Carbon capture and storage laws in Australia : project facilitation or a precautionary approach?

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is considered to be an integral transitionary measure in the mitigation of the global greenhouse gas emissions from our continued use of fossil fuels. Regulatory frameworks have been developed around the world and pilot projects have been commenced. However, CCS processes are largely untested at commercial scales and there are many unknowns associated with the long terms risks from these storage projects. Governments, including Australia, are struggling to develop appropriate, yet commercially viable, regulatory approaches to manage the uncertain long term risks of CCS activities. There have been numerous CCS regimes passed at the Federal, State and Territory levels in Australia. All adopt a different approach to the delicate balance facilitating projects and managing risk. This paper will examine the relatively new onshore and offshore regimes for CCS in Australia and the legal issues arising in relation to the implementation of CCS projects. Comparisons will be made with the EU CCS Directive where appropriate.

Book review : "Carbon Capture and Storage Emerging Legal and Regulatory Issues" edited by Ian Havercroft, Richard Macrory, Richard B Stewart, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2011

As the international community struggles to find a cost-effective solution to mitigate climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, carbon capture and storage (CCS) has emerged as a project mechanism with the potential to assist in transitioning society towards its low carbon future. Being a politically attractive option, legal regimes to promote and approve CCS have proceeded at an accelerated pace in multiple jurisdictions including the European Union and Australia. This acceleration and emphasis on the swift commercial deployment of CCS projects has left the legal community in the undesirable position of having to advise on the strengths and weaknesses of the key features of these regimes once they have been passed and become operational. This is an area where environmental law principles are tested to their very limit. On the one hand, implementation of this new technology should proceed in a precautionary manner to avoid adverse impacts on the atmosphere, local community and broader environment. On the other hand, excessive regulatory restrictions will stifle innovation and act as a barrier to the swift deployment of CCS projects around the world. Finding the balance between precaution and innovation is no easy feat. This is an area where lawyers, academics, regulators and industry representatives can benefit from the sharing of collective experiences, both positive and negative, across the jurisdictions. This exemplary book appears to have been collated with this philosophy in mind and provides an insightful addition to the global dialogue on establishing effective national and international regimes for the implementation of CCS projects...

Legal liability for carbon capture and storage in Australia : where should the losses fall?

This article presents a critical analysis of the current and proposed CCS legal frameworks across a number of jurisdictions in Australia in order to examine the legal treatment of the risks of carbon leakage from CCS operations. It does so through an analysis of the statutory obligations and liability rules established under the offshore Commonwealth and Victorian regimes, and onshore Queensland and Victorian legislative frameworks. Exposure draft legislation for CCS laws in Western Australia is also examined. In considering where the losses will fall in the event of leakage, the potential tortious and statutory liabilities of private operators and the State are addressed alongside the operation of statutory protections from liability. The current legal treatment of CCS under the new Australian Carbon Pricing Mechanism is also critiqued.

Carbon Capture and Productivity of Plantation Forests in North-eastern Australia

Approximately 130,000 ha of hardwood plantations have been established in north-eastern Australia in the last 15 years. As a result of poor taxa selection approximately 25,000 ha have failed due to drought, pest and disease or extreme weather events (drought and cyclones). Given the predicted impacts of climate change in north-eastern Australia (reduced rainfall, increased temperatures and an increase in extreme weather conditions, particularly drought, storms and cyclones), selection of the right taxa for plantation development is even more critical as the taxon planted needs to be able to perform well under the environments experienced at planting as well as those that may develop over in 30 years time as a result of changing climate.

Long Term Dynamics in CO2 Allowance Prices and Carbon Capture Investments

In this paper we analyse the behaviour of the EU market for CO2 emission allowances; specifically, we focus on the contracts maturing in the Kyoto Protocol's second period of application (2008 to 2012). We calibrate the underlying parameters for the allowance price in the long run and we also calibrate those from the Spanish wholesale electricity market. This information is then used to assess the option to install a carbon capture and storage (CCS) unit in a coal-fired power plant. We use a two-dimensional binomial lattice where costs and profits are valued and the optimal investment time is determined. In other words, we study the trigger allowance prices above which it is optimal to install the capture unit immediately. We further analyse the impact of several variables on the critical prices, among them allowance price volatility and a hypothetical government subsidy. We conclude that, at current permit prices, from a financial point of view, immediate installation does not seem justified. This need not be the case, though, if carbon market parameters change dramatically and/or a specific policy to promote these units is adopted.

