|
News overview
Disclosing CCS Barriers4 December 2014Assessing the interrelation among important barrier for deploying CCS An Intricate RelationBesides many barriers for CCS deployment might be well-known, it is not very clear the intricate relation between them: how important are some barriers in relation to others? How do they influence each other? How favorable or unfavorable are their current situations? Are there differences or similarities among the perceptions of different organizations involved in CCS?To answer these questions, an online questionnaire was designed. It is part of a PhD research at the Delft University of Technology, (TUDelft) in the Netherlands and involved CCS experts from different types of organizations. The survey assessed important barriers that were previously identified via literature review: "liability of CO2 storage" (LiSt), "financial incentives" (FiIn), "CO2 price" (CO2P), "public acceptance" (PuAc), "political support" (PoSu), "cooperation among actors" (CoAc) and "technological uncertainties" (TeUn). The results were grouped based on the types of the organization of the respondents: users of CO2 (including suppliers, carrier or consumer of CO2), public organizations, NGO's, academia and research institutes. This classification was chosen by the respondents during the survey. Also, a total result combining all the valid responses was computed. Revealing the intricate relation
Further
For all the types...
The survey also assessed the perception about the current situation of each barrier (Figure 3). When considering all the responses together, once they were very similar, it could be observed that the current situation of the most important barriers is very unfavorable. For "CO2 price", 94.4% of the responses considered it as being in highly unfavorable or unfavorable situation, while the remaining 5.6% considered it only as neutral. For "financial incentives", 83.3% of the responses considered the situation as being highly unfavorable or unfavorable, while 11.1% and 5.6% considered it in a neutral and favorable situation, respectively. "Public acceptance" is also not perceived in a very good position: 50% of the respondents think that this barrier is in a highly unfavorable or unfavorable situation and only 5.6% believes that it is in a favorable position. On the other side, "technological uncertainties" and "cooperation among actors" received the most positive scores: respectively 50% and 38.9% of the respondents considered these two barriers in a favorable or highly favorable situation. Even with the situation of other barriers being more favorable, which can positively influence "financial incentives" for example, improving the conditions for a proper deployment of the CCS project can be quite challenging. Economic barriers: similar importance, different strategy approachesBesides the two economic barriers were considered the most important ones, the analysis of their mutual influence with other barriers reveal that decision-makers need different types of strategy approaches to improve them. "CO2 price" is a very influential barrier; therefore strategies should be designed that directly influence it. "Financial incentives", on the other hand, is influenced by other barriers. In this sense, strategies should be created to influence other barriers that will, indirectly, have impact on it. According to respondents' perceptions, improving political support and the price of CO2 as well as reducing technological uncertainties can enhance the achievement of financial incentive goals.Public acceptance: a real barrier?An interesting observation is that "public acceptance" was perceived as having low importance and low influence. However, according to an open question in the survey, this "public acceptance" was mentioned by more than 30% of the respondents as one of the main barriers faced by CCS. These apparently contradictory results may indicate that, besides this barrier (and probably the other barriers analyzed) is relevant, the economic factors are predominantly more important than the others.Common vision among the different types of organizations: a good startThe different groups of organizations analyzed had, in overall, similar points-of-view, which is very important for defining common strategies to overcome CCS barriers. Different opinions can lead to a very long and costly decision-making process. A common vision is a good start for creating consensus and for defining collective actions that will effectively overcome the difficult barriers that CCS initiatives are facing today.For any further information, please contact the PhD candidate responsible for this survey: Juliana Sara da Silva. |