two national models, specifically the
Integrated Policy Assessment Model of China (IPAC) and the IPAC-Emission global model,
IPAC-CGE model and IPAC-AIM/technology model. These modules in IPAC are currently
soft-linked, which means the output of one module is used as the input of another
module.
The IPAC team developed and published emission scenarios for China, with three
scenarios inside (Jiang et al, 2009a; Jiang et al, 2009b). The three scenarios are Baseline,
low carbon and enhanced low carbon scenario. The enhanced low carbon scenario says
China could peak CO2 emission by 2030 and then start to decrease after that.
From figure 1, we can see China’s emission will peak around 2025, with total CO2
emissions of 8.56billion ton, in order to reach global 2 degree target. This is tougher
than the enhanced low carbon scenario from IPAC. Making assumptions on GDP growth,
the carbon intensity from 2005 to 2020 will be in the range from 49% to 59% for these
scenarios, which is much higher than the government target announced.
CO2 emission by regions, IPACresults，400ppmCO2,450ppmCO2, per capita
convergence
1000t-C
7000000
6000000
Annex 1 Countries
5000000
Major Developing
Countries
4000000
Other developing
Countries
Economy in
Transition
3000000
China
2000000
Middle East
1000000
00
21
90
20
80
20
70
20
60
20
50
20
40
20
30
20
20
20
10
20
00
20
19
90
0
Figure 2 Emission in regions based on per capita emission convergence burden sharing
The government target announced with a 40% to 45% carbon intensity reduction
between 2005 and 2020 is a domestic effort. On one hand it is possible for China to do
better, if existing policies on energy efficiency, renewable energy and nuclear could
continue for the next two Five Year Plans, and more effort is placed on low carbon
development, low carbon transport and life styles are pursued. On the other hand, it is
also possible to go further with international collaboration by technology collaboration,
international carbon financing, carbon markets etc. Basically, there is high potential for
China to do better.
The IPAC modeling team in ERI worked on low carbon scenario for China (Jiang, et al,
2009), the low carbon scenario was presented to cover CCS use in China(see Error!
Reference source not found. ).
Three scenarios were defined for the emission scenario analysis:
Baseline scenario: The Baseline Scenario reflects existing policies and measures, and
considers current efforts of the Chinese Government to increase efficiency and control
emissions.
Low Carbon Scenario: China will make national efforts towards a relatively low carbon
future, by making Co2 emission control a domestic environment target and through the
implementation of domestic policies. the optimization of the economic structure,
including a decrease in the share of high energy consuming industries in the economy;
the wide dissemination of current energy conservation technology; and the aggressive
diversification of the electricity generation mix. By 2020, the energy efficiency of major
high energy consuming industries would reach or surpass the level of the advanced level
of developed countries, and new building construction would need to reach a high
energy efficiency standard. In general, this would reflect a shift towards highly efficient
and clean production; and aggressive standards to encourage a public focus on energy
efficiency in the home and the workplace.
Enhanced Low Carbon Scenario (ELC): Under this scenario China will take a leadership
role in the global effort towards lowering GHG emissions by making a much bigger effort
on GHG emission control. The potential of lower carbon emission technologies will be
further explored: zero-emission vehicles, low emission buildings, renewable energy and
nuclear reach their maximum potential; decentralized power supply systems are
widespread; some coal fired plants employ CCS; China becomes a global leader in low
carbon technology.
In order to analyze the feasibility for China, one more scenario, the 2 degree scenario for
China was generated using same model. By using this modeling analysis, we can see
much more detail of economic activities, energy activities, technology progress and
lifestyle changes. The 2 degree scenario was developed based on the Enhanced low
carbon scenario by pushing further actions to assess their feasibility.
Figure 2 presents the results for the new scenario family.
CO2 Emission
14000
12000
MtCO2
10000
BaU
8000
LC
6000
ELC
2degree
4000
2000
0
2000
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Figure 3 CO2 emission scenario in China
In the 2 degree scenario, energy mix would be changed significantly. Figure 3 presents
the energy mix in the 2 degree scenario. Coal use will peak between 2010 and 2020 and
there would be large increase for natural gas, nuclear and renewable energy by 2050.
