Page 1

2011 Communication Activities Report



1. 2. 3. 4.

Media Coverage Events Online Other

p. 4 p. 48 p. 65 p. 82


2011 Communication Activities Report Introduction Dear ZEP Member, The following report provides a comprehensive but not exhaustive overview of our platform’s communications activities and achievements during 2011. Effectively communicating the need for CCS and its benefits to opinion leaders like policymakers, the media, industry, civil society and the successor generation, has been a key activity for the platform since 2008. Our focus on key event participation; online presence; media relations; communications tools/content and expanding our network of relationships with key CCS stakeholders are all covered individually within this annual review. While this report contains the summary of the entire 2011 activity set, 2012 will see ZEP report on its communications activities every six months to provide a more regular overview. As ZEP moves forward in supporting CCS demonstration projects and MS governments to ensure the EU CCS Demonstration Programme is a success, ZEP’s communications activities will be adapted accordingly to leverage the expertise and quality content and tools the platform has developed to date, and will continue to deliver in the future. We would like to offer our sincere thanks to the ZEP members who contributed to the platform’s communications activities, and to the organisations that have provided the financial means necessary to deliver them. Best Regards,

Eric Drosin Director of Communications Zero Emissions Platform Mobile: +32-493-511-982


Media Coverage


Media Coverage 1. Title: Mlex Headline: EC’s guidelines could lead to never-ending liabilities for CCS site operators Date: 21/04/2011 Guidelines on how to implement laws governing carbon capture and storage (CCS) sites in the EU could leave site operators financially responsible forever, warn companies, scientists, academics and environmental groups supporting development of the technology. The European Commission this month sent non-binding guidance to EU governments to help implement the EU legal framework for CCS. Among other things, the commission suggested that companies operating storage sites for CO2 set aside at least 25 percent of the estimated total operating, safety and compliance liabilities that could arise from any leak or accident (see MLex story here). But supporters of the technology in Europe, represented by Zero Emissions Platform (Zep), warn that the commission’s interpretation of how financial liability for any potential accident at a site should be transferred – in the event of a change of ownership, for example – could leave the bill in the hands of the original site operator.

“Financial security provided by the previous operator should not cover obligations for continued injection,” Zep said in a response note to the commission’s guidance. “The directive gives the competent authority discretion to continue such injection, but it would be contrary to the very principles of the directive to do so at the expense of the previous operator.” Open-ended financial liability for CO2 storage sites could scare off potential developers, and act as a roadblock to development of CCS in Europe. Many, including EU energy commissioner Günther Oettinger, believe CCS technology will be essential, if the EU is to cut its CO2 emissions by 80-95 percent by 2050, as EU leaders have pledged. The provision in question is Article 11(4) of the CCS Directive.

2. Title: Comment Visions (European Voice) Headline: Contribution to debate on how government and industry can win public support for new low-carbon technologies Date: 27/04/2011


3. Title: Bloomberg Headline: EU Members Face June Deadline After Requesting CO2 Capture Funds Date: 16/05/2011 European Union members seeking funding for carbon capture and storage facilities facing a deadline today are under pressure to meet another date next month to adopt law, said the Zero Emissions Platform. Spain is the only nation to have implemented the EU Directive on Geological Storage, which is meant to be enacted by June 25, said Eric Drosin, a spokesman for the lobby group known as ZEP, whose members include ENEL SpA and BP Plc. (BP/). About eight other member states are set to meet the June deadline, Drosin said today by e-mail. Member states need to apply by today to get funding from the 5 billion euros ($7.2 billion) NER 300 fund set up by the EU for carbon-capture and renewable-energy projects, ZEP said in an e-mailed statement.

4. Title: Europe’s World Headline: European Union CO2 Capture Plans Achieve Major Milestone for Clean Energy Future Date: 16/05/2011 Three years ago the European Union (EU) pledged to become a leader in CO2 capture and storage (CCS), a technology which captures CO2 from power plants, refineries and other industrial facilities and stores it deep underground. The EU set itself a goal to have 10-12 large scale CCS projects in operation around Europe by 2015, an extraordinary endeavor given that there are no major facilities operating anywhere in the world today. CCS is an essential technology for a lower carbon, clean energy future. The EU has established a fund worth ₏5 billion (the NER300) as part of the European Emissions Trading System and May 9, 2011, marked a crucial milestone in moving CCS from concept to reality with countries across Europe submitting applications for funding of proposed CCS plants. Efforts by the European Union thus far are to be applauded but much remains to be done. CCS in Europe will fail if Member States do not deliver the essential regulatory and financial support needed. This support needs to be delivered fast. Major issues remain to be resolved. These include the implementation of the EU Directive on Geological Storage of CO2 (before a deadline of June 2011) as well as completion of national CCS legal frameworks which will enable the approval of permit applications for CCS demonstration projects.

