UNBATED FOSSIL FUELS
1. Context
At the ongoing COP28 climate summit, one phrase that has taken the centrestage is “unabated” fossil fuels
The phrase is inextricably tied to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technologies — a hotly debated subject between oil and gas producers, and climate experts. Here is a look at the issue.
2. What are ‘unabated’ fossil fuels?
- When discussing fossil fuels, the term "unabated" indicates taking no action to reduce the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases emitted from burning coal, oil, and natural gas.
- On the other hand, "abated" refers to efforts aimed at reducing the emission of harmful substances to a level considered acceptable. However, there's a lack of clarity regarding what this acceptable level is and the means to achieve it.
- Furthermore, there exists no universally recognized or internationally agreed-upon definition for these terms. The closest approximation to a widely accepted definition is found in the footnote of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientific advisory body's recent benchmark report.
- It specifies that unabated fossil fuels are those released "without interventions that substantially reduce" greenhouse gas emissions.
- According to the report, this would involve capturing at least 90% of CO2 emissions from power plants or up to 80% of methane leaked during energy production and transportation.
- Discussions surrounding fossil fuel abatement primarily center around CCS (carbon capture and storage) technologies, which capture emissions from power plants or industrial facilities and sequester them underground. However, opinions on this topic remain deeply divided.
- While oil and gas-producing companies and countries view carbon capture as a crucial element in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, climate activists and experts contend that its effectiveness is limited.
- In a statement issued in July, the European Union and 17 nations, including Germany, France, Chile, New Zealand, and climate-vulnerable island states, emphasized that carbon capture technologies should not be seen as a replacement for substantial reductions in fossil fuel use and caution against excessive reliance on them
3. Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies
- The International Energy Agency (IEA) has highlighted that modern CCS technologies in power and industrial plants can capture approximately 90% of the CO2 emissions.
- However, a 2022 report from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), a global think tank focusing on energy markets, found that most of the 13 prominent CCS projects analyzed globally either performed below expectations or encountered complete failure.
- Furthermore, Climate Analytics, a climate science and policy institute based in Germany, conducted an analysis indicating that heavy reliance on CCS might result in an additional release of 86 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere between 2020 and 2050.
- This would occur if carbon capture rates reach only 50% instead of the anticipated 95%, and upstream methane emissions remain high.
- The projected emissions would surpass double the global CO2 emissions in 2023. The analysis cautioned against the misconception that CCS could effectively limit the global temperature rise below 1.5 degrees Celsius, especially in the context of expanding fossil fuel projects. Additionally, it emphasized the considerable expense associated with CCS technologies, highlighting that shutting down a coal plant and substituting it with a mix of renewable energy sources like wind, solar, and batteries proves more cost-effective than attaching a carbon capture device to the plant
4. Way forward
There is a chance that the COP28 meeting’s final declaration might mention phase out or phase down of unabated fossil fuels. If this happens, many are concerned that it would allow countries and fossil fuel companies to continue to burn fossil fuels as long as they capture the emissions and store it underground
Source: Indianexpress
