Clean Energy, 2019, 1–10

doi: 10.1093/ce/zkz031
Advance Access Publication Date: 24 December 2019
Homepage: https://academic.oup.com/ce

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

Perspective
Carbon capture and storage in the USA: the role
of US innovation leadership in climate-technology
commercialization
Lee Beck*
Global CCS Institute Ltd, Level 16, 360 Elizabeth Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract
To limit global warming and mitigate climate change, the global economy needs to decarbonize and reduce emissions
to net-zero by mid-century. The asymmetries of the global energy system necessitate the deployment of a suite of
decarbonization technologies and an all-of-the-above approach to deliver the steep CO2-emissions reductions necessary.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies that capture CO2 from industrial and power-plant point sources as well
as the ambient air and store them underground are largely seen as needed to address both the flow of emissions being
released and the stock of CO2 already in the atmosphere. Despite the pressing need to commercialize the technologies,
their large-scale deployment has been slow. Initial deployment, however, could lead to near-term cost reduction and
technology proliferation, and lowering of the overall system cost of decarbonization. As of November 2019, more
than half of global large-scale CCS facilities are in the USA, thanks to a history of sustained government support for
the technologies. Recently, the USA has seen a raft of new developments on the policy and project side signaling a
reinvigorated push to commercialize the technology. Analysing these recent developments using a policy-priorities
framework for CCS commercialization developed by the Global CCS Institute, the paper assesses the USA’s position to lead
large-scale deployment of CCS technologies to commercialization. It concludes that the USA is in a prime position due to
the political economic characteristics of its energy economy, resource wealth and innovation-driven manufacturing sector.

Graphical Abstract

Received: 9 October 2019; Accepted: 25 November 2019

© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of National Institute of Clean-and-Low-Carbon Energy
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected] 1
 2 | Clean Energy, 2019, Vol. XX, No. XX

Keywords:  carbon capture; CCUS; energy and environment; energy system and policy; fossil energy; hydrogen
and fuel cell

Introduction From a global perspective, scenarios that lead to a full

decarbonization of the world economy include CCS in

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

The USA is one of the top emitters globally and remains
both the industrial sector and the power sector. For ex-
highly dependent on fossil fuels to satisfy its primary en-
ample, the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Sustainable
ergy demand. In light of ambitious and necessary climate
Development Scenario [5] sees 7% [6] of emissions reduc-
goals enshrined in the Paris Agreement, bringing the decar-
tions to be delivered by CCS, in almost equal parts in the
bonization of the country’s economy on track is extremely
power and the industrial sectors, by 2040. The IPCC Report
important. The 2018 release of the UN Intergovernmental
on 1.5°C includes CCS in three of four illustrative pathways
Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 1.5°C Report on Global
and negative emissions in all pathways (Fig. 1).
Warming [1] has bolstered the need for urgent climate
The USA—the second largest CO2 emitter globally in
action, calling to reduce emissions as soon as possible and
absolute terms—can be regarded as a microcosm within
to net-zero by mid-century. After a decline of emissions
the global economy. While comprehensive, economy-wide
of several years, greenhouse-gas emissions rose sharply
models that forecast a net-zero economy by mid-century are
in 2018 by 3.1% in the USA, outpacing global emissions
lacking for the USA, most available decarbonization path-
growth almost by a factor of two [2]. Emissions were driven
ways that are compliant with either the Paris Agreement or
by more frequent hotter and colder days prompting higher
a net-zero-emissions scenario by mid-century include CCS
demand.
in the industrial and the power sectors, among a range of
A suite of clean-energy technologies that has recently
other clean-energy technologies. For example, the Union
experienced renewed policy support through incentive
of Concerned Scientists analysed models that will lead to
structure innovation and legislative initiatives is carbon
a 90% decarbonization of the US power sector by 2050. In
capture and storage (CCS). The technologies, which cap-
these scenarios, natural-gas power plants retrofitted with
ture carbon dioxide (CO2) from industrial and power
CCS comprise between 9% and 28% of the total mix [7].
plants, and transport and permanently and safely store it
With the impacts of more extreme weather already
underground, are commercially viable and deployment-
being felt across the globe—July 2019 was the hottest
ready. Direct air capture (DAC), which captures CO2 from
month on record to date [9]—the pressure to decarbonize
the ambient air to deliver negative emissions, has also
and address rising CO2 emissions is intensifying. As part of
gained increasing attention. The USA has also historically
this global challenge, innovation in the energy, industrial
been a leader in innovation, particularly with regard to
and manufacturing sectors must therefore enable sus-
policy driving private-sector action, designing novel busi-
tainable growth. Continued economic prosperity will de-
ness models and inventing new-energy and clean-energy
pend on countries’ ability to reduce their energy intensity.
technologies. For the past decade, the country has been a
Carbon capture is expected to play a key role, particularly
leader in energy-supply investment and the second largest
due to three key characteristics of the US economy.
destination for energy investment after China [3].
The first is the power sector, which is largely seen as
Due to a renewed push to formulate supportive policy
the easiest sector to decarbonize vis-à-vis transportation
and enhance the existing policy framework across the
and industry, yet still faces complex challenges. Despite
country, the USA is in a prime position to commercialize
renewable-energy generation more than doubling since
these technologies that are expected to be needed widely
1990, the USA remains heavily dependent on fossil fuels to
to fully decarbonize the global economy. As such, US lead-
satisfy energy demand. In addition, the future of its nuclear
ership on the deployment of CCS technologies would
fleet, which provides more than 60% [10] of the country’s
make significant contributions to the world’s reaching its
carbon-free power, remains uncertain. Analysts expect re-
climate and sustainable-development goals. It would also
tiring nuclear to be replaced not only by renewable energy,
contribute to reducing the cost of CCS—a technology that
but also by unabated fossil-fuel additions. These asym-
is essential to meeting climate goals and enabling tech-
metries, coupled with a young natural-gas fleet of 22 years
nology deployment abroad. The paper seeks to provide an
average age [11] and further unabated, natural-gas cap-
overview of CCS deployment in the USA while assessing
acity underway, underpin the need to deploy carbon cap-
the maturity of the US deployment framework, including
ture in the US power sector.
policies and infrastructure.
The second is the industrial sector—an often-
overlooked sector in terms of decarbonization and CCS
deployment. It remains the largest consumer of energy
1  The US decarbonization opportunity and is responsible for 22% of emissions [12]. In 2017, the
After 3  years of decline, US CO2 emissions rose by 3.1% sector was also responsible for ~18.2% [13] of US gross
in 2018. Its largest emissions sector remains the trans- domestic product. So far, experts agree that the sector
portation sector, followed by electricity and industry [4]. has felt little pressure to decarbonize due to the lack of
 Beck | 3

