Contemporary politics,local and international current affairs, science, music and extracts from the Queensland Newspaper "THE WORKER" documenting the proud history of the Labour Movement.
MAHATMA GANDHI ~ Truth never damages a cause that is just.
Monday, 18 November 2024
A climate solution or distraction? The carbon capture facility at Chevron's Gorgon project tells a cautionary tale.
Beside
the turquoise waters of the Indian Ocean, on top of the red sand of
Western Australia's arid north-west, relics of Australia's industrial
past stand like museum pieces.
The
derricks of oil wells bob up and down on Barrow Island, more than 1,200
kilometres north of Perth, much as they have done since the discovery
of reserves in the 60s.
But
look a little further, beyond the derricks, and another construction —
of shiny steel pipes and machinery on an epic scale — looms much larger.
It
is the Gorgon project — a gas plant owned by US energy giant Chevron of
truly monumental size that is Australia's most expensive ever resources
development.
At this plant, more than 40,000 tonnes of gas is processed every day through a feat of modern engineering.
The
gas is chilled to minus 162 degrees Celsius and compressed to a tiny
fraction of its natural form — 1/600th — before being loaded onto
specially designed ships that can hold and transport this liquefied
natural gas, or LNG.
From
there, the gas is sent to Australia's biggest trading partners in North
Asia, where it is used to feed the energy-hungry economies of Japan,
China and South Korea.
For
all the attention the LNG plant demands from the observer, it is
another, much more modest construction nearby that arguably attracts
just as much, if not more, scrutiny.
Sitting
amid the spinifex and low sandy dunes to the north of Barrow Island is
the plant Chevron hopes can — and has long claimed will — prevent many
of the emissions that would otherwise be caused by Gorgon.
It is the world's biggest carbon capture and storage, or CCS, project.
And,
as the name suggests, it involves taking carbon from the Gorgon project
and burying it deep underground to avoid releasing it into the
atmosphere.
The part CCS might
play in cutting greenhouse gas emissions is likely to get a fresh airing
over the coming week, with global climate talks known as COP29 underway
in Azerbaijan.
A series of setbacks
Earlier
this year, Chevron gave a rare insight into the performance of a
project that is a flag-bearer for the technology globally.
In
theory, the plant is supposed to bury — or sequester — 80 per cent of
the carbon dioxide from Gorgon's gas fields over the life of the
project.
Chevron's commitment to bury the carbon formed part of Gorgon's environmental approval from the WA government.
But
seemingly endless problems and delays with the CCS plant on Barrow
Island have dashed those plans, at least in the short term.
Even still, Chevron's director of Australian operations, Danny Woodall, said the CCS plant was providing valuable lessons.
Crucially, he said most, if not all, of the problems on Barrow Island were technical in nature and could be fixed.
Once this happened, he said Gorgon would be able to deliver on its sequestration promises.
"These projects are complicated, complex," Mr Woodall said.
"They take time to develop. We're working hard to find ways to develop those projects across the world.
"And I think Gorgon is one example of where that's happening.
"The
fact that we've injected (more than 10) million tonnes, we have plans
to inject more and to increase that capacity, I think is a testament to
it working."
Leading
this interest has been the United States, where President Joe Biden
turned on the money taps to turbocharge investment in the technology in
America.
Under his signature
Inflation Reduction Act, which aims to clean up America's economy, firms
can get up to $US85 ($129) for every tonne of carbon they can store.
And companies including the Western world's biggest oil super-major ExxonMobil have rushed to take advantage of the scheme.
Stephanie
Chiang, a research analyst at global energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie,
said the enthusiasm from oil and gas firms for CCS was understandable.
It was, she said, one of the most obvious ways for them to cut their emissions.
"I think CCS first and foremost is one of the key decarbonisation pathways," Ms Chiang said.
"It's not the only one of course but it is important to help a lot of economies to get to net zero."
But critics of the technology — and the fossil fuel industry's embrace of it — say it is a dangerous distraction.
Geoscientist
Dimitri Lafleur, who used to work at Dutch-Anglo oil behemoth Shell,
said carbon capture and storage did practically nothing to deal with the
root cause of global warming — the combustion of fossil fuels.