Primary Energy Demand, 2 degree scenario
8000
Bio-Diesel
Mtce
7000
6000
Ethonal
5000
Biomass
4000
Power
Solar
3000
Wind
2000
1000
Nuclear
0
2000
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Hydro
Year
Figure 4 Primary energy demand in the 2 degree scenario
In the enhanced low carbon scenario, CO2 emissions increase until 2030. It is
expected that emissions will be reduced after 2030 through various policy options
(discussed below). In this scenario, by 2030, CO2 emissions will have increased to
2.63 billion t-C, 3.13 times that of 2000 levels. By 2050, in this scenario, it is possible
CO2 emissions would be reduced to 1.73 billion t-C, which is 66% of emissions in
2030, and 2.05 times the 2000 levels.
Analysis of the policies in low carbon scenarios indicate that many of the enhanced
policies match well with sustainable development strategy policies. This is
particularly true in the early period; lack of experience to combat climate change
means that focusing on sustainable development is the most promising way for China
to contribute to climate change mitigation.
3.2 Potential of CCS in CO2 emission reduction
In this section the trend of cost reduction for CCS technologies on natural gas based CHP
plants will be predicted, and the competence of this technology against other optional
technologies will be assessed. On the basis of this scenario analysis, the emission
reduction potential by CCS on natural gas based CHP plants will be evaluated and
clarified.
3.2.1 CCS utilization for power generation and CO2 emission reduction
In the Enhanced low carbon scenario (ELC), CCS was included for deep CO2 emission
cuts in China. It was assumed that IGCC would be implemented after 2020, and all
the IGCC and Natural Gas Combine Cycle (NGCC) power plants will be fully equipped
with CCS in China, together with 22% of Ultra-Super critical and 10% of Super critical
units (see figure 4 to 6). With this assumption, by 2050, in the ELC scenario, there will
be 560GW units with CCS, which is around 800 units, accounting for 48% of fossil fuel
fired power generation capacity which is equivalent to 19.8% of total installed
capacity. Total CO2 captured is 1589 MtCO2 per year in 2050.
Installed Capacity, Enhaced Low Carbon Scenario
250000
200000
Biomass
Solar
150000
10^4 Kw
Wind
Nuclear
Hydro
100000
N.Gas
Oil
Coal
50000
0
2000
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Figure 4 Installed power generation capacity, ELC scenario
Power Capacity by technologies in China, low energy scenario
250000
Hydro
Nuclear
Wind off shore
Wind on shore
Biomass IGCC
Biomass Direct
200000
Solar Thermal
Solar PV
10MW
150000
Oil
NGCC
100000
N.Gas
PFBC
IGCC-Fuel Cell
IGCC-68%
50000
0
2000
IGCC-20%
US-Critical
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Year
Super Critical
Large Coal Unit
Samll Coal
Figure 5 Installed capacity by technologies, LC
CCS future
120
100
IGCC-Fuel Cell
IGCC
US-Critical
Super Critical
Large Coal Unit
Samll Coal
%
80
60
40
20
0
2000
2005
2010
Figure 6 CCS scenario
2020
Year
2030
2040
2050
Power generation capacity with CCS
700
GW
600
500
NGCC
400
IGCC-Fuel Cell
300
IGCC
200
US-Critical
100
Super Critical
0
2000
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Figure 7 installed power generation capacity with CCS in China
CO2 emissions removed by CCS is provided in figure 8. Key assumptions are listed in
table 2 and table 3. A lower removal rate for different power generation technologies
is assumed because technology development is not yet mature at the beginning of
the adoption of CCS.
CO2 removed by CCS, ELC scenario
1800
1600
million ton-CO2
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
2000
Figure
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
6 CO2 removed by CCS in power generation sector
Table 2 removal rate for CO2 by CCS in 2 degree scenario, %
Super
IGCC-Fuel
Critical
US-Critical
IGCC
Cell
2020
80.0
80.0
85.0
85.0
2030
85.0
85.0
90.0
90.0
2040
85.0
85.0
90.0
90.0
2050
85.0
85.0
90.0
90.0
Table 3 power generation capacity with CCS in 2 degree scenario
NGCC
85.0
90.0
90.0
90.0
2020
2030
2040
2050
Super
Critical
0
217
1319
2822
US-Critical
0
379
2184
8465
IGCC
1316
6310
12890
22045
IGCC-Fuel
Cell
0
701
2275
5144
NGCC
203
3411
9679
21514
Use of CCS will increase energy usein general. However IGCC is a kind of clean solid
fuel technology. IPCC with CCS could have fewer local environment effects than other
coal fired power generation technologies with CCS. Key environment pollution by
IGCC is provided in table 4.