The NER 300 funding programme for CCS is important but more funds need to be committed in order to progress this vital technology. CCS demonstration projects are unlikely to generate sufficient revenue so Member State intervention and support is essential as these plants scale up to commercial size. And delivering this first wave of CCS projects is only the beginning. Future research into the full family of CCS technologies remains a priority, together with a clear progamme of international knowledge sharing. Neither of these requirements is in place today, despite repeated calls from industry to see them materialize. Finally and most importantly, there is an acute need to win over public support for CCS. Without the support of local communities where CCS projects will be built, progress will not be possible. While the EU was indisputably first out of the gate in launching a CCS demonstration programme of substantial size and importance, it will only be able to ensure it crosses the finish line if appropriate CCS legislation is in place, funding is delivered and international cooperation is fully engrained in the development of CCS in Europe. CCS provides one of the most cost effective ways to respond to climate change. There is no downside to capturing more CO2 sooner rather than later. There is no second chance at this, and time is running out


5. Title: VG (Norway) Headline: Regjeringen frykter kreftfare p책 Mongstad, men EU er ikke enig Date: 25/05/2011


6. Title: VGB PowerTech Headline: The cost of CO2 capture, transport and storage. Four ZEP reports with unique content and basic cost data Date: June 2011











7. Title: Mlex Headline: CCS funding at risk as EU states drag feet over CO2 storage law Date: 19/06/2011 Germany, Italy, Poland and the Netherlands have also applied for funding for CCS demonstration projects but are yet to implement the law, which was supposed to be passed into national statute books by 24 June. The commission has said they are still receiving notifications from member states of implementation of the CCS directive, which will be checked for completeness. The Commission will issue letters of formal notice to states that have submitted no or only partial transposition notification as part of due process. Over half of the countries who have applied for EU funding for carbon capture and storage (CCS) demonstration projects have missed the deadline to implement a law ensuring the safe and legal application of the technology. The European Commission confirmed today that 12 out of the 27 European states have made law, or ‘transposed’, an EU directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide. While the commission declined to say that projects in the running for the NER 300 would be discounted without transposition of the law, an official pointed out that without the law, permits cannot be granted and without the permits a project cannot go ahead. The directive, adopted in April 2009, was created to remove any legal obstacles which stood in the way of developing CCS. It is not possible for companies to receive authorisation permits for projects without the law in place. The countries which have transposed the law are Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Spain, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Austria, Romania, Finland and the United Kingdom.

Germany has had political difficulties implementing the law due to growing opposition to CCS technology, with health and safety fears. Discussions are ongoing in its parliament but the law is unlikely to be implemented before September. Berlin has recently changed its energy policy to move away from nuclear power by 2022 due to the nuclear disaster in Japan. While the country has said it will plough more investment into renewable energy technologies, there is likely to be an increase in coal-produced energy in the absence of nuclear power. This would mean an increase in CO2 emissions without the use of CCS. Poland’s power relies heavily on coal, which means CCS is set to play a large part in its legally-binding CO2 emissions reduction targets. Procedures to get a CCS demonstration project off the ground, such as for authorisation permits and gathering finances, are lengthy. Delays could make the EU’s target of having up to 12 demonstration projects up and running by 2015 tight, as these processes cannot start without first the CCS law being transposed. The commission will decide June 2012 which projects will receive funding under the NER 300.

Of these states, the UK, France and Romania have submitted projects into a competition run by the European Commission to gain funding under the so-called NER 300. This money comes from the New Entrants Reserve of the EU Emissions Trading System in the form of 300 million allowances which will be sold. At today’s carbon price, they are estimated to be worth 4.5 billion euros.


8. Title: Point Carbon Headline: EU faces lure of price control in pivotal vote Date: 11/07/2011 European lawmakers face a crossroads this week that will see them take the first steps to becoming a central bank for their flagship emissions trading scheme (ETS) or inject fresh supply into a market that is near a two-year low, risking hundreds of millions of euros in clean technology investment. On Wednesday, officials from the 27 member states will vote on whether to advance supply of 120 million carbon allowances originally slated for sale in 2013 to help power companies hedge forward power sales next year. The move was originally designed to stop carbon prices spiralling upwards, but the EU faces the prospect of sending negative market signals at a time when the price of carbon has crashed by 34 per cent in just six weeks, largely due to concerns about the EU economy. If the EU reneges on a previous pledge to deliver the credits, it risks accusations of interfering in the market as well as the credibility of the European commission, the defacto regulator of the scheme and an institution that has so-far denied any role as a carbon central bank. But by delivering on a previous pledge to sell additional supply next year, it chances a sustained slump in carbon prices that could jeopardise plans to fund renewable energy and carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. The funding is due to come from a separate sale of 300 million permits from a reserve set aside for new entrants (NER 300) to the scheme, which is slated to earn €4.5 billion ($6.3 billion).