If anything, he said it would only prolong their use and make it harder to rein in emissions in later years.
To illustrate his point, he cited Chevron's own numbers for Gorgon.
Mr
Lafleur, now the chief scientist at the Australasian Centre for
Corporation Responsibility, said Gorgon had in five years buried about
10 million tonnes of carbon dioxide.
By
comparison, he said the amount of carbon dioxide equivalent emitted
courtesy of fossil fuel combustion every year was 40 billion tonnes.
In
other words, the amount of carbon buried by Gorgon to date amounted to
1/4000th of global greenhouse gas emissions every year.
What's
more, he said burying carbon naturally contained in oil and gas fields
did nothing to prevent the release of vastly more carbon into the
atmosphere when the resource was used by customers at the end of the
line.
"It's very problematic," Mr Lafleur said.
"It's
the wrong type of application of CCS, because you cannot sequester the
emissions that are associated with combustion of fossil fuel, and that's
a magnitude larger than the emissions that are emitted from the
development of fossil fuels.
"So
if you're trying to capture those emissions at one facility, you are
still increasing emissions if you look at the whole life cycle."
The oil and gas industry, for its part, argues that fossil fuels are not the problem so much as the emissions they cause.
Chris
Powers, vice-president at Chevron's New Energies division, said the
aim, in that sense, should be the reduction or elimination of those
emissions rather than the use of those fuels themselves.
To
that end, Mr Powers said Chevron first looked to make its operations
more efficient, avoiding waste and associated emissions where possible.
Beyond that, he said CCS would be a key plank in the company's efforts.
Faced
with questions about the high cost of the technology at Gorgon — where
the CCS plant is believed to have cost as much as $3.5 billion to date —
he was sanguine.
"One
of the things I say with any new technology, whether it's CCS, whether
it's wind, solar … there's always a cost curve and a learning curve
associated with it," Mr Powers said.
"Initial
projects always cost more, and as you develop more and more projects
over time, the unit cost of those projects are going to come down as you
have learnings (sic)."
Ms
Chiang said the jury was still out on whether — or the extent to which —
carbon capture and storage could be brought down in cost to a level
that made it viable.
And she acknowledged there was a world of difference between the hype around CCS and what it was currently delivering.
Despite
this, Ms Chiang said the industry was still at a fledgling stage in its
development and only starting to be taken more seriously.
Among
its backers, she noted, were not just the usual industry types but the
International Energy Agency, a club of rich energy-using nations that
has also called for a halt to new fossil fuel developments.
She
said it was better to have a viable CCS industry than not, arguing some
industries as well as countries would find it hard to reach carbon
neutrality without it.
"I don't see it as a distraction," Ms Chiang said.
"I think it's one of the solutions as part of your decarbonisation toolkit that a country has.
"And that's why CCS, I mean if you look across multiple net zero scenarios… is still part of that toolkit.
"Yes,
CCS does help to decarbonise upstream oil and gas production, the use
of fossil fuels, but at the same time it also decarbonises those
hard-to-abate industrial sectors.
"And I think we shouldn't forget about that."
Carbon capture's role
Mr
Lafleur from the ACCR agreed that the technology behind CCS was not the
problem and, in fact, would be needed in the push to decarbonise.
He
said it was common ground that some industries — such as cement making —
would have to rely on CCS because they had few, if any, other ways to
cut their emissions.
Similarly,
he said it could be a useful way of clawing back reverses in the event
the world blows past the limits set by the Paris climate accord, under
which global temperature rises would be kept to no more than 1.5C above
pre-industrial levels.
But
Mr Lafleur warned that the technology should not be used by incumbent
oil and gas producers as a stalking horse for other motives.
"There are other avenues where it can be a part of the solution," Mr Lafleur said.
"And that's more to do with the industries that eventually, if we get close to net zero, are not able to reduce their emissions.
"The second portion here is that CCS can play a real role in the removal of carbon from the atmosphere.
"If
you put CCS onto a fossil fuel project, you are delaying the
transition, you continue to rely on fossil fuels and you are increasing
emissions in the long term."
The ABC paid for travel on a Chevron chartered plane to access Barrow Island.
No comments:
Post a Comment