TECHNOLOGY
risks . Analysis by the ETI has shown that once one CCS facility has been constructed , the cost of building others will inevitably decrease .
“ The first jump is going to be a little bit expensive because you ’ re going to have to put the infrastructure in , although our analysis shows that with close attention to how the project is designed these costs can be manageable ,” Green says . “ It ’ s not a technology issue , there ’ s not a big technology development requirement : it ’ s about taking that first jump .”
The ETI has created a tool called the Energy System Modelling Environment ( ESME ) which is capable of finding the least-costly energy system designs to meet stipulated sustainability targets . When the model is run to achieve the UK ’ s 2050 targets in the most cost-effective way , it has consistently shown that CCS is the single-most valuable technology in the country ’ s carbon reduction arsenal . Renewable energy has a sizeable part to play in reducing greenhouse gas emissions , but fossil fuels will likely remain a practical , and integral , part of our energy mix in decades to come .
“ You could carpet half of Southern England with solar panels , but the other issue you face is energy storage ,” Green says .
“ You need to provide energy when it ’ s needed . And when it ’ s not needed , if you ’ re making electricity , you ’ re going to have to store it somewhere . Fossil fuels are the most efficient way of storing energy known to man at the moment .”
Some critics of CCS have voiced concerns that capturing carbon , rather than eliminating it entirely , will further obstruct the process of fossil fuel divestment . For Green and the ETI , the perceived benefits of carbon capture technologies arise from their
‘ The innovation that is needed in CCS isn ’ t so much traditional technological innovation , it ’ s innovation of the market and the investment climate ’
22 July 2016