A AIM 2.0 MESSAGE-GLOBIOM 1.0 REMIND-MAgPIE 1.5 MESSAGEix-GLOBIOM 1.0 WEM

SSP1–19 SSP2–19 SSP5–19 LowEnergyDemand Faster Transition Scenario
(S1) (S2) (S5) (LED) (IEA WEM)
Primary energy by illustrative pathway (EJ/y)

Fossil without CCS Nuclear

1000 Fossil with CCS Wind
Biomass without Solar
CCS Other renewables
800

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

Biomass with CCS

600

400

200

0
2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050

B Fossil Fossil Biomass Biomass

Nuclear Wind Solar 4 Other renewables
without CCS with CCS without CCS with CCS
S1
500
Primary energy by fuel type (EJ/y)

S2
S5
400 LED
IEA WEM

300

200

100

0
2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100 2030 2050 2100

Fig. 1:  Primary energy supply for the four illustrative pathway archetypes plus the IEA’s Faster Transition Scenario (OECD/IEA and IRENA, 2017) (a)
and their relative location in the ranges for pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C with no or limited overshoot (b) Reproduced by permission from
the IPCC [8].

solutions and understanding of the challenge, as well as alone. A  total of more than 250 Mtpa of CO2—almost 10
its significant political economic influence. In fact, the in- times the US capture capacity today—would be available
dustrial sector offers early deployment opportunities for for capture from hydrogen, cement, steel, ethanol, am-
CCS. As of November 2019, 17 of 19 operating, large-scale monia production and natural-gas processing combined
facilities globally are in the industrial sector [14]. In the [18]. Hence, the industrial sector should be considered a
USA, 9 of 10 operating, large-scale facilities are in industry. key target for CCS deployment.
Furthermore, low-cost applications of CCS are concen- The third is the USA’s economic structure; the USA is
trated in industry, amenable to a near-term roll-out of the strongly dependent on fossil fuels, providing ideal condi-
technology that could result in significant cost reductions tions for CCS deployment. In fact, in 2018, about 80% of the
and learning-by-doing. For example, processes that pro- primary energy demand was satisfied by natural gas, coal
duce a pure stream of CO2 such as ethanol production and and petroleum [19]—a share that has been constant for the
natural-gas processing can start at $15/tCO2. last decade. Between 1983 and the great recession, the share
Further, CCS can play a key role as a low-carbon heat hovered around 85%. These long-term trends signal strong
solution and for process emissions from cement and steel rigidity of the US energy economy. The USA, due to the shale
[15]. Industrial heat emissions alone account for 10% of revolution, has also become the largest natural-gas pro-
global emissions and research has shown that many de- ducer in the world, holding this position since 2009, but also
carbonization options are more costly than CCS applica- demonstrating its ability to improve techno-economic pro-
tion [16]. Along these lines, a key to decarbonizing industry cesses through innovation. Due to its fossil-fuel-dependent
could be hydrogen, whose production from fossil resources economic structure, the USA, along with China and Russia,
can be decarbonized with CCS. In fact, the USA holds ideal ranks highest in the Global CCS Institute’s Inherent Interest
conditions for large-scale hydrogen production with CCS in CCS [20], which is a relative index based on the share
thanks to the vast availability of low-cost natural gas [17]. of fossil-fuel production and consumption, indicating an
A  2014 NETL study showed that almost 70 Mtpa of CO2 economy’s suitability for large-scale CCS deployment to di-
would be available for capture from hydrogen production versify and decarbonize its energy production.
 4 | Clean Energy, 2019, Vol. XX, No. XX

However, the USA’s energy economy evidences further large-scale CCS deployment. Furthermore, the technology,
supporting factors for CCS commercialization in the near- which is also seen as essential to alleviate the existing
to-medium term, underpinning the country’s suitability. lock-in of emissions from existing infrastructure, could
The structure of its energy supply has also contributed to potentially be exported to other countries, cementing the
low energy prices in comparison to other advanced econ- USA’s leadership in innovation. Moving to a lower-carbon
omies, boosting energy security, while also strengthening economy is inevitable to contain global warming and