Evaluation of two alternative carbon capture and storage technologies

4 p.

Evaluation of Two Alternative Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies: A Stochastic Model

30 p.

Optical assessment of impact and recovery of sedimentary pH profiles in ocean acidification and carbon capture and storage research

Available methods for measuring the impact of ocean acidification (OA) and leakage from carbon capture and storage (CCS) on marine sedimentary pH profiles are unsuitable for replicated experimental setups. To overcome this issue, a novel optical sensor application is presented, using off-the-shelf optode technology (MOPP). The application is validated using microprofiling, during a CCS leakage experiment, where the impact and recovery from a high CO2 plume was investigated in two types of natural marine sediment. MOPP offered user-friendliness, speed of data acquisition, robustness to sediment type, and large sediment depth range. This ensemble of characteristics overcomes many of the challenges found with other pH measuring methods, in OA and CCS research. The impact varied greatly between sediment types, depending on baseline pH variability and sediment permeability. Sedimentary pH profile recovery was quick, with profiles close to control conditions 24 h after the cessation of the leak. However, variability of pH within the finer sediment was still apparent 4 days into the recovery phase. Habitat characteristics need therefore to be considered, to truly disentangle high CO2 perturbation impacts on benthic systems. Impacts on natural communities depend not only on the pH gradient caused by perturbation, but also on other processes that outlive the perturbation, adding complexity to recovery.

Life cycle GHG assessment of fossil fuel power plants with carbon capture and storage

The evaluation of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from power generation with carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a critical factor in energy and policy analysis. The current paper examines life cycle emissions from three types of fossil-fuel-based power plants, namely supercritical pulverized coal (super-PC), natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) and integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), with and without CCS. Results show that, for a 90% CO2 capture efficiency, life cycle GHG emissions are reduced by 75-84% depending on what technology is used. With GHG emissions less than 170 g/kWh, IGCC technology is found to be favorable to NGCC with CCS. Sensitivity analysis reveals that, for coal power plants, varying the CO2 capture efficiency and the coal transport distance has a more pronounced effect on life cycle GHG emissions than changing the length of CO2 transport pipeline. Finally, it is concluded from the current study that while the global warming potential is reduced when MEA-based CO2 capture is employed, the increase in other air pollutants such as NOx and NH3 leads to higher eutrophication and acidification potentials.

Public perception of carbon capture and storage in relation to hydraulic fracturing: content analyses, survey results, and policy proposals

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) can contribute significantly to addressing the global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions problem. Despite widespread political support, CCS remains unknown to the general public. Public perception researchers have found that, when asked, the public is relatively unfamiliar with CCS yet many individuals voice specific safety concerns regarding the technology. We believe this leads many stakeholders conflate CCS with the better-known and more visible technology hydraulic fracturing (fracking). We support this with content analysis of media coverage, web analytics, and public lobbying records. Furthermore, we present results from a survey of United States residents. This first-of-its-kind survey assessed participants’ knowledge, opinions and support of CCS and fracking technologies. The survey showed that participants had more knowledge of fracking than CCS, and that knowledge of fracking made participants less willing to support CCS projects. Additionally, it showed that participants viewed the two technologies as having similar risks and similar risk intensities. In the CCS stakeholder literature, judgment and decision-making (JDM) frameworks are noticeably absent, and public perception is not discussed using any cognitive biases as a way of understanding or explaining irrational decisions, yet these survey results show evidence of both anchoring bias and the ambiguity effect. Public acceptance of CCS is essential for a national low-carbon future plan. In conclusion, we propose changes in communications and incentives as programs to increase support of CCS.