Spanish EU Presidency draws criticism on carbon capture technology

Spain, the current holder of the EU Council presidency, has been accused of undermining the adoption of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in Europe following the circulation of a discussion paper that questions the EU’s approach.

The discussion paper was circulated to EU member states earlier this month to unearth gaps in consensus.

But CCS advocates complained the document showed a bias towards the technological solution, which proponents say is vital to meeting the EU’s 2050 net-zero target.

“Heads of government recognised 16 years ago that CCS would be needed to help curb CO2 emissions,” said Chris Davies, director of advocacy body CCS Europe.

“It is very disappointing that the Spanish Presidency should seek to frustrate measures that are essential if a significant reduction in CO2 emissions from industrial sources is to be achieved,” he added.

CCS technology removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and injects it underground, where it will remain for hundreds of years, removing its contribution to global warming. 

Under the EU’s Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA) tabled in March this year, the Commission has proposed a target of capturing at least 50 million tonnes of CO2 by 2030, rising to 550 million tonnes of carbon annually by 2050.

Oil and gas producers are legally required to contribute to this target, using depleted oil fields and gas reservoirs as storage sites.

EU sets world’s first target for underground CO2 storage capacity

The European Commission set out a target on Thursday (16 March) to enable 50 million tonnes of annual carbon dioxide injection capacity by 2030, a move that puts the oil and gas industry under pressure to deliver on a technology they have been peddling for years.

However, the discussion paper encourages member states to consider “the potential lack of compatibility of CCS and CO2 transport with the ‘energy efficiency first’ principle, which should underpin all EU energy policies”.

This wording mirrors green campaigner’s concerns that CCS will become a “licence to pollute” for industry, detracting from efforts to decarbonise.

The Spanish Presidency also questions whether it would be possible to reach a geographic balance in CCS sites – going beyond the North Sea – without an obligation on oil and gas producers to engage in CCS. “If so, would you be in favour of deleting these obligations from the text?” the document asks.

The question of whether EU nations would “see merit in limiting the promotion of CCS to hard-to-abate sectors… to avoid further consumption of fossil fuels” or if all sectors should be included is additionally posed.

Whether CCS should be reserved for sectors without options to fully cut emissions, such as the steel, cement, and aviation industries, has sparked fierce debate internationally. The European Commission’s narrower interpretation differs from other nations, such as Canada.

CCS a costly solution

Toby Lockwood, a carbon capture expert with Clean Air Task Force, a US-based NGO, said the narrative that CCS could cause industry to roll back their efforts to decarbonise is “problematic”.

“The principle should be that any CO2 not emitted is a good thing,” he told EURACTIV. “I think it’s misleading to talk about doing CCS as a kind of ‘licence to pollute’. It’s precisely a way of not polluting if done properly.”

Lockwood portrayed carbon capture as a last resort for industry.

“The bottom line is CCS is a very costly solution for all sectors,” he said. “It’s very unlikely to undermine the drive towards energy efficiency or other decarbonisation approaches because it’s normally the last thing you want to do; the less CO2 you have to abate by that means (CCS), the better.”

Green technologies are not yet available at scale for many industries, such as aviation, meaning the shift to carbon-free operations could take decades. According to Lockwood, an aversion to CCS would see interim emissions go unabated, exacerbating the climate crisis.

“The alternatives to CCS normally require an awful lot of low-carbon electricity, such as to generate green hydrogen or to electrify, and in most parts of Europe, that’s not a reality at the moment,” he said.

“There’s almost more risk from saying ‘let’s wait until we have green hydrogen,’ and then [industry] can keep emitting until we have sufficient clean energy to deliver that,” he added.

‘Trivial questions’

James Cogan, policy advisor at Ethanol Europe, a family-owned biofuel producer from Ireland, said the “superficial” approach taken by the Spanish Presidency to CCS is disappointing.

“The paper reduces the NZIA and CCS – and hence all climate-related industrial development – to glib chit-chat. The EU is already perilously weak on climate and CCS-related industrial development,” he said.

Cogan warned that the structure of the NZIA essentially allows disinterested EU nations to ignore their CCS obligations.

“If there was an EU-wide financial incentive, especially for non-ETS carbon such as fermentation CO2, then the market would come up with CCS solutions regardless of how supportive or otherwise the member states are,” he said.

“Instead of raising largely trivial questions, the Spanish presidency could give dignity to the presidency process by helping make CCS big and bankable soon in Europe,” he added.

A request for comment from the Spanish Presidency was not returned.

[Edited by Frédéric Simon]

Read more with Euractiv

EU says pesticide giants breached law over withheld brain toxicity studies

Agrochemical giants Bayer and Syngenta are in breach of legal obligations for withholding information on the brain toxicity risk of pesticides, the European Commission said on Tuesday (18 July).