But at current prices the permits would only generate around €4 billion in revenue for the pioneering projects, a huge sum, but still €500 million short of target. “The current price raises concerns about whether the ETS will supply what is required to get low carbon technology off the ground,” said Eric Drosin, a spokesman for the Zero Emissions Platform, a wide consortium of power companies, scientists and environmental groups supporting CCS.

The ZEP group reckons that for European leaders to make good on their pledge of delivering 10-12 commercial scale CCS plants by 2020, they need to help find €5-6 billion to build the infrastructure to capture, transport and bury emissions far beneath the Earth’s surface. Any cash for pilot renewable projects, such as tidal power and geothermal energy, would need to come on top of this figure.
 The dilemma has led to calls by consultants Idea Carbon for the EU to take on an intervening role in the carbon market, similar to the Bank of England’s over UK monetary policy and the US Commodities Futures Trading Commission’s over commodities trade. Pressure to deliver funding for carbon-cutting projects and other commitments could create a problem for officials who were previously fearful of meddling in a mechanism designed to cut emissions at the lowest cost. Jonathan Grant, a consultant for PWC, said the EU was likely to resist the temptation to intervene, despite the prospect of less money for clean energy.

“I don’t think there is any ulterior motive to manipulate the market in order to raise more money for the NER300 pot, though obviously the commission would like to fund as many projects as possible,” he told Point Carbon News. Grant said a bigger concern for EU lawmakers is how much a sustained slump in prices will reduce the bloc’s capability of using revenue from selling permits to fund action on climate change in developing countries. A UN agreement struck last year targeted raising $100 billion a year by 2020 to help developing states limit their emissions and adapt to a warming climate. Under current EU law, the 27 member states can sell around half of the 2 billion EU allowances set to be issued each year after 2013, potentially raising well over €250 billion by the end of the decade for government coffers and overseas development aid.

But the recent price crash has potentially halved this figure.


9. Title: ENDS Europe Daily Headline: CCS can be cost-competitive after 2020 – report The industry-led Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP) has said it is confident carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology will prove successful and be cost-competitive with other low-carbon technologies once its commercialisation phase begins. A ZEP report published on Friday estimates the electricity generation cost of a CCS power plant using hard coal at about €70 per megawatt hours, excluding carbon costs. This is €20/MWh more than the same installation without CCS.

CCS plants will continue to need significant financial support after 2020. Those using hard coal would become economically viable at a carbon price of €37 per tonne of CO2, compared with €34/tonne and €90/tonne for lignite and gas respectively. This makes CCS coal plants potentially cost-competitive in the mid-2020s. In the EU, demonstration plants to be built between 2015 and 2020 will get funding from programmes such as the NER300. The emissions trading scheme (ETS) will not be a sufficient driver for investment until the carbon price is high enough to allow full-scale commercialisation. Other funding instruments will be needed.

The cost of gas-fired plants equipped with CCS would be a lot higher than for those using coal. The cost difference with a plant without CCS is also about €20/MWh: €70/ MWh, rising to €90/MWh with CCS, excluding carbon costs.

10. Title: European Energy Review Link: Article: Uploaded Key Statement to website and provided link to CCS Cost reports on

ZEP website. 11. Title: Reuters Headline: CO2 capture will need support beyond 2020-study Link: LONDON, July 15 (Reuters) - Power plants fitted with carbon capture technology will need government support beyond 2020, especially following a sharp drop in European carbon prices, an EU and industry-funded study found on Friday. Carbon capture and storage (CCS), untested at the commercial scale, is meant to trap and bury carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel power plants. The European Union’s emissions trading scheme (ETS) forces polluting factories and power plants to pay for carbon emissions, in a scheme partly intended to make green technologies competitive.

“It’s likely that it will require additional support over and above what’s provided by the EU ETS to enable deployment in the early 2020s,” said Graeme Sweeney, chair of the Zero Emissions Platform, an EU-industry initiative.

The price of pollution permits called European Union allowances (EUAs) have fallen 25 percent in the past month, however, following concerns about the pace of European economic recovery.

The G20 has called for 20 commercial-scale CCS plants worldwide by 2020. EU states are preparing funding for 10-12 commercial projects by then. CCS has a high capital cost and also inflicts a penalty on power plant efficiency. Pilot projects around the world have been repeatedly delayed or cancelled and no commercial-scale plant has yet been built. Most recently in the United States on Thursday power producer AEP said that it was putting on hold plans to

Friday’s report said that CCS would need continued support after 2020, to compete with unconstrained fossil fuel power and give energy companies time to fine-tune the technology.

