PROSPECTS OF CCS PROJECTS IMPLEMENTATION IN RUSSIA: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES
Pavel Tcvetkov 1  
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
National Mineral Resources University (Mining University), Vasil’evsky Ostrov, 21 liniya 2, Saint-Petersburg, 199106 Russia
Publish date: 2016-04-01
 
J. Ecol. Eng. 2016; 17(2):24–32
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The urgency of environmental protection is determined by its intensive change because of human impact, which, among other things, accompanied by an increasing of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. One of the ways to reduce the emission is Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies. To date, developed countries have successfully implemented a number of CCS demonstration projects. Their main purpose is to study the effectiveness of CO2 storage. Russia is one of the world’s largest producers of CO2 emissions. However, CO2 capture and storage issues are not studied by Russian enterprises due to the absence of environmental taxes. The experience of developed countries shows that CO2 storage projects, in addition to the reduction of anthropogenic impact, can be commercially effective not only by reducing the tax burden. This review presents the analysis of international experience in the field of CO2 capture and storage. Given the immaturity of technology and lack of the necessary volume of statistical data, it was an attempt to determine the minimum conditions, which permit the implementation of CCS projects in Russian oil fields. On the basis of the Russian development forecast and the fuel balance structure the volumes of CO2 emissions in the 2016–2030 years were calculated. According to significant difference in opinions about the feasibility of CCS implementation in Russia, this review presents the main arguments for and against such projects. Evaluation of the potential effectiveness of CCS projects to enhance oil recovery factor showed that in spite of the absence of CO2 emissions taxes, such projects could be commercially effective in Russia due to the increase in oil recovery.
 
REFERENCES (49)
1.
Adele M. Want a pro-growth pro-environment plan? Economists agree: Tax carbon. The Brookings Institution Up Front blog, 2013a. URL: http://www.brookings.edu/blogs.... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
2.
Borodulya V.A., Palchenko G.I., Vinogradov L.M. et al. Bioenergy – hydrogen or carbon? In: Proceedings of V Minsk International Forum on Heat and Mass Transfer, 2004. 9 p. http://www.itmo.by/ru/conferen... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
3.
Burcu B. Pyrolysis: A sustainable way from waste to energy. Proceedings the 1st FOREBIOM Workshop: Potentials of Biochar to mitigate climate change. European Geosciences Union General Assembly, 2013. URL: http://www.oeaw.ac.at/forebiom... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
4.
CCES. Carbon Capture and Storage. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, 2014. URL: http://www.c2es.org/technology... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
5.
CCST official web site. URL: https://sequestration.mit.edu/... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
6.
Cherepovitsyn A.E., Sidorova G.I., Smirnova N.V. The feasibility of using CO2 sequestration technologies in Russia. Oil and Gas Business, 2013, 5, 459–473 URL: http://www.ogbus.ru/authors/Ch... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
7.
Dakota Gasification Company – How it works. URL: http://www.dakotagas.com/CO2_C... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
8.
Doha Climate Change Conference, Summary. Earth Negotiations Bulletin, 2012, 12(567). URL: http://www.iisd.ca/vol12/enb12... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
9.
EIA. International Energy Statistics URL: http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdb... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
10.
European Commission. Official web site. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/...(accessed 14.02.2016).
 
11.
European Commission. Reference Document on Best Available Techniques (BREF) in Large Combustion Plants. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC), 2006. 618 pp. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/environmen... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
12.
Folger P. Carbon capture and sequestration: Research, development, and demonstration at the U.S. Department of Energy, 2014. URL: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mi... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
13.
Gazpromneft oil company quarter report, 2015. URL:http://ir.gazprom-neft.ru/file... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
14.
GCCSI. Strategic analysis of the global status of carbon capture and storage. Global CCS Institute Report 3: Russia, 2009, 35 p. URL: http://cdn.globalccsinstitute.... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
15.
Geological disposal of carbon dioxide and radioactive waste: A comparative assessment. Monograph. L. Toth, A. Cherepovitsyn and A. Ilinsky (Eds.) Comparison of the Geological Disposal of Carbon Dioxide and Radioactive Waste in European Russia, p. 489–513. International Atomic Energy Agency, 2011; Springer Dordrecht London Heidelberg New York, p. 621.
 
16.
Golombek R., Greaker M., Kittelsen S. A.C., Røgeberg O., Aune F.R. Carbon capture and storage technologies in the european power market. Discussion Papers No. 603, December 2009. Statistics Norway, Research Department. URL: http://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjo...(accessed 14.02.2016).
 
17.
Greenpeace. False hope – Why carbon capture and storage won’t save the climate. Greenpeace International, 2008. 44 p. URL: http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
18.
Holt N., Booras G., Todd D. Summary of recent IGCC studies of CO2 capture for sequestration. Gasification Technologies Conference, 2003. URL:http://www.gasification-syngas...(accessed 14.02.2016).
 
19.
Hongmei Gu, Bergman R. Life-cycle GHG emissions of electricity from syngas produced by pyrolyzing woody biomass. Proceedings of the 58th International Convention of Society of Wood Science and Technology, June 7-12, 2015 Jackson Lake Lodge, Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming, USA. URL: http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/docum... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
20.
Hulme M. and Mahony M.. Climate change: What do we know about the IPCC? Progress in Physical Geography, 2010. DOI: 10.1177/0309133310373719.
 
