An integrated assessment of carbon dioxide capture and storage in the UK

Geological carbon dioxide storage (CCS) has the potential to make a significant contribution to the decarbonisation of the UK. Amid concerns over maintaining security, and hence diversity, of supply, CCS could allow the continued use of coal, oil and gas whilst avoiding the CO2 emissions currently associated with fossil fuel use. This project has explored some of the geological, environmental, technical, economic and social implications of this technology. The UK is well placed to exploit CCS with a large offshore storage capacity, both in disused oil and gas fields and saline aquifers. This capacity should be sufficient to store CO2 from the power sector (at current levels) for a least one century, using well understood and therefore likely to be lower-risk, depleted hydrocarbon fields and contained parts of aquifers. It is very difficult to produce reliable estimates of the (potentially much larger) storage capacity of the less well understood geological reservoirs such as non-confined parts of aquifers. With the majority of its large coal fired power stations due to be retired during the next 15 to 20 years, the UK is at a natural decision point with respect to the future of power generation from coal; the existence of both national reserves and the infrastructure for receiving imported coal makes clean coal technology a realistic option. The notion of CCS as a ‘bridging’ or ‘stop-gap’ technology (i.e. whilst we develop ‘genuinely’ sustainable renewable energy technologies) needs to be examined somewhat critically, especially given the scale of global coal reserves. If CCS plant is built, then it is likely that technological innovation will bring down the costs of CO2 capture, such that it could become increasingly attractive. As with any capitalintensive option, there is a danger of becoming ‘locked-in’ to a CCS system. The costs of CCS in our model for UK power stations in the East Midlands and Yorkshire to reservoirs in the North Sea are between £25 and £60 per tonne of CO2 captured, transported and stored. This is between about 2 and 4 times the current traded price of a tonne of CO2 in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. In addition to the technical and economic requirements of the CCS technology, it should also be socially and environmentally acceptable. Our research has shown that, given an acceptance of the severity and urgency of addressing climate change, CCS is viewed favourably by members of the public, provided it is adopted within a portfolio of other measures. The most commonly voiced concern from the public is that of leakage and this remains perhaps the greatest uncertainty with CCS. It is not possible to make general statements concerning storage security; assessments must be site specific. The impacts of any potential leakage are also somewhat uncertain but should be balanced against the deleterious effects of increased acidification in the oceans due to uptake of elevated atmospheric CO2 that have already been observed. Provided adequate long term monitoring can be ensured, any leakage of CO2 from a storage site is likely to have minimal localised impacts as long as leaks are rapidly repaired. A regulatory framework for CCS will need to include risk assessment of potential environmental and health and safety impacts, accounting and monitoring and liability for the long term. In summary, although there remain uncertainties to be resolved through research and demonstration projects, our assessment demonstrates that CCS holds great potential for significant cuts in CO2 emissions as we develop long term alternatives to fossil fuel use. CCS can contribute to reducing emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere in the near term (i.e. peak-shaving the future atmospheric concentration of CO2), with the potential to continue to deliver significant CO2 reductions over the long term.

A Lady of York: migration, ethnicity and identity in Roman Britain

Modern methods of analysis applied to cemeteries have often been used in our pages to suggest generalities about mobility and diet. But these same techniques applied to a single individual, together with the grave goods and burial rite, can open a special kind of personal window on the past. Here, the authors of a multidisciplinary project use a combination of scientific techniques to illuminate Roman York, and later Roman history in general, with their image of a glamorous mixed-race woman, in touch with Africa, Christianity, Rome and Yorkshire.

Commuting, CO2 and the location of offices

This paper investigates the extent to which office activity contributes to travel-related CO2 emission. Using ‘end-user’ figures[1], travel accounts for 32% of UK CO2 emission (Commission for Integrated Transport, 2007) and commuting and business travel accounts for a fifth of transport-related CO2 emissions, equating to 6.4% of total UK emissions (Building Research Establishment, 2000). Figures from the Department for Transport (2006) report that 70% of commuting trips were made by car, accounting for 73% of all commuting miles travelled. In assessing the environmental performance of an office building, the paper questions whether commuting and business travel-related CO2 emission is being properly assessed. For example, are office buildings in locations that are easily accessible by public transport being sufficiently rewarded? The de facto method for assessing the environmental performance of office buildings in the UK is the Building Research Establishment’s Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM). Using data for Bristol, this paper examines firstly whether BREEAM places sufficient weight on travel-related CO2 emission in comparison with building operation-related CO2 emission, and secondly whether the methodology for assigning credits for travel-related CO2 emission efficiency is capable of discerning intra-urban differences in location such as city centre and out-of-town. The results show that, despite CO2 emission per worker from building operation and travel being comparable, there is a substantial difference in the credit-weighting allocated to each. Under the current version of BREEAM for offices, only a maximum of 4% of the available credits can be awarded for ensuring the office location is environmentally sustainable. The results also show that all locations within the established city centre of Bristol will receive maximum BREEAM credits. Given the parameters of the test there is little to distinguish one city centre location from another and out of town only one office location receives any credits. It would appear from these results that the assessment method is not able to discern subtle differences in the sustainability of office locations