Sweeney, who is also head of CO2 at Anglo-Dutch oil company Shell, stressed that it would be able to compete with other low-carbon power options, however. “We’re saying that fossil fuels with CCS are costcompetitive with the onshore and offshore wind, solar and nuclear group. They’re a viable low-carbon power option.”


commercialise CCS, ending an agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy, citing uncertainties over U.S. climate policy and a weak economy. Sweeney was confident that CCS projects would proceed, however, pointing for example to Shell’s own project in Alberta which last month won local and Canadian government funding. Friday’s ZEP report, “The Costs of CO2 Capture, Transport and Storage”, estimated that the cost of cutting emissions using CCS ranged from about 35-90 euros per tonne of CO2, after 2020, depending on the type and price of fossil fuel.

The ZEP study reported wide ranges in its cost estimates depending on for example on assumptions about fuel prices. It concluded that, regardless of those assumptions, the cost would be less if projects were coordinated into clusters, transporting CO2 from several sources into a single sink. “A strategic plan we show has a substantial impact on the transport and storage costs,” said Sweeney.

That compares with an EU carbon price of about 12.3 euros on Thursday, meaning at the moment it is much` cheaper for coal plants simply to buy emissions permits than to fit CCS.


12. Title: mLex Headline: CCS to be cost-competitive by 2020, stakeholder reports says



13. Title: Point Carbon Headline: Post 2020, CCS will be cost-competitive with other low-carbon energy technologies Article: Guest Commentary editorial requested by Point Carbon and provided by ZEP. integrated CCS value chains presented in a summary report. As the costs of CCS will be inherently uncertain until further projects come on stream, the ZEP CCS cost study will be updated every two years. Key conclusions • ZEP’s study indicates that the EU CCS demonstration programme will not only prove the costs of CCS, but provide the basis for future cost reductions, enhanced by the introduction of second- and third generation technologies. CCS is therefore on track to become one of the key technologies for combating climate change – within a portfolio of technologies, including greater energy efficiency and renewable energy. Indeed, recent reports such as the IEA’s “Projected Costs of Generating Electricity - 2010” indicate that the costs of post-demonstration CCS with coal (€70-90/ MWh) and gas (€70-120/MWh), as presented in ZEP’s study, will be cost-competitive with other low-carbon power options, including on- and offshore wind, solar power and nuclear. • CCS can technically be applied to both coaland gasfired power plants – their relative economics depend on power plant cost levels, fuel prices and market positioning, whereas applicability is mainly determined by load regime. Future updates will also cover co-firing with biomass as it provides significant abatement potential when combining CCS with sustainably-produced biomass feedstock.

In order to keep global warming below 2ºC – costeffectively – CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS) technology must provide 20 per cent of the global emission cuts required by 2050, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). Indeed, the costs of doing so without CCS are estimated to be over 70 per cent higher. In turn, CCS will enable Europe to enjoy a surge in economic growth – creating new jobs, boosting industry and promoting technology leadership – while ensuring a secure energy supply. In order to establish a reference point for the costs of CCS, the companies, scientists, academics and environmental NGOs that together make up the Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP) have therefore undertaken a ground-breaking study based on new data provided by member organisations on existing pilot and planned demonstration projects. The aim: to estimate the costs of complete CCS value chains (i.e. the capture, transport and storage of CO2) for new-build coal- and gasfired power plants located at a generic site in Northern Europe, from the early 2020s. This is described in three reports on CO2 capture , CO2 transport and CO2 storage respectively, with the resulting

• The study covers first-generation capture technologies (post-combustion, pre-combustion and oxy-fuel) and indicates that all three capture technologies could be competitive in the future once successfully demonstrated. • Clustering plants to a transport network can achieve significant economies of scale. Early strategic planning of a large-scale transport infrastructure is therefore vital, with any cross-border restrictions removed. Clusters can also include industrial applications of CCS (e.g. steel, cement and fuel transformation) which could abate ~15 per cent of all global man-made CO2 emissions by 2050 (IEA). • CO2 storage is cheaper onshore than offshore; depleted oil and gas fields are cheaper than deep saline aquifers; larger reservoirs are cheaper than smaller ones; and high injectivity is cheaper than poor injectivity. However, given the large variation in storage costs (up to a factor of 10) and the risk of investing in the exploration of aquifers that are ultimately found to be unsuitable, a risk-reward mechanism is needed to realise the significant aquifer potential and ensure sufficient storage capacity is available. • The current main incentive for the EU-wide deployment of CCS is the price of EUAs under the EU ETS. However, based on current trajectories, this will not be a sufficient 24

driver for investment after the first generation of demonstration projects is built (2015-2020). Enabling policies are therefore required in the intermediate period – after the technology is commercially proven, but before

the EUA price has increased sufficiently to allow full commercial operation. The goal: to make new-build power generation with CCS more attractive to investors than without it.