Table 4 environment effects from IGCC power plants,
IGCC
SO2
Removal rate>99%
NOx
25mg/m3, removal rate >
90%
PM
1-2mg/m3
PM2.5
0.3-1mg/m3
Mercury
5ppmw
Water used
30% to 50% less than PC
plants
Note
70% to 85% less than PC
plants
Romoval rate>90%
3.2.2 Natural gas CHP development in China and the world
Combined heat and power (CHP) systems were responsible for just under 10% of
global electrical power generation capacity in 2011. CHP is a set of power generation
technologies that provides both heat in the form of steam or hot water and
electricity from a single system. These systems include a prime mover to convert fuel
into electricity, a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) to generate the process heat
and perhaps a boiler if the system burns coal or wood waste to run a steam turbine.
In China, CHP has developed quickly in the last five years, as that country’s fast paced
electrical generation capacity increases have significantly bolstered the CHP market
in the country. However, China’s power capacity growth is slowing, resulting in an
essentially flat global CHP market between 2007 and 2011.
Natural gas turbines play an important role in CHP. They provide the most CHP
electricity generation in the U.S. and Europe, but it is reciprocating engine-based CHP
systems that are the most numerous. The most common type of fuel in use for CHP
systems in most countries is natural gas. The major exception is China where coal is
still the dominant fuel being used in many of the country’s district heating systems.
Countries such as Sweden, Switzerland, Norway and Finland have over 30% of CHP
electricity generation from renewable fuels such as wood waste and municipal
waste.
In China, due to stricter regulations on air pollution, natural gas CHP is expected to
expand rapidly in the near future. The case happened in China could be the typical
pathway for whole China in coming decade.
By the end of 2011, the hot discussion on PM2.5 emission brought about much more
attention both from the public and the government to push for strong action to
control air pollution. By the start of 2012, it was announced that Beijing would be the
first city in China to be coal free. All coal fired power generation and heat supply will
be replaced by natural gas before 2015. NGCC CHP is booming in Beijing.
This trend is expected to happen in other cities, such as Shang Hai and Tianjin.
Recently Tianjin announced sharp increases in its natural gas use by 20BCM by 2015,
while it is only less the 4BCM by 2011.
Outside China, the CHP market will continue to experience slow growth over the next
five years. However, SBI Energy expects global electricity costs to rise faster than the
cost of natural gas in the long term, leading to a much stronger CHP market through
the end of the decade. By 2021, there will be 651 gigawatts (GW) of CHP capacity
installed worldwide. The small-CHP segment will continue to grow faster than the
overall CHP market, achieving a CAGR of 12.2% between 2012 and 2021 and growing
to be worth a little over 6% of the global CHP market.
3.2.3 CCS for Natural gas CHP
In the 2 degree scenario, CCS for natural gas CHP was analyzed. The results were
presented in tables 5 to table 8. We can see from these tables, there will be an
increased demand for CHP in China due to the increase in building space and
demand for space heating resulting from increasing income (table 5). The structure
for CHP plants will undergo significant changes in the future due to technology
improvements and environment pollution control (Table 6). High efficiency coal fired
CHP will be utilized in future super critical units and ultra-super critical units. Natural
gas fired CHP will develop at a rapid pace mainly due to urban environment concerns,
of which NGCC is a major part. Another reason for greater natural gas fired CHP is the
increased supply of natural gas that is expected in the future.
Potential utilization of CCS in CHP is very large. Even though now it is difficult to
predict the diffusion rate for CCS in CHPs in China, it could reach 330 million ton CO2
based on the 2 degree scenario analysis.
NGCC CHP plays a key role in CCS utilization. After 2030, NGCC based CHP will
increase rapidly with CCS, and the emission reduction from NGCC CHP with CCS could
contribute more than half of the total CO2 emissions reductions in CHPs by CCS in
China (table 8).