21.
IEA – Energy technology perspectives. Scenarios and strategies to 2050. OECD/IEA, Paris, France, 2010. 710 p. URL: http://www.iea.org/publication... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
22.
IEA. Data from CO2 emissions from fuel combustion (2015 prelimin. edition). International Energy Agency Statistics. http://www.iea.org/publication... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
23.
IEA. Prospects for CO2 Capture and Storage. International Energy Agency, 2004. URL: https://www.iea.org/Textbase/n... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
24.
IPCC. Renewable energy sources and climate change mitigation. Special report, New York, USA, 2012. 1088 p. URL: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
25.
Jacobson C.B. Economic prospects for advanced combustion technologies suited for climate change mitigation. All Theses and Dissertations (ETDs), 2012. Paper 1029. URL: http://openscholarship.wustl.e...(accessed 14.02.2016).
 
26.
Keeling C.D. The influence of mauna loa observatory on the development of atmospheric CO2 research. In Mauna Loa Observatory: A 20th Anniversary Report. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Special Report, September 1978), edited by John Miller, pp. 36–54. Boulder, CO: NOAA Environmental Research Laboratories.
 
27.
Keller K., Yang Z., Hall M., Bradford D.F. Carbon dioxide sequestration: When and how much? Center for Economic Policy Studies (CEPS) Working Paper No. 94. Princeton University, September 2003. URL: https://www.princeton.edu/ceps...(accessed 14.02.2016).
 
28.
Khlebnikov V.N., Zobov P.M., Khamidullin I.R., Ruzanova Ju.F., Ivanov E.V., Vinokurov V.A. Perspective regions for hothouse gas sequestration project realization in Russia // Bash. chem. journal, 2009, 2, 73–80. URL: http://cyberleninka.ru/article... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
29.
L׳Orange Seigo S., Dohle S., Siegrist M. Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 38, 2014, 848–863. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.017.
 
30.
Leung D. Y.C., Caramanna G., Maroto-Valer M.M. An overview of current status of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 39, 2014, 426–443. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.093.
 
31.
Maurstad O., Herzog H., Bolland O., Beér J. Impact of coal quality and gasifier technology on IGCC performance. Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, 2006. Trondheim. URL: https://sequestration.mit.edu/... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
32.
McFarland J.R., Herzog H.J., Reilly J.M. Economic modeling of the global adoption of carbon capture and sequestration technologies. Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT-6), 2003. Vol. II, J. Gale and Y. Kaya (Eds.), Elsevier, pp 1083–1088.
 
33.
McKinsey & Company. Carbon Capture & Storage: Assessing the Economics. – McKinsey & Co., 2008. 53 p. URL: http://assets.wwf.ch/downloads... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
34.
Meakin S. The rio earth summit: summary of the united nations conference on environment and development. Science and Technology Division, November 1992. URL: http://publications.gc.ca/Coll... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
35.
Ministry of the Russian Federation Economic Development, 2013. Forecast of Long-Term Socio- Economic Development of the Russian Federation for the Period until 2030. URL http://government.ru/media/fil... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
36.
Mirfendereski Y. Techno-economic assessment of carbon capture and sequestration technologies in the fossil fuel-based power sector of the global energy-economy system. Technische Universität Berlin Energy Engineering Institute, 2008. Master Thesis. URL: https://www.pik-potsdam.de/mem... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
37.
Morris A., Mathur A. A carbon tax in broader U.S. fiscal reform: Design and distributional issues. Center for climate and energy solutions, May 2014. URL: http://www.c2es.org/publicatio... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
38.
RBC multimedia holding official web site. URL: http://www.rbc.ru/business/13/... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
39.
Rhodes S.J., Keith D.W. 2003. Biomass energy with geological sequestration of CO2: Two for the price of one? Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, 2, 1371–1376. URL: http://scholar.harvard.edu/fil...(accessed 14.02.2016).
 
40.
Rhodes S.J., Keith D.W. 2005. Engineering economic analysis of biomass IGCC with carbon capture and storage. Biomass and Bioenergy 29, 440–450. URL: http://keith.seas.harvard.edu/... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
41.
Rubin E.S. et al. Comparative assessments of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage. Proceedings of the GHGT-7 Conference, V.1, Elsevier, 2005. 9 p. URL: http://repository.cmu.edu/cgi/... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
42.
SCCS. Scottish carbon capture & storage official web site. URL: http://www.sccs.org.uk/experti... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
43.
Shell official web site. http://www.shell.ca/en/aboutsh... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
44.
Speck S. Carbon taxation – two decades of experience and future prospects. Carbon Management, 4(2), 2013, 171–183. DOI: 10.4155/cmt.12.81.
 
45.
Tcvetkov P., Strizhenok A. Ecological and economic efficiency of peat fast pyrolysis projects as an alternative source of raw energy resources. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 17(1), 2016, 56–62, DOI: 10.12911/22998993/61190.
 
46.
Van Egmond S., Hekkert M.P. Argument map for carbon capture and storage. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2012. 12 p. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ij... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
47.
Withana S., Brink P., Illes A., Nanni S., Watkins E. Environmental tax reform in Europe: Opportunities for the future, A report by the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) for the Netherlands Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment. Final Report. Brussels, 2014. URL: http://www.ieep.eu/assets/1397... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
48.
WWF. The Energy Report, 100% Renewable Energy by 2050. – WWF/Ecofys/OMA, Gland, Switzerland, 2011. 256 p. URL: http://www.wwf.or.jp/activitie... (accessed 14.02.2016).
 
49.
ZERO official web site. URL: http://www.zeroco2.no/projects... (accessed 14.02.2016).