14. Title: New York Times (IHT) Link: BRUSSELS — Can the world use fossil fuels and protect the climate too? That is the goal of carbon capture and sequestration, which is a process for trapping carbon dioxide before it reaches the atmosphere and then pumping it underground, or under the seabed. The process is already used by oil and natural gas companies like BP and Statoil at sites like In Salah, Algeria. There, the carbon dioxide that exists along with natural gas is captured and stored onshore in a saline aquifer. Despite a tiny leak from a faulty wellhead valve four years ago, and despite the need to reduce the quantities of carbon dioxide injected because pressure had built up in the saline aquifer faster than expected, BP of Britain and Statoil of Norway said, millions of tons of the greenhouse gas have been prevented from reaching the atmosphere. Oil and natural gas companies also have trapped large amounts of carbon dioxide in the minute pores and spaces in rocks at similar projects in countries like Norway and Canada. But efforts to make the process, known as C.C.S., a mainstay of efforts by the power industry to go green are hitting obstacles. Critics warn that a large leak could harm the climate and local populations. They also say huge amounts of state support would be needed to pay for infrastructure like pipelines, taking money away from renewable energy projects. Supporters say the technology is essential if the world is ever to meet targets for cutting greenhouse gases and preventing runaway climate change. They say C.C.S. is the most viable way to curb emissions from existing fossil fuel plants and that it should be cost-competitive in the coming years. They also say that there is large storage capacity in depleted oil and natural gas fields and deep saline aquifers across the world. Although the separate elements of capture, transportation and storage already have been demonstrated, and although big engineering companies like Siemens of Germany and Alstom of France are helping construct pilot projects, a commercial-scale facility for capturing and burying carbon dioxide from a power plant has not yet been built.

Managing costs is a challenge. That was underlined by a decision last month by American Electric Power, a major U.S. utility, to put on hold plans to build a fullscale carbon-capture plant at Mountaineer, a coal-fired electrical plant in West Virginia, where the company has successfully captured and buried carbon dioxide in a small pilot program. The company said it had to drop the $668 million project because it did not believe state regulators would let it recover its costs by charging customers, leaving no compelling regulatory or business reason to continue the program. Another factor clouding prospects for C.C.S. is local acceptance, particularly in Europe. Residents and environmental groups have raised concerns about the possibilities of contaminating water. There also are concerns about suffocation if large quantities of carbon dioxide should leak out and collect in valleys. The effect that C.C.S. projects could have on property prices has also stirred unease. Opposition to carbon dioxide burial has become known as numby, for “not under my backyard” — a variation of the more common “nimby,” or “not in my backyard,” denoting opposition to projects like power plants. Last year, sustained local opposition led the Dutch government to cancel a project led by Royal Dutch Shell, an oil and natural gas company based in the Netherlands, that would have buried carbon dioxide under Barendrecht, a town near Rotterdam. Delays and a “complete lack of local support” forced the cancellation, according to Maxime Verhagen, the Dutch minister for economic affairs. In Germany, where there is a fierce debate over whether to pass a law laying down rules for testing carbon dioxide storage, companies like Vattenfall, a Swedish utility, face a long and uncertain wait for permission to test the suitability of burial sites. Vattenfall had to abandon plans to bury carbon dioxide in Altmark, in the German state of Saxony-Anhalt, because of protests, and it faces a similar challenge at Beeskow, a site in Brandenburg State.


“We’re doing everything we can to develop C.C.S. but the future of the technology now lies in the hands of national politics,” said Maria Lidzell, a spokeswoman for Vattenfall. Graeme Sweeney, an executive vice president at Shell and chairman of the Zero Emissions Platform — a group of companies, researchers and environmental organizations that advises the European authorities on carbon capture and storage — said the cost challenges facing C.C.S. should be surmountable. He presented a report in July showing that the costs of C.C.S. would be competitive with those of sources of lowcarbon power, including on- and offshore wind, solar and nuclear, beginning in the early 2020s. The report said that burying carbon dioxide at onshore sites and clustering plants to reduce the number of pipelines needed to send the carbon dioxide to a single storage site should help control costs. But Mr. Sweeney stressed that the technology needed more government support in Europe, partly because it still was much cheaper for coal plants to buy permits under the E.U. Emissions Trading System than to invest in C.C.S.

Mr. Sweeney could not say where the first commercialscale utility fitted with C.C.S. would be constructed, but he said it would happen after 2020. He also said governments and developers needed to work harder to build public approval because of “a low level of understanding of the crucial role that C.C.S. can play in mitigating CO2 emissions.” David Reiner, a senior lecturer in technology policy at the Judge Business School at the University of Cambridge, said part of the reason for opposition was that communities were being asked to take on risks for storing a gas that they were not responsible for having generated in the first place and that might come from power plants some distance away. Even so, “a serious effort on education” supported by regional and national leaders could chip away at that opposition, he said. Prospects for C.C.S. “would be in much better shape than they are today if national governments and project developers had taken the issue of education seriously five years ago,” he said.