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

the desire by producers, policymakers and consumers to prevent potentially disastrous effects of climate change.
maintain low levels of energy prices [21]. At the same time, Therefore, the USA’s ability to maintain its position as a
for the past decade, the country has been a leader in energy- top natural-resource producer, exporter and its ability to
supply investment and the second largest destination for provide energy security will largely depend on the possible
energy investment, right after China [22], evidencing strong transformation of its energy and industrial sectors.
government commitment as well as a capability to attract
investment in the sector. On an absolute basis, the USA in-
vests more than any other nation to support clean-energy
innovation. It invests more in total clean-energy RD&D 2  CCS in the USA
($6.8 billion in 2018) than the next two countries, China and Currently, as of November 2019, there are 10 CCS facilities in
Japan, combined and more in basic energy science than all the USA with a combined capacity to capture more than 25
other nations combined [23]. Therefore, the desire to main- million tonnes per annum. In total, there are 19 operating
tain strong energy security as well as accelerate innovation facilities globally, with a further 28 in various stages of de-
provides fertile ground for large-scale CCS deployment. velopment and 4 under construction (Fig. 2). In the USA,
While this outlook, evidencing strong fossil-fuel and there are 10 operating, large-scale projects and a further
manufacturing dependence of the economy, might pose 17 under development. One of the operating facilities in
an obstacle to full decarbonization at first sight, it should the USA is in the power sector, with others in natural-gas
also be regarded as an opportunity and incentive to trans- processing and fertilizer, hydrogen and ethanol produc-
form the sector and develop next-generation clean-energy tion [24]. In addition, the USA hosts the National Carbon
technologies. Coupled with a strong desire to bolster en- Capture Center—a large public and privately backed test
ergy security, demonstrate technology leadership and an centre allowing new technology providers to test their
innovative edge from a policy, finance and private-sector technologies. The USA also has a history of demonstra-
perspective, the USA is well positioned to benefit from tion and small-scale projects. A  prime example is the

APPLICATIONS IN OPERATION 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025+

WASTE
INCINERATION NORWAY FULL CHAIN
CEMENT
PRODUCTION
CHEMICAL INTEGRATED
PRODUCTION LAKE
SINOPEC QILU MID-
CHARLES
CONTINENT
ILLINOIS INDUSTRIAL YANCHANG METHANOL
HUB

IRON AND STEEL

ABU DHABI PHASE 1
PRODUCTION
HYDROGEN CARBONNET*
PRODUCTION GREAT AIR ACTL
QUEST PORTHOS
PLAINS PRODUCTS STURGEON

FERTILISER
PRODUCTION ENID COFFEYVILLE ACTL AGRIUM WABASH
FERTILIZER

NATURAL GAS SNØHVIT

PROCESSING CNPC JILIN
SHUTE
CREEK PETROBRAS PRE-SALT

ABU DHABI
TERREL CENTURY UTHMANIYAH GORGON PHASE 2
(FORMALLY PLANT
VAL VERDE)
LOST CABIN
SLEIPNER

POWER
GENERATION
CARBONSAFE ILLINOIS HUB*

BOUNDARY DAM PETRA NOVA

DRY FORK

PROJECT TUNDRA

= 1 Mtpa OF CO2 CIRCLE AREA PROPORTIONATE TO CAPACITY IN OPERATION IN CONSTRUCTION ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT

Fig. 2:  Large-scale CCS projects by industry and storage type [25]. Reproduced by permission from the Global CCS Institute Ltd.
 Beck | 5

demonstration of the Allam Cycle, a novel zero-emissions large-scale operating and under-construction CCS facil-
power-plant technology, at a 50MWth facility in Texas. ities. In particular, the authors assessed their incentive
The USA has traditionally been the leader in CCS de- and capital structures, alongside other enabling mechan-
ployment. Initial deployment was driven by enhanced oil isms (Fig. 3). The framework lends itself well to analysing
recovery (EOR), which has provided a value for carbon di- the maturity of the USA to accelerate the large-scale de-
oxide. This is complemented by private-sector-technology ployment of CCS:

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

expertise and a supportive policy framework. The typ-
1. A value on carbon
ical price for anthropogenic CO2 that companies pay is
estimated to start at around US$15/tCO2 [26], albeit it is A value on carbon provides policy signals that gov-
indexed to the oil price. For example, at oil prices of US$70 ernments are committed to moving to a lower-carbon
per barrel, the cost of CO2 is around US$30/tCO2 [27]. Hence, world, and reflects the externalities created by pol-
as a result, multiple CCS projects in the USA have come lution. Twenty-two of the 23 facilities analyzed were
online during periods of high oil prices; in the early 1980s, built or are being built in an environment that pro-
two projects started and, in 2013, three CCS projects com- vided some value on carbon such as through an emis-
menced operation [28]. EOR has demonstrated secure geo- sions credit, a carbon tax or a tax credit, or enhanced
logic storage, can result in reduced life-cycle emissions oil recovery. For example, two projects in Norway
per barrel of oil and has provided an incentive to deploy were built as the result of a carbon tax on offshore
CCS, demonstrating that a value on carbon can drive tech- natural gas production. Only one project, the Gorgon
nology deployment. project in Australia, which is also the largest geologic
storage project to date, was the result of a regulatory
requirement.

