Search

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.04.005 Byline: David Gerard (a), Elizabeth J. Wilson (b) Abstract: The potential to capture carbon from industrial sources and dispose of it for the long-term, known as carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), is widely recognized as an important option to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions. Specifically, CCS has the potential to provide emissions cuts sufficient to stabilize greenhouse gas levels, while still allowing for the continued use of fossil fuels. In addition, CCS is both technologically-feasible and commercially viable compared with alternatives with the same emissions profile. Although the concept appears to be solid from a technical perspective, initial public perceptions of the technology are uncertain. Moreover, little attention has been paid to developing an understanding of the social and political institutional infrastructure necessary to implement CCS projects. In this paper we explore a particularly dicey issue -- how to ensure adequate long-term monitoring and maintenance of the carbon sequestration sites. Bonding mechanisms have been suggested as a potential mechanism to reduce these problems (where bonding refers to financial instruments used to ensure regulatory or contractual commitments). Such mechanisms have been successfully applied in a number of settings (e.g., to ensure court appearances, completion of construction projects, and payment of taxes). The paper examines the use of bonding to address environmental problems and looks at its possible application to nascent CCS projects. We also present evidence on the use of bonding for other projects involving deep underground injection of materials for the purpose of long-term storage or disposal. Author Affiliation: (a) Center for the Study & Improvement of Regulation, Department of Engineering & Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15217, USA (b) Center for Science, Technology, and Public Policy, Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA Article History: Received 24 April 2007; Revised 26 January 2008; Accepted 6 April 2008

Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) capture and storage, (CCS) has the potential to substantially mitigate CO 2 emissions, but concerns over the potential for leakage of CO 2 and brine from subsurface formations in which CO 2 has been geologically stored have impeded the deployment of CCS. In three lines of work, we investigated the causes and consequences of the leakage risk of CO 2 storage in deep saline aquifers. Our work developed the Leakage Impact Valuation (LIV) method to estimate the economic costs of leakage, produced an approach to probabilistically estimate the extent and magnitudes of leakage, and established the Leakage Risk Monetization Model (LRiMM) of geologic CO 2 storage to estimate the site-specific monetized leakage risk (MLR) of geologic CO 2 storage. The LRiMM combines the estimates of the economic costs and probabilistic extents and magnitudes of leakage in three dimensions within the geospatial context of leakage pathways and other subsurface activities. Here, we provide brief summaries of these lines of work and the lessons that arise from the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage involves injecting CO2 into permeable geologic reservoirs. Candidate reservoirs will be overlain by an impervious caprock, but CO2 or brine may leak through this caprock via natural or manmade pathways into overlying units. Such leakage will incur multiple costs to a variety of stakeholders, as mobile fluids may interact with other subsurface activities, reach groundwater, or possibly escape from the surface. We summarize a methodology to monetize leakage risk throughout a basin, based on simulations of fluid flow, subsurface data, and estimates of costs triggered by leakage. We apply this methodology to two injection locations in the Michigan (U.S.A.) Sedimentary Basin, and show that leakage risk is site-specific and may change priorities for selecting CO2 storage sites, depending on its siting relative to leakage pathways and other subsurface activities. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Leakage of brine or carbon dioxide (CO2) from geologic CO2 storage reservoirs will trigger numerous costs. We present the Leakage Impact Valuation (LIV) method, a systematic and thorough scenario-based approach to identify these costs, their drivers, and who incurs them across four potential leakage outcomes: 1) Leakage only; 2) leakage that interferes with a subsurface activity; 3) leakage that affects groundwater; and 4) leakage that reaches the surface. The LIV method is flexible and can be used to investigate a wide range of scenarios. The financial consequences of leakage estimated by the LIV method will be specific to the case study, because the consequences of leakage will vary across case studies due to differences geologic, institutional, and regulatory settings. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Background: Higher levels of physical activity are associated with better functional status, fewer hospital admissions, and lower mortality. In this pilot study, we examined the feasibility and safety of a novel program that combines a pedometer with a website to increase walking. Methods: 27 persons with stable COPD wore the Omron HJ-720ITC pedometer and used the website for 90 days. They uploaded step-count data to the study server using their home computer and received an email each week with their individualized step-count goal. The website provided step-count feedback, education, and motivational content. Subjects participated in a monthly semi-structured interview by telephone. Subjects reported changes in medical condition by telephone or on the website. Paired T-tests assessed change in daily step counts. Results: Subjects were males, mean age 72 ± 8 years, with moderate COPD, FEV1 1.57 ± 0.48 L (55 ± 16% predicted). 87% and 65% reported no problems using the pedometer and website, respectively. At month 3, 96% reported it was true that they knew their step count goal every day, and 52% reported that they were able to reach their goal. 95% of participants said they would recommend the walking program to another person with COPD. Eight subjects experienced breathing problems unrelated to the intervention. In 24 subjects with step counts at baseline and month 3, there was a significant increase of 1263 steps per day (approximately 1.0 km), p = 0.0054. Conclusions: The use of a website and pedometer was feasible and safe, and persons increased their daily walking. Registration Site and Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01564043. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Perceptions of the potential of emerging technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS) are constructed not just through technical and economic processes but also through discourse, i.e. through compelling narratives about what a technology is, what a technology might become and why it is needed and preferable to competing technologies. The influence of discourse is particularly important in the innovation phases prior to commercialization when innovation activities are focused on research, development and demonstration, and when feasibility and costs of alternatives systems cannot yet be tested by market dynamics. This paper provides a state-level comparative analysis of CCS discourse in the U.S. to provide insights about the socio-political context in which CCS technology is advancing and being considered in four different states: Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, and Texas. This research combines analysis of interviews of state-level energy stakeholders and media analysis of state-level newspapers. In semi-structured interviews, state-level energy policy stakeholders were asked to explain their perceptions of the potential opportunities and risks of CCS technology within their unique state context. Interview texts were coded to assess the frequency and extent of various different frames of CCS opportunities and risks including technical, political, economic, environmental, aesthetic, and health/safety. A similar coding scheme was applied to analysis of state-level newspaper coverage of CCS technology. Here, the frequency of these different framings of CCS opportunities and risks in state-level print media was assessed. This analysis demonstrates wide variation in state-level CCS discourse and perceptions of the potential opportunities and risks associated with CCS technology. This mixed-methods approach to characterizing the socio-political context for CCS advancement in these four states contributes to improved understanding of state-level variation in energy technology innovation, provides valuable information about energy technology development in these specific states, and also offers insight into the very different sub-national discourses associated with emerging low-carbon energy technologies in the U.S. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: An important subset of the utility sector has been scarcely explored for its ability to reduce carbon dioxide emissions: consumer-owned electric utilities significantly contribute to U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, but are often excluded from energy efficiency and renewable energy policies. They sell a quarter of the nation''s electricity, yet the carbon impact of these sales is not well understood, due to their small size, unique ownership models, and high percentage of purchased power for distribution. This paper situates consumer-owned utilities in the context of emerging U.S. climate policy, quantifying for the first time the state-by-state carbon impact of electricity sales by consumer-owned utilities. We estimate that total retail sales by consumer-owned utilities account for roughly 568 million metric tons of CO2 annually, making this sector the 7th largest CO2 emitter globally, and examine state-level carbon intensities of the sector in light of the current policy environment and the share of COU distribution in the states. Based on efficiency and fuel mix pathways under conceivable regulations, carbon scenarios for 2030 are developed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: As the private sector and government begin to spend billions of dollars to research and deploy carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, the question of legal liability for managing short-term and long-term environmental, health and safety risks must be addressed. We examine potential CCS liability within a U.S. context and survey the existing environmental and tort law liability regimes that may affect CCS. We conclude that while existing liability regimes are insufficient on their own to govern the CCS industry, they could provide important risk management tools and serve as safeguards to private parties and governments in the event of harm. We also propose a model for long term stewardship, blending including bonding, insurance, and pooled federal funding into commercial CCS project management to better provide financial security to investors without destroying existing liability protections for those who may suffer harm from CCS. This proposal offers a starting point to develop a model to integrate liability for the nascent CCS industry. A longer version of this paper can be found in the Emory Law Review, Fall 2008. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: States will play a vital role in the deployment of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) in the United States. Many of the decisions and planning required to deploy CCS projects on a national scale will occur at the state and regional levels, including Public Utility Commission decisions on treatment of CCS costs, decisions on land use for building CO2 pipelines and developing geologic sequestration sites. There has been a burst of CCS policy activity in the states over the past few years. As of August 2008, 26 states have some sort of policy in place aimed at furthering CCS. To examine the importance of states’ particular circumstances on CCS policy development, we consider variables related to each state’s geology, electrical power system, economy, and political ideology. We find that distinctly different profiles emerge between states with CCS policies, states with climate policy, states with both, and states with neither. Understanding the state level policy landscape provides a basis for more effective coordination between state, regional, and federal CCS policy, and sheds some light on the compromises that need to be made between geographically diverse states for CCS to be widely deployed. A case study of the Midwestern Governors Association CO2 Management Infrastructure Partnership illustrates the opportunities that regional partnerships offer to facilitate these types of compromises and coordinate policy between states with varying circumstances but a shared interest in regional cooperation to advance commercial scale CCS. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: As a technology that may involve new risks, large-scale infrastructure, and significant government involvement, carbon capture and storage (CCS) faces a wide variety of deployment challenges. Because energy policy in the U.S. is negotiated at the state level, it is important to evaluate what might influence CCS related decisions in the U.S. at that level. This paper presents a detailed analysis of how deployment discussions and decisions regarding CCS are negotiated within Texas, Minnesota, and Massachusetts. These states were chosen based upon their current involvement in CCS research (high, medium, low), potential for deploying CCS (direct, indirect, or absent), and regulation (restructured, regulated). We explore nuances within the policy debates and public discourse surrounding CCS in these three states through the use of legislative and policy analysis, interviews with stakeholders, and media analysis. Using information generated from legislative dockets and state-level newspaper coverage we construct a template of CCS discussions, framing, and policy creation within each study state. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract The economic viability of new energy technologies is held as a central tenet to their future deployment; conventional wisdom posits economically rational decision-makers will readily invest in proven low-risk and affordable technologies. But what happens when this is not true. This paper examines the non-financial barriers facing economically viable Combined Heat and Power (CHP) projects. CHP is a mature and lower carbon technology that efficiently uses waste heat from thermal electricity generation; CHP can also provide flexibility services to help integrate variable renewable resources. CHP is low risk and many industrialized countries, particularly those in colder climates in Northern Europe and Russia, generate as much as 50% of their electricity and heat needs from CHP, but United States deployment remains low and investment hurdle rates high. While lower U.S. energy costs make some projects un-economic, many economically-viable CHP projects are stalled or killed by non-financial barriers. To better understand why financially viable CHP projects are not getting built, developers, owners and operators, regulators, and other stakeholders of this technology were interviewed and three major barriers emerged a) the business model of the electrical utility b) negative subjective impressions and c) challenges in allocating the risks and benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Without careful planning and design, energy policies like carbon taxes and renewable subsidies like production tax credits undercut one another in unanticipated ways. We examine how a carbon tax interacts with PTCs by simulating an electricity market using the IEEE RTS model with a carbon tax of $38/tonCO2e and a PTC of $23/MWh. The results show that PTCs work against the carbon tax by both lowering average energy prices and altering the generator dispatch. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Over the past decade, the United States (US) has demonstrated strong and evolving interest in the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS), an emerging set of technologies with potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants. Given the many technical, economic, and environmental uncertainties about the future of CCS, the political salience of this technology is high. In the US, states make key decisions about deploying energy technology projects, but variation in state-level energy context (both technical and socio-political) is substantial. This research assesses variation in the state-level energy context for CCS development by exploring energy policy stakeholders' perceptions of CCS in four geographically and demographically diverse states. Policy stakeholders have different degrees of familiarity with CCS, and the goal of this research is to understand and compare the perceptions of CCS among stakeholders who shape state-level energy policy. Semi-structured interviews with 84 energy policy stakeholders across government, industry, academia, and non-governmental organizations active in four different states (Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana and Texas) were analyzed to compare perceptions of CCS risks and benefits. Negative associations of CCS were mentioned more frequently than positive attributes in each state, and technical, political and economic risks are more dominant than environmental or health and safety risks. Content analysis of the interviews provides insight on emerging sub-national discourse regarding CCS, on state-level variation in familiarity with CCS, and on sub-national variation in the socio-political context for energy technologies. The variation in state and stakeholder energy priorities and perceptions revealed in this study highlights challenges in the development and implementation of national-level energy policy and also specific challenges in the deployment of CCS. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

• Grid-scale energy storage are modeled to arbitrage in electricity market. • Storage-induced emissions are estimated in two power grids with high and low wind penetration. • High wind penetration can favorably pair with storage and reduce air pollutant burden. • Carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury emissions are estimated. • Storage-induced emissions are 42-64% lower in the high- than in the low-wind grid. Energy storage provides many benefits that can improve electric grid performance but has been shown to increase overall system emissions. Yet, how energy storage might interreact with renewables in existing grids and how these interactions affect overall emissions remain unclear. Here, we estimate emissions induced by battery energy storage in two regions of the United States with very different levels of wind penetration using high-resolution, both spatially and temporally, locational marginal prices and hourly marginal emission factors. We find that the emission intensity of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury is 4264% lower in the high wind penetration grid (28%) than in the low wind penetration grid (<5%). This is due in part to a significant share of wind dispatched as marginal fuel in baseload hours when battery storage charges from the grid, reducing storage-induced emissions. Our study suggests that more wind generation can favorably pair with storage and reduce the air pollution burdens otherwise caused by storage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]