15. Title: Cogeneration and On-Site Power Production Headline: European Study says CCS will need support beyond 2020 The Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP), a European Union (EU) and industry funded initiative, has said in a report that power plants fitted with carbon capture technology will need government support beyond 2020, especially following a sharp drop in carbon prices. The EU’s emissions trading scheme (ETS) requires the purchase of EU allowances (EUA) in a scheme partly intended to make green technologies competitive.

compete with unconstrained fossil fuel and to give energy companies time to fine-tune the technology. Graeme Sweeney, chair of ZEP, said: “It’s likely that it will require additional support over and above what’s provided by the EU ETS to enable deployment in the early 2020s. “However, fossil fuels with CCS are cost competitive with offshore wind, solar and nuclear.”

The price of EUAs has fallen 25 per cent in the last month. The ZEP report said that carbon capture and storage (CCS) would need continued support after 2020 in order to

16. Title: Norwegian Media Coverage of CCS Cost Reports Link: Norway´s biggest commercial radio channel, P4, also ran a news story on the CCS cost report, with the headline “CO2 -fangst er ikke dyrere enn vindkraft” (“CO2 capture will not be more expensive than wind energy”). Norway’s news agency NTB wrote an article that was published in several regional papers (online/print): - Hamar Arbeiderblad - Sunnmørsposten - Haugesunds Avis - Trønder-Avisa - Gudbrandsdølen Dagningen

and news site, serving off shore industries. The lead in the majority of the articles related to the news agency piece was: “CO2 capture and storage will most likely be cost competitive with wind, solar and nuclear energy, concludes a new EU report” except for one, which used the following title: “CO2 capture important”.


17. Title: mLex print edition Headline: Underground Resistance Date: 07/09/2011







18. Title: Comment Visions (online) + European Voice print edition Headline: Commentary based on EU 2050 Energy roadmap statement Date: 12/09/2011

19. Title: Bloomberg Headline: EU Must Take Swift Action to Halt CO2 Price Slump: Shell Headline: 04/10/2011 Europe must take “urgent action” to prevent further declines in carbon prices that could undermine the region’s goal to cut greenhouse gases and boost investment in green technologies, according to Royal Dutch Shell Plc.

taken very quickly,” Sweeney, who is also a chairman of the Zero Emissions Platform, told Bloomberg News during the group’s general assembly in Brussels today. “Otherwise the value of carbon in the system will not be high enough to sustain the roadmap or the changes that are planned.”

The best tool to “restore the credibility and the effectiveness” of the European Union emissions trading system, or the ETS, is to withhold some carbon permits in the next phase of the program starting in 2013, said Graeme Sweeney, Shell’s vice president of Future Fuels and CO2. Permits for December in the world’s biggest carbon market fell as much as 2.6 percent today, dropping below 10 euros for the first time since February 2009.

ZEP includes utilities, fuel companies, equipment suppliers, scientists and environmental groups supporting the technology to capture and store carbon dioxide, known as CCS. Companies investing in CCS and renewable energy are eyeing EU aid from the planned sale of up to 300 million carbon permits.

“It seems that the most effective action would be a setaside of allowances in Phase 3 and that action should be

The European Commission was seeking earlier this year member states’ recognition of its carbon roadmap, which shows the most cost-effective way to reduce greenhouse gases would be to lower discharges by 40 percent from 1990 levels in 2030 and by 60 percent in 2040. At a 33

meeting of EU climate ministers on June 21, Poland blocked a draft declaration on the matter, which also included support for finding ways of strengthening the ETS.

EU carbon permits for December have lost 30 percent this year because of oversupply concerns and speculation that the region’s debt crisis may worsen at the time when economic growth is slowing.

The commission, the EU’s regulatory arm in Brussels, first came up with the idea of setting aside allowances in the eight-year third phase of the emissions program in 2010 and then included a reference to such a tool in a March policy paper, known as the low-carbon 2050 road map.

While the commission and member states could agree to postpone the auctioning of some allowances without changing the EU emissions-trading directive, an eventual cancellation of permits after 2020 would require a revision of that law, a step that involves approval by the European Parliament and the council of ministers.

In June, the EU regulator suggested that the bloc may need to “recalibrate” the carbon-reduction plan by within holding a number of permits corresponding to extra emission reductions resulting from newly proposed efficiency measures.

“We need to make the case to the member states for the set aside, we need to make the case to the European Parliament, the commission and the council,” Sweeney said. “This is urgent.”

The commission would first need the green light from member states to come up with a draft measure on the set-aside, which could be gradually created from the pool of permits to be auctioned to companies by countries starting in 2013.