3  A framework for analysing CCS 2. A framework enabling investment

progress Most CCS projects have been enabled through high
The Global CCS Institute, in 2019, has developed a policy- proportions of grant funding, with little to no debt
priorities framework [29] through analysing the 23 financing. To deploy CCS at scale, private sector

AC
TL
er

wi
is

th POLICIES & PROJECT

k
Fer til

NW
Sin

ee
Yanc

CHARACTERISTICS
Cr
op

St
Terrell

ur
er
ec

ute
Enid
h

ge
ang

on pn
Qi

Sh

i Carbon Tax
le
lu

Re S
AC fin
T Lw er Tax Credit or
ith y
Ag Emission Credit
s
riu lain
m a tP
Gre Grant Support
v it
Gorgon SnØh Provision by
Government or SOE
Century Plant Regulatory
CNPC Jilin Requirement
Air
ova Pro Enhanced Oil
aN duc
Petr ts S
MR Recovery
Co
ffe
yv Low Cost Capture
al ille
tri
Lo
t
ec

s
du
s

Low Cost Transport

oj

tC

In
Pr

is
ab

and Storage
Quest

ino
CS

in

Ill
iC

Pet
ah

Vertical Integration
ab

Boundary
niy
Dh

rob
ma
u

ra
Ab

sS
Uth

The facilities in light blue

ant

are under construction

Dam

os

Fig. 3:  Key incentives and project characteristics of realized-large-scale CCS projects globally [30]. Reproduced by permission from the Global CCS
Institute Ltd.
 6 | Clean Energy, 2019, Vol. XX, No. XX

investment must increase with banks providing debt As mentioned above, EOR has provided a value on CO2,
financing at feasible interest rates. Currently, pro- roughly estimated at ~$15 t/CO2. Nonetheless, to date,
ject risks are perceived by banks as too high, and the only about 30% of CO2 used for EOR is from anthropogenic
cost of capital has a substantial implication for the sources, the rest is being mined from natural resources
sanction of CCS projects. As the number of CCS fa- [32]. Hence, it would be an obvious step to aim for the sub-
cilities increases, debt finance will become available stitution of mined for anthropogenic sources, opening up

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

for CCS projects, thereby reducing the cost of capital. a larger market for capture, or to require maximum CO2
However, in the meantime, governments can provide stored per barrel of oil produced [33].
further grant funding, accelerated depreciation, con- Beyond regional carbon markets, which, for the most
cessional loans, loan guarantees and other mech- part, trade either below $10 t/CO2 or do not allow CCS pro-
anisms to attract private capital. Such instruments jects to gain credit, the USA has recently reformed and
reward early investments for the knowledge they introduced two significant, CCS-specific values on carbon.
create that is available to future project developers. Since 2008 [34], the USA has been incentivizing the capture
Government investment in public goods such as of CO2 through a tax credit also known as 45Q, named after
clean air is important, even if these investments do the relevant section of the US tax code. The tax credit was
not make a private financial return, but a distributed first introduced in 2008, when it provided $10 t/CO2 for CO2
societal financial return. stored via EOR and $20 t/CO2 for geologic storage, adjusted
for inflation. This credit was significantly expanded and re-
3. Infrastructure access and storage
formed in 2018 (Table 1). The work was led by a bipartisan
group of lawmakers, supported by a diverse coalition of en-
Most facilities that have successfully commenced
vironmental groups, trade associations and industry. The
operation so far had access to well-developed and
credit now provides up to $18/tCO2 for CO2 used for EOR
characterized storage sites, and low-cost transporta-
and $29/tCO2 for CO2 stored through dedicated geological
tion options, such as existing pipeline infrastructure
storage, rising linearly to $35/tCO2 and $50/tCO2 by 2026, re-
to transport the CO2. It is therefore an imperative for
spectively, and adjusted to inflation thereafter. The credit is
countries to map and understand their CO2 storage
currently being implemented by the internal revenue ser-
capacity, and aid the private-sector in the identifica-
vice and also includes other features, including enhanced
tion of suitable sites. In addition, governments can
transferability that will make it more attractive to the tax-
support the build-out of CO2 pipeline networks to
equity market, similar to solar and wind. Projects have to
reduce cross chain risks and enable the establish-
commence construction before 2024 in order to qualify.
ment of CCS hubs that significantly reduce unit CO2
Moreover, California’s Air Resources Board, antici-
storage costs.
pating the need for CCS and DAC, amended the state’s
Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) [35]—a credit-based
emissions-reductions system aimed at reducing the
4  The framework in the US context emission intensity of fuels sold in California by 20% by
Using the above-mentioned framework to analyse CCS 2030. The regulation was amended with a CCS protocol in
policy and deployment infrastructure provides a clear September of 2018, after a series of stakeholder consult-
understanding that the USA is in a prime position to ations and listening sessions, and came into effect in early
commercialize carbon-capture technologies. These find- 2019. Trading at an average of 186.5$/tCO2 during the first
ings are also supported by the Global CCS Institute’s CCS 6 months of 2019 [36], the LCFS CCS Protocol credits are
Readiness Index, which actively monitors the progress of stackable with 45Q for projects that reduce the life-cycle
CCS deployment and identifies nations that are leaders in emissions of fuel consumed in California. Recognizing
creating an enabling environment for the large-scale de- that the stock of CO2 contained in the atmosphere is a
ployment of CCS. The USA ranks in second place, with 70 transnational problem, the protocol also incentivizes DAC
of 100 points—close to Canada, the global leader [31]. projects globally to spur advancement and technological

Table 1  : The 45Q tax credit for CCS [35]

Plant size in ktCO2/yr Relevant level of tax credit (USD/tCO2)

Power Industrial
plants facilities DAC 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Onwards