Table 5 Installed capacity for CHP in China, 10000kW
Large
Coal
Super
Unit
Critical US-Critical IGCC
N.Gas
2005
6933
335
0
0
0
2010
7772
2371
117
0
85
2020
6015
4827
1099
73
300
2030
2582
4793
2094
516
1262
2040
1088
3429
1754
857
1948
2050
0
1534
1233
863
1241
NGCC
0
2
253
1599
4061
8370
Total
7269
10347
12568
12847
13138
13241
Table 6 Energy use in CHP, Mtce
Large
Coal
Super
Unit
Critical US-Critical
2005
166
7
0
2010
186
53
3
2020
144
107
24
2030
62
106
45
2040
26
76
38
2050
0
34
27
IGCC
0
0
2
11
18
18
N.Gas
0
2
7
27
42
27
NGCC
0
0
5
30
76
157
Total
173
243
288
282
276
262
Table 7 CO2 emission in CHP, MtCO2
Large
Coal
Super
Unit
Critical US-Critical
2005
469
21
0
2010
525
149
7
2020
407
303
67
2030
175
301
128
2040
74
215
108
2050
0
96
76
IGCC
0
0
4
30
50
51
N.Gas
0
3
11
44
68
43
NGCC
0
0
8
48
123
253
Total
490
685
800
727
638
519
Table 8 CO2 emission reduction by CCS in CHP, MtCO2
Large
Coal
Super
Unit
Critical US-Critical IGCC
N.Gas
NGCC
Total
2005
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
103
86
60
0
0
0
24
40
41
0
0
0
6
55
35
0
0
0
12
98
202
0
0
0
145
279
338
3.3 Role of CCS on urban heat and power plants in strategy of China
Finally, the role of CCS on natural gas based CHP plants and the possibility of its
demonstration and future application in China will be examined.
If the 2 degree target is to be reached, China’s CO2 emissions have to peak before 2025,
and then start to reduce deeply. All fossil fuel fired power generation and heat supply
plants will have to make a key contribution to CO2 emission reductions. Among fossil
fuel fired power generation and heat supply, CHP will contribute more than 1/3 of total
capacity, and contribute CO2 emissions of a similar size. Even though there is
uncertainty for CCS for CHPs in urban China, it is clear that given the importance of CO2
emissions in CHPs, they MUST reduce emissions and CCS is getting to be a crucial option
for this reduction.
4.4 Summary
In this chapter, scenarios for CCS utilization in CHP, especially natural gas fired CHP was
analyzed by using the IPAC model. It has been found that CHP will increase due to the
increase in building space and demand for space heating with increasing incomes.
And the structure for CHP plants will be significantly changed in future because of
technological progress and environment pollution control. Natural gas fired CHP will
develop at a rapid pace mainly due to urban environment concerns, of which NGCC
is major part.
Potential for utilization of CCS in CHP is very large. Even though now it is difficult to
predict the diffusion rate for CCS in CHPs in China, it could reach 330 million ton CO2
reduction based on the 2 degree scenario analysis.
NGCC CHP plays key role in the CCS utilization. After 2030, NGCC based CHP will
increase rapidly with CCS, and the emission reduction from NGCC CHP with CCS could
contribute more than half of the total CO2 emission reduction in CHPs by CCS in
China.
Even though there is uncertainty for CCS for CHPs in urban China, it is clear that given
the importance of CO2 emissions in CHPs, they MUST reduce emissions and CCS is
getting to be a crucial option for this reduction.
Reference
Jiang Kejun, Xiulian H, Xing Z, et al. China’s 2050 Energy and Emission Scenarios, in
China’s 2050 Energy and CO2 Emission Report, 2009a, China Science Publishing
House, Beijing, China
Jiang Kejun, Liu Qiang, Zhuang Xing, Hu Xiulian, Technology Roadmap for Low-Carbon
Society in China, 2009b, Renewable Energy Journal, Vol 28, No.11, 2009
Jiang Kejun, Zhuang Xing, He Chenmin, China’s Emission Scenario under the Global 2
degree target, 2012, Energy of China, No.2, 2012
UNEP, Emission Gap Report, 2010, UNEP report
UNEP, Bridging the Gap Report, 2011, UNEP report
UNFCCC, Copenhagen Accord, 2009, UNFCCC document
Jos G.J. Olivier, Greet Janssens-Maenhout, Jeroen A.H.W. Peters, Julian Wilson,
LONG-TERM TREND IN GLOBAL CO2 EMISSIONS, 2011, The Hague: PBL/JRC.