20. Title: Platts Headline: CCS knowhow ‘must be global’: Sweeney Date: 04/10/2011 Europe must extend its carbon capture and storage knowledgesharing efforts globally if the technology is to reach commercial viability by 2020, Dr Graeme Sweeney told Platts Monday. Sweeney, who is chairman of the Zero Emission Platform multi-stakeholder advisory group and Executive Vice President of CO2 at Shell, said the sector had to accept that funding 12 CCS demonstrations by 2015 was no longer realistic: “times are tough, and there is a slowdown in the investment rate for all capital projects, not just CCS,” he said. The EU’s NER-300 program has 13 CCS candidate projects and a number of innovative renewable energy projects up for funding. Some 300 million EU Allowances are to be sold to support the projects. With the price of CO2 at a 31-month low of Eur10.15/metric ton Monday, however, the sale of EUAs is going to raise less than first envisaged, and Europe can expect four-tosix CCS demonstrations by 2015, ZEP believes. “Member states need to work positively with a set of projects to create the circumstances for success,” Sweeney said. “It would be helpful if, like the UK, other member states looked at a carbon floor price.”

Sweeney remained positive that the benefits of demonstration would be undiluted in 2015, not least because other projects were making progress outside Europe, “and if we adopt the same approach to knowledge-sharing that we have in Europe for projects in North America and Australia, it is perfectly feasible that we will see sufficient demonstrations in train to deliver the same cost reductions, proving-out of technology and the public acceptance” as under a full European plan. On September 23, Germany’s Bundesrat upper house rejected a second attempt to transpose EU law on CCS, with regional lander strongly opposed to underground storage. While Sweeney was adamant that CCS must continue to be seen as a key element in the EU’s low carbon plan, he said proponents needed to “make more of the fact that in a clean energy future, CCS can deliver jobs, skills and potential for investment and revenue. This is a storyline that we need to place more emphasis on. There is not a single solution to climate change, but without CCS there is not a solution.”


21. Title: Bloomberg Headline: Carbon Storage to Have Important Place in EU 2050 Energy Roadmap Headline: 04/10/2011 The technology to capture carbon dioxide and store it underground will have an “important place” in the European Union 2050 energy roadmap to be published later this year, said Philip Lowe, director general at the European Commission’s energy department. “The share of coal and gas-fired CCS plants could be around 20 percent or approximately 190 gigawatts of

installed capacity,” he told the general assembly of the Zero Emissions Platform in Brussels today. “By 2035, around 30 gigawatts with CCS needs to be build in the EU.” The energy roadmap will focus on decarbonizing the EU economy after 2020 while guaranteeing competitive markets and security of supply, according to Lowe.


22. Title: mLex Headline: EC to Highlight CCS Role in 2050 Energy Plan Date: 04/10/2011


23. Title: mLex Headline: Lack of national CCS law jeapordises EU funding bids Date: 04/10/2011


24. Title: Le Monde Headline: Economic crisis puts brakes on CCS projects Headline: 08/10/2011 Enfouir le gaz carbonique pour réduire sa concentration dans l’atmosphère : c’est l’un des moyens envisagés pour atténuer le changement climatique. Sous le nom de captage et stockage du carbone (CSC), il est étudié attentivement à travers le monde, où plusieurs installations sont déjà en opération, comme à Sleipner, au large de la Norvège, ou à In Salah, en Algérie. Mais sa mise en oeuvre à grande échelle reste encore lointaine, comme l’ont reconnu les industriels et compagnies énergétiques réunis à Bruxelles, mardi 4 octobre, pour l’assemblée générale de leur association, la Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP), qui regroupe 300 membres de 19 pays européens. Certes, a affirmé le président de ZEP, Graeme Sweeney, « le CSC n’est pas la solution au changement climatique. Mais il n’y aura pas de solution au changement climatique sans CSC ». L’Agence internationale de l’énergie (AIE) évalue ainsi le potentiel du CSC à 19 % du total de la réduction nécessaire des émissions à l’horizon 2050. Mais, alors que le but des membres de ZEP est de présenter des dispositifs opérationnels à l’échelle industrielle en 2020, peu de projets de prototypes (ou « démonstrateurs ») sont actifs. L’une des raisons en est le manque de financement, alors que la récession économique assèche les budgets des entreprises et des Etats. De surcroît, en Europe, l’acceptation par le public paraît de plus en plus difficile. Une partie du mouvement écologiste est opposée à cette technique. Elle juge qu’elle n’est pas sûre, puisqu’on ne pourrait pas garantir l’étanchéité des réservoirs de CO2. En Allemagne, le Sénat (Bundesrat) a rejeté, le 23 septembre, la loi portant sur les démonstrations et l’utilisation du CSC. Aux Pays-Bas, le stockage souterrain du CO2 est interdit sur terre (mais pas sous les fonds marins), de même qu’en Autriche. « Je reste optimiste, a pourtant déclaré Johannes Lambertz, président du conseil d’administration de RWE, l’un des plus importantsproducteurs allemands d’électricité. D’ici deux à trois ans, les gens vont devenir réalistes. » Cependant, les gouvernements semblent aussi traîner les pieds : si l’Union européenne a adopté une directive en 2009 sur le CSC, seule l’Espagne l’a pour l’instant transposée. Or cette transposition est indispensable pour que le programme européen de financement, NER 300, puisse soutenir les projets. Treize démonstrateurs sont étudiés par ce programme, qui choisira les six qu’il

