Search

The transboundary transportation of carbon dioxide (CO2) gives rise to international legal issues not faced in other standalone carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects or domestic projects. While the European Union CCS Directive establishes a framework for CCS, it does not address specifically the issue of transboundary transportation. This will require participating Member States to agree a statutory framework for CO2 transport, which addresses issues at the international, national and local levels of law. This paper considers several key issues for developing and resolving legal issues around ownership and risk for CO2 transportation, an area with limited research literature to date. The legal challenges are examined using a ‘pilot’ project to explore and highlight specific examples. The research draws from a series of CCS industry stakeholder meetings and analysis was developed through interdisciplinary perspectives. In addition, the potential partnership arrangements are explored from a law and policy perspective with an examination of the key issues for these partnerships for Member States. Finally, this research presents a timeline for a legal strategy on resolving the issues for risk and ownership for CO2 transport. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research is a legal analysis concerning four scenarios for cross-border carbon dioxide (CO2) transport that could increase the deployment of carbon-capture and storage (CCS) deployment in Europe. The legal analysis categorizes the law into three levels--international, national and local--and considers the four scenarios in light of these three levels of energy law. Upon reviewing the four scenarios, it is clear that the Rotterdam Nucleus (referred to as the 'Pilot Case') is the leading scenario and as a result it is explored in more detail. The potential Pilot Case is based on the development of Rotterdam (in the Netherlands) as a southern North Sea hub. Under this Rotterdam Nucleus scenario, captured CO2 will be transported through the Port of Rotterdam to depleted gas fields offshore the Netherlands. CO2 will also be transported through further links using CCS infrastructure to facilitate the processing of undeveloped gas fields offshore UK. The Pilot case contemplates further expansion opportunities, increasing the capture clusters through additional pipelines, expanding to further gas fields and using the port of Rotterdam for CO2 shipping--hence the analysis of the other scenarios may be invaluable in the future development of CO2 networks in the EU. Finally, and an original contribution of this article is that it employs the three lawyers of energy law theoretical framework to an energy problem that was examined by an interdisciplinary research team. Furthermore, this research was developed further through two key industry stakeholder meetings with CCS experts in the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper presents a roadmap for the development of a large-scale CO2 transport infrastructure in Europe, between 2020 and 2050, which was defined in the EU FP7 CO2Europipe project. The most important conclusions are related to the finding that the EU CCS transport infrastructure is to be led by a relatively small number of countries, who share the largest burden in the areas of CO2 capture, transport and storage. These include the countries bordering the North Sea, and those countries relying heavily on coal or lignite for their power supply (Germany, Poland the Czech Republic). It is crucial that these countries take the lead and are supported to do so, not only now, but during the whole CCS infrastructure development. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper serves to highlight work completed within the EU FP7 CO2Europipe project, which aims to provide guidance to elements of an EU master plan for the development of large scale European CO2 infrastructure. In the last 5 years there have been some significant advancements in EU and international regulations that serve to facilitate CO2 transportation, however there is little guidance on how multi-user transport networks should be organized and financed. Poor planning and initial underinvestment in CO2 pipeline capacity can lead to inefficient networks and higher lifetime costs. Although shipping of CO2 may be a favourable transport option under certain circumstances, the monitoring and verification guidelines for this form of CO2 transportation are currently deficient. Cost estimates have been provided by industrial project members for CO2 pipelines (on/offshore), compression and shipping. Economies of scale are exhibited for pipelines, shipping and compression installations, however in order for operators to take advantage of economies of scale in pipelines, the intentions of governments regarding the regulation of tariffs for third-party network users need to be consolidated as soon as possible. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]