Geologic storage Min. 500 100 100 34 36 39 42 45 47 50 Indexed to

CO2-EOR-storage Min. 500 100 100 22 24 26 28 31 33 35 inflation
Utilization dependent on actual 25–500 25 25 22 24 26 28 31 33 35
emissions reductions
 Beck | 7

innovation in negative-emissions-technology options is essential to risk reduction enabling financing, which

needed to reach global climate goals (Fig. 4). in turn will lead to more deployment, reducing risk and
These combinable measures have the potential to sig- cost. For example, both the Air Products SMR CCS project
nificantly change the economics of projects. Current (a hydrogen-production facility) and the Decatur Illinois
break-even estimates range between $5 t/CO2 for natural- project (an ethanol plant) depended on grants to provide
gas-processing CCS facilities to $30t/CO2 for hydrogen pro- more than 60% [41] of their funding. On the other hand,

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

duction and coal-to-chemicals processing, as well as $60 projects like Petra Nova and Lake Charles Methanol were
t/CO2 for power plants equipped with CCS [38]. The incen- able to secure financing, because their revenues are re-
tives are expected to support spurring a wave of new pro- liant on the sale and use of CO2 for EOR. Contributing sig-
jects at low-cost capture facilities, bringing down the cost nificantly to enhancing policy confidence, these policies
of the technology, while also enabling and accelerating in- have already resulted in project announcements. This in-
frastructure and industrial hub build-out. In fact, a 2019 cludes an ammonia-production facility set to become the
analysis has shown that, in the power sector alone, 45Q largest geologic-storage project in the USA, as well as a
could drive the deployment of CCS, enabling the capture of DAC facility in Texas. More announcements are antici-
49 Mtpa on coal- and gas-fired power plants [39]. A conser- pated, pending the implementation of the 45Q tax credit.
vative learning-rate estimate of 10% means that the cost of Currently, there are nine projects at various stages of de-
CCS could halve with large-scale deployment. velopment, which include ethanol, coal power, fertilizer
Further positive policy signals include the passage production and DAC [42].
of clean-energy standards in seven states, bolstering Nonetheless, large-scale deployment of CCS at the scale
technology–neutral decarbonization pathways in the necessary to reduce emissions to net-zero will need to
power sector and providing an alternative value on be driven by policy measures, just as other clean-energy
carbon through certificate trading. Ambitious emissions- technologies have been deployed thanks to innovative in-
reductions pledges by multiple utilities complement this centive structures like feed-in tariffs and renewable port-
policy development and could spur CCS deployment in the folio standards. These policy measures, at the beginning of
short-to-medium term [40]. large-scale deployment, must be accompanied by further
With CCS-specific incentives in place creating an initial risk-reducing mechanisms.
business case for deployment, further project support is The Department of Energy (DOE) is largely seen as the
still necessary. As outlined in the framework, the financing global leading agency concerning the support of CCS,
of CCS projects remains challenging due to the perceived having supported the advancement of the technologies
and actual risks of these projects. As such, banks are re- since 1997 [43]. The DOE is responsible for R&D and hosts
luctant to lend unless they can be assured that the risk of multiple funding programmes for different parts of the
a proven, yet not widely deployed, technology has been CCS-development, -deployment and -commercialization
sufficiently mitigated. Therefore, government support value chain. For example, it provides funding for Front-End

DIRECT AIR CCS AT OIL & GAS CCS AT REFINERIES ALL OTHER CCS
CAPTURE PRODUCTION PROJECTS PROJECTS (E.G. CCS
PROJECTS FACILITIES WITH ETHANOL)
Anywhere, provided
Anywhere, provided they Anywhere, provided they
Location of they sell the
Anywhere in the world sell the transportation sell the transportation fuel
CCS project transportation fuel in
fuel in California in California
California
Storage site Onshore saline or depleted oil and gas reservoirs, or oil and gas reservoirs used for CO2-EOR

Project-based, under Project-based, under the

Project-based or fuel
Credit method Project-based the Innovative Crude Refinery Investment Credit
pathway
Provision Program
Earliest date
which existing Any 2010 2016 Any
projects eligible
Requirements Project must meet requirements specified in the CCS protocol

Additional Must achieve minimum

None None None
restrictions CI or emission reduction

Fig. 4:  Types of CCS projects qualifying for credits under the LCFS [37]. Reproduced by permissions from the Global CCS Institute Ltd.
 8 | Clean Energy, 2019, Vol. XX, No. XX

Engineering Design (FEED) Studies, research grants, tech- mid-west, an ethanol hub, to the Permian Basin could en-
nology development and related activities, all of which can able an additional 30 Mtpa of CO2 to be stored, doubling the
reduce risk and entry cost. It also provides a loan guar- US storage of anthropogenic sources. Should the govern-
antee for advanced fossil-energy projects that include CCS ment finance only half of the pipeline, CO2 storage would
to support projects in securing affordable financing. In drop to 19 Mtpa [47]. The study also found that the net-
total, there are $8.5 billion in loan guarantees available. So work would not be feasible without government finance