financera durant le second semestre 2012, a annoncé un représentant de la Commission européenne, Torsten Woellert. Un autre élément refroidit l’enthousiasme des opérateurs : la mise en place du CSC entraîne un surcoût important, si bien qu’il ne peut être rentable que pour un prix élevé de la tonne de gaz carbonique. Selon une étude présentée par Lars Stomberg, de la compagnie suédoise Vattenfall, le CSC appliqué aux centrales thermiques ne sera rentable que si le prix de la tonne de CO2 atteint 40 euros, si la centrale est au charbon, et 80 euros, si elle est au gaz. Or elle se négocie aujourd’hui sur le marché européen du Emissions Trading Scheme autour de 11 euros la tonne. « Le prix du carbone restera longtemps trop bas, dit M. Stomberg. Il faudra pendant un certain temps des politiques de soutien, même quand la technologie sera opérationnelle au niveau industriel. » Les membres de ZEP restent cependant persuadés de l’intérêt à long terme de la séquestration du carbone. C’est d’ailleurs en France qu’un des projets les plus ambitieux se prépare, dans un haut-fourneau d’Arcelor Mittal, à Florange (Moselle). Le dispositif, étudié depuis plusieurs années, moderniserait le haut-fourneau et permettrait de réduire de plus de 700 000 tonnes par jour ses émissions de CO2, mais aussi de réduire sa consommation d’énergie de plus de 25 %. Le haut-fourneau concerné vient cependant d’être arrêté, « temporairement », assure ArcelorMittal. Le financement partiel du dispositif de CSC par NER 300 ne sera connu que dans près d’un an. Par ailleurs, le groupe d’entreprises France Nord cherche un site de stockage de grande capacité dans le Bassin parisien. Rassemblant notamment Total, EDF, Air Liquide, GDF Suez et Lafarge, et soutenu par l’Agence de l’environnement et de la maîtrise de l’énergie, le consortium étudie les aquifères salins de plus de 1000 m de profondeur, assez vastes pour stocker durablement plus de 100 millions de tonnes de gaz carbonique. Il espère identifier un site à la mi-2012, puis entamer la concertation avec le public pour une mise en opération vers 2016. Enfin, Total mène une expérimentation depuis 2011 à Lacq (Pyrénées-Atlantiques). Mais des problèmes techniques ont perturbé son fonctionnement et 20 000 tonnes de CO2 seulement sont.


25. Title: Platts Headline: UK Longannet CCS project canceled Date: 20/10/2011 Scottish Power, along with Shell and National Grid, had been negotiating funding support for the project at Longannet, which would store extracted CO2 under the North Sea. The government had offered GBP1 billion towards the cost of a pre-commercial post-combustion facility on around 330 MW of existing generating capacity. The cost of a precommercial CCS project was put at around Eur1.5 billion last year. That funding will now be available to other planned CCS projects. Among those planning CCS projects in the UK are Drax/Alstom/National Grid (426 MW oxy-fired capture at Drax power station), Peterhead (SSE, 385MW post-combustion capture), Hunterston (Peel Energy, post-combustion), Eston Grange (Progressive Energy, integrated gasification), Don Valley (2Co Energy/National Grid, integrated gasification) and North Killingholme (C-GEN, integrated gasification). Reaction to project collapse It had been known for some time that the Longannet CCS project was struggling because it was tethered to the unviable retrofit of an existing subcritical coal plant, an industry source told Platts.

The Longannet carbon capture and storage project will not receive government funding and alternative CCS projects in England and Scotland are to be considered in its place, the Department of Energy and Climate Change said Wednesday. DECC said in a statement it would not proceed with the Scottish Power-led Longannet project after negotiations broke down, but reaffirmed its commitment to the technology. “Despite everyone working extremely hard, we’ve not been able to reach a satisfactory deal for a project at Longannet at this time, so we’ve taken the decision to pursue alternative projects,” Energy Secretary Chris Huhne said. “CCS is a key technology for the UK’s long term energy strategy. A billion pounds is enough to demonstrate this vital new technology in the UK, but it’s got to be spent in the most effective way,” said Huhne. Prime Minister David Cameron told Parliament earlier Wednesday that the GBP1 billion ($1.583 billion) funding for a large CCS demonstration project was still on offer despite problems in negotiations with Scottish Power and its partners over the project at the Longannet coal-fired power station in Fife, Scotland.

“The old power station would have needed rejuvenating, but still would not have reached the efficiency levels of modern supercritical technology,” the source said. “It was always going to need selective