Such innovations from ARPA - E programs like IMPACCT will prove critical for enabling both fossil and bioenergy
CCS projects in the future.
Not exact matches
In this
future scenario with a high need for CDR, if the PUC had built the coal +
CCS project, it could choose to retrofit the plant to a biomass +
CCS power plant capable of removing carbon from the atmosphere at a relatively small incremental cost.
Even by keeping the door open for fossil
CCS projects (if not mandating the technology outright), the EPA has provided an opportunity for utilities and
project developers to build fossil energy with
CCS projects, and hopefully pave the way for carbon removal
CCS techniques such as bioenergy with
CCS and direct air capture and storage
in the
future.
As a result, fossil
CCS projects could provide a pathway to «renewable
CCS»
projects in the
future.
To get an idea of current and near -
future prospects for
CCS in the power sector, I went to the Global
CCS Institute list of large - scale
projects.
If fossil energy with
CCS projects can credibly commit to serving as a bridge to bio-
CCS in the
future (through agreements to ratchet up biomass co-firing, or by supporting RPS - like standards for bio-
CCS in the
future, for example), they are more likely to get the support they need to get early
projects built and deployed.
Because
CCS technology like that deployed at Petra Nova can be adapted for
CCS at other industrial sources of CO2,
projects like Petra Nova can generate valuable lessons that help us reduce costs, develop fair environmental and safety regulations, and increase investor experience for
CCS projects in all sectors of the economy
in the
future.
Transitioning all of these
projects to renewables will be even harder than the transition from coal power, which means that
CCS technology will be highly valuable for reducing CO2 emissions from these
projects in the near
future.