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

far, one project—the Lake Charles Methanol project, which and pointed to the important role of government sup-
is the first petcoke-to-methanol facility in the USA—has port overcoming the chicken-and-egg problem. Therefore,
been offered a conditional commitment to guarantee while the USA possesses an initial CO2-transport infra-
loans of up to $2 billion [44]. These support mechanisms structure, its overall pipeline system is insufficient to sup-
and structures have helped initial projects to be realized port the scale of CCS expansion needed to transition to a
through mitigating risk. net-zero economy.
However, stakeholders in the USA representing the cli- With regard to CO2 storage, the USA has made significant
mate and CCS community have moved to suggest add- advances in developing its own geologic-storage potential.
itional incentives through legislative efforts. These focus In the Global CCS Institute’s database, the USA ranks as
on the ability of projects to secure additional financial sup- second out of all countries assessed. The USA’s storage is
port, including but not limited to the eligibility for private- thoroughly characterized and there is high confidence in
activity bonds and master limited partnerships. Other published storage-resource estimates that include 2360–
legislative proposals include funding for large-scale CCS- 21  200 GT (high likelihood) [48]. Currently, there are >100
demonstration projects. sites operating EOR, injecting an estimated 68 Mtpa [49]
To conclude, the USA has a robust framework of policy of CO2, albeit the majority being non-anthropogenic CO2
support through the DOE, as well as multiple potentially [50]. An excellent example of the US government’s leader-
fruitful legislative initiatives to reduce the financial risk of ship on supporting CCS deployment is the Carbon Storage
large-scale CCS projects. However, more near-term, robust Assurance Facility Enterprise (CarbonSAFE) Initiative.
policies to lower perceived and actual risk could accel- These projects focus on the development of geologic-
erate and support the urgently necessary roll-out in light storage sites for the storage of an estimated 50 Mt of CO2.
of climate goals. The projects are aimed at improving the understanding
A key part enabling the large-scale deployment of of project screening, site selection, characterization and
CCS is a robust CO2-transportation network. The US CO2- baseline monitoring, verification, accounting and assess-
transport and -storage infrastructure is among the most ment procedures. Commencement of injection is antici-
well developed globally, but not sufficient to support imme- pated for 2026 [51]. States are also seeking to simplify
diate large-scale deployment. The USA already possesses CO2-storage guidelines and provide regulatory clarity. In
5000 miles of CO2 pipelines, which were built primarily addition, multiple CO2-transport and -storage hubs are in
for EOR and connect privately owned assets [45]. Several the early stages of development.
states already provide financial assistance and tax incen- Overall, CCS has gained momentum in the USA. Beyond
tives for the build-out of CO2 pipelines. However, the cur- the analysis of its policy framework, multiple initiatives
rent amount of pipeline capacity and geographical reach are pending and being proposed, evidencing that the
are not sufficient to sustain large-scale CCS deployment. policy gaps for CCS deployment have been well under-
Experts estimate that pipeline capacity needs to grow 3- to stood and stakeholders are aiming for an optimization of
5-fold over the course of the next 30  years to facilitate a the government’s role. For example, several pieces of legis-
CCS industry of the size needed for climate mitigation [45]. lation are aiming to increase the funding and scope of the
In 2015, a working group consisting of different stake- DOE’s carbon capture, storage and utilization (CCUS) pro-
holders suggested five trunk lines to be developed. These gramme, including directing funding to CCS on natural-gas
trunk lines could connect different CO2 and industrial power generation. Further legislation seeks to fix the 48A
hubs, strategically transporting more than 150 Mtpa of tax credit for efficient coal plants, which, equipped with
CO2, which is about six times as much as being stored CCS, are unable to meet the efficiency requirements, es-
from anthropogenic sources today [46]. Pending legisla- tablish research programmes for DAC and commercialize
tion such as the USE IT Act can enable the facilitation of CCS within the next decade. Building on the diverse and
and clarify the siting, permitting and planning of the CO2 bipartisan support, lawmakers also introduced legislation
infrastructure. However, it remains to be seen how these aimed at research and development to enable emissions
pipelines can be financed, particularly in the absence of reductions in the industrial sector, including steel, iron,
government financing. Analyses suggest a strong role for cement, aviation, shipping and petrochemicals. The indus-
initial government financing and ownership to reduce trial sector has long been an overlooked climate challenge
cross-chain risk and address the fact that pipelines are and reflects a significant policy gap to accelerate decarbon-
natural monopolies. For example, an analysis from 2018 ization solutions. In fact, some CCS applications in the in-
showed that a government-financed pipeline from the dustrial sector are low-cost and already competitive today.
 Beck | 9

5 Conclusion [2] IEA. Global Energy & CO2 Status Report. 2019. https://www.iea.
org/geco/ (1 October 2019, date last accessed).
To conclude, the USA provides ideal preconditions to [3] IEA. World Energy Investment. Paris, France: 2019.
commercialize CCS technologies due to its strong depend- [4] Houser  T, Pitt  H, Hess  H. Final US Emissions Updates for 2018.
ence on fossil fuels and manufacturing, coupled with an Rhodium Group. 2018. https://rhg.com/research/final-us-
innovation-based economy and a desire and pressure to emissions-estimates-for-2018/ (1 October 2019, date last
accessed).

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

maintain extremely low energy prices. Whilst the USA cer-
[5] IEA. World Energy Outlook—the Sustainable Development Scenario.
tainly evidences a very advanced policy incentive and in-
2019. https://www.iea.org/weo/weomodel/sds/ (7 October
frastructure framework, not least because it also hosts the 2019, date last accessed).
most facilities globally, conditions for large-scale CCS de- [6] IEA. Carbon Capture and Storage. https://www.iea.org/topics/
ployment on the scale necessary to meet climate goals re- carbon-capture-and-storage/ (8 October 2019, date last
main incomplete. The latest movements in terms of policy accessed).
development in the USA provide a promising outlook, par- [7] Cleetus R, Bailie A, Clemmer S. The US Power Sector in a Net Zero
ticularly with the implementation of 45Q and further ini- World—Analything Pathways for Deep Carbon Reductions. Union
of Concerned Scientists.2019. https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/
tiatives to address infrastructure shortcomings, access to
default/files/attach/2016/11/UCS-Deep-Decarbonization-
affordable private capital and storage characterization. working-paper.pdf (7 October 2019, date last accessed).
Including CCS in regional carbon markets and transi- [8] Rogelj J, Shindell D, Jiang K, et al. Mitigation pathways com-
tion from renewable- to clean-energy standards can fur- patible with 1.5°C in the context of sustainable development.
ther increase policy support for CCS deployment. Further In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, et al. (eds.). Global
priorities include an emphasis on project deployment Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global
enabling technology optimization through more invest- Warming of 1.5°C Above Pre-industrial Levels and Related Global
Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening
ment in demonstration projects, possibly by the govern-
the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable
ment itself. Emphasis should also be placed on reducing Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty, Fig. 2.15. Geneva,
risk through government involvement, clarifying liability Switzerland: IPCC, 2018. In Press.
and regulatory questions, and enabling the build-out of [9] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. July 2019
pipelines between emissions clusters and storage hubs was hottest month on the record for the planet. https://www.
and facilities. Moreover, creative incentive structures to noaa.gov/news/july-2019-was-hottest-month-on-record-for-
reduce emissions in the industrial sector are needed, as planet. 2019 (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
[10] World Nuclear Association. Nuclear Power in the United States. 2019.
is an innovative business model for CO2 transport and
https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-
storage. Finally, if the USA can accelerate the deployment profiles/countries-t-z/usa-nuclear-power.aspx (9 October 2019,
of CCS technologies accelerating the cost-reduction pro- date last accessed).
cess, similarly to what Germany has done for solar and [11] Energy Information Administration. Natural gas gener-

Great Britain for offshore wind [52], this would not only ators make up the largest share of overall U.S.  generation
reduce the collective-action problem that climate change capacity. 2017. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.
represents, but also bring the world closer to tackling its php?id=34172 (8 October 2019, date last accessed).
[12] Environmental Protection Agency. Sources of greenhouse

global emissions problem.
gas emissions. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-
greenhouse-gas-emissions (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
[13] World Bank, OECD. Industry (including construction), value
Acknowledgements added (% of GDP). 2018. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/
NV.IND.TOTL.ZS (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
This paper and the research behind it would not have been possible
[14] Global CCS Institute. CO2RE Facilities Database. https://co2re.
without the exceptional support of my general manager, Guloren
co/FacilityData. (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
Turan, as well as my colleagues, Lucy Temple-Smith, Alex Zapantis
[15] Friedmann  J, Zhiyuan  F, Tang  D. Low-carbon heat solu-

and Alex Townsend, at the Global CCS Institute, who provided in-
tions for heavy industry: sources, options, and costs today.
sight, feedback and expertise that greatly assisted the research.
Columbia University. 2019. https://energypolicy.columbia.
edu/sites/default/files/file-uploads/LowCarbonHeat-CGEP_
Report_100219-2_0.pdf (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
Conflict of Interest [16] Friedmann  J, Zhiyuan  F, Tang  D. Low-carbon heat solu-

None declared. tions for heavy industry: sources, options, and costs today.
Columbia University. 2019. https://energypolicy.columbia.
edu/sites/default/files/file-uploads/LowCarbonHeat-CGEP_
Report_100219-2_0.pdf (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
References [17] Beck  L. Insight: Hydrogen may be the next clean energy game
[1] Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, et al. Global Warming changer. Bloomberg Environment. 2019. https://news.
of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/
of 1.5°C Above Pre-industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse insight-hydrogen-may-be-the-next-clean-energy-game-
Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global changer (7 October 2019, date last accessed).
Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, [18] National Energy Technology Laboratory. Cost of Capturing CO2
and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC, 2018. from Industrial Sources. DOE/NETL-2013/1602. 10 January 2014.
 10 | Clean Energy, 2019, Vol. XX, No. XX

https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=1836 (7 wp-content/uploads/2019/05/LCFS-and-CCS-Protocol_digital_
October 2019, date last accessed). version-2.pdf (27 November 2019, date last accessed).
[19] Energy Information Administration. U.S. Energy Facts Explained. [36] Air Resources Board. Monthly Credit Reports. 2019. https://ww3.
2019. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=us_en- arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/credit/lrtmonthlycreditreports.htm (31
ergy_home (8 October 2019, date last accessed). September 2019, date last accessed).
[20] Global CCS Institute. CO2RE Inherent Interest Database. 2019. [37] Havercroft  I, Townsend  A. The LCFS and CCS Protocol: An
https://co2re.co/inherentinterest (8 October 2019, date last Overview for Policymakers and Project Developers. Global

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ce/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ce/zkz031/5686277 by Universidad del Norte user on 04 February 2020

accessed). CCS Institute. 2019. https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/
[21] Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office. wp-content/uploads/2019/05/LCFS-and-CCS-Protocol_digital_
Energy Security in the United States. Congress of the United States version-2.pdf (27 November 2019, date last accessed).
Congressional Budget Office. 2012. http://www.cbo.gov/sites/ [38] IEA. Transforming Industry through CCUS. International Energy
default/files/cbofiles/attachments/05-09-EnergySecurity.pdf Agency. 2019.
(9 October 2019, date last accessed). [39] Nagabhushan  D, Thompson  J. Carbon Capture & Storage in the
[22] IEA. World Energy Investment. Paris, France: International United States Power Sector. Clean Air Task Force. 2019. https://
Energy Agency. 2019. www.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/CATF_CCS_United_
[23] Cunliff C, Hart D. The Global Energy Innovation Index—National States_Power_Sector.pdf (7 October 2019, date last accessed).
Contributions to the Global Clean Energy Innovation System. 2019. [40] Clean Air Task Force. Fact Sheet: State and Utility Climate Change
http://www2.itif.org/2019-global-energy-innovation-index. Targets Shift to Carbon Reductions, Technology Diversity. 2019.
pdf (9 October 2019, date last accessed). https://www.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/State-and-
[24] Global CCS Institute. CO2RE Facilities Database. https://co2re. Utility-Climate-Change-Targets.pdf (7 October 2019, date last
co/FacilityData (9 October 2019, date last accessed). accessed).
[25] Global CCS Institute analysis of its CO2RE database. CO2RE [41] Zapantis,  A, Townsend,  A, Rassool,  D. Policy Priorities to
Facilities Database. Global CCS Institute. https://co2re.co/ Incentivise Large Scale Deployment of CCS. The Global CCS
FacilityData (9 October 2019, date last accessed). Institute. 2019. https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/
[26] National Energy Technoloy Laboratory. Carbon Dioxide Enhanced wp-content/uploads/2019/04/TL-Report-Policy-prorities-
Oil Recovery: Untapped Domestic Energy Supply and Long Term to-incentivise-the-large-scale-deployment-of-CCS-digital-
Carbon Storage Solution. 2010. https://www.netl.doe.gov/sites/ final-2019-1.pdf (7 October 2019, date last accessed).
default/files/netl-file/CO2_EOR_Primer.pdf (27 November [42] Global CCS Institute. CO2RE Facilities Database. https://co2re.
2019, date last accessed). co/FacilityData (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
[27] Bliss K, Eugene D, Harms RW, et al. A Policy, Legal, and Regulatory [43] Folger  P. FY2019 Funding for CCS and Other DOE Fossil Energy
Evaluation of the Feasibility of a National Pipeline Infrastructure for R&D. Congressional Research Service. 2018. https://crsreports.
the Transport and Storage of Carbon Dioxide. Georgia: Southern congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10589 (27 November 2019, date
States Energy Board, 2010. last accessed).
[28] Global CCS Institute analysis of its CO2RE database. CO2RE [44] Department of Energy. Advanced Fossil Energy Projects

Facilities Database. Global CCS Institute. https://co2re.co/ Solicitation. Department of Energy. https://www.energy.gov/
FacilityData (9 October 2019, date last accessed). lpo/services/solicitations/advanced-fossil-energy-projects-
[29] Zapantis A, Townsend A, Rassool D. Policy Priorities to Incentivise solicitation (27 November 2019, date last accessed).
Large Scale Deployment of CCS. The Global CCS Institute. [45] Righetti  T. Siting carbon dioxide pipelines. 3 Oil & Gas, Nat
2019. https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/up- Resources & Energy J 2017; 907. https://digitalcommons.law.
loads/2019/04/TL-Report-Policy-prorities-to-incentivise-the- ou.edu/onej/vol3/iss4/3.
large-scale-deployment-of-CCS-digital-final-2019-1.pdf (7 [46] State CO2-EOR Deployment Work Group. 21st Century Energy
October 2019, date last accessed). Infrastructure: Policy Recommendations for Development of American
[30] Zapanti A, Townsend A, Rassool D. Policy Priorities to Incentivise CO2 Pipeline Networks. 2019. https://www.betterenergy.org/
Large Scale Deployment of CCS. The Global CCS Institute. wp-content/uploads/2018/02/GPI_Whitepaper_21st_Century_
2019. https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/wp-content/up- Infrastructure_CO2_Pipelines.pdf (8 October 2019, date last
loads/2019/04/TL-Report-Policy-prorities-to-incentivise-the- accessed).
large-scale-deployment-of-CCS-digital-final-2019-1.pdf (7 [47] Edwards  R, Celia  M. Infrastructure to enable deployment of
October 2019, date last accessed). carbon capture, utilization, and storage in the United States.
[31] Global CCS Institute. CO2RE Facilities Database. https://co2re. PNAS 2018; 115:E8815–E8824.
co/FacilityData (9 October 2019, date last accessed). [48] Global CCS Institute. CO2RE Storage Data. https://co2re.co/

[32] IEA. Putting CO2 to Use—Creating Value from Emissions. StorageData (9 October 2019, date last accessed).
International Energy Agency. 2019. https://webstore.iea.org/ [49] Edwards  R, Celia  M. Infrastructure to enable deployment of
putting-co2-to-use (7 October 2019, date last accessed). carbon capture, utilization, and storage in the United States.
[33] IEA. Storing CO2 through Enhanced Oil Recovery. International PNAS 2018; 115:E8815–E8824.
Energy Agency. 2015. https://webstore.iea.org/insights-series- [50] Folger P. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in the United States.
2015-storing-co2-through-enhanced-oil-recovery (7 October Congressional Research Service. 2018. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/
2019, date last accessed). misc/R44902.pdf (8 October 2019, date last accessed).
[34] IEA. Carbon Capture and Storage. https://www.iea.org/topics/ [51]
National Energy Technology Laboratory. Carbonsafe.
carbon-capture-and-storage/ (9 October 2019, date last accessed). https://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/storage-
[35] Havercroft  I, Townsend  A. The LCFS and CCS Protocol: An infrastructure/carbonsafe (8 October 2019, date last accessed).
Overview for Policymakers and Project Developers. Global [52] The Economist. A warming world: the climate issue. The

CCS Institute. 2019. https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/ Economist, 21–27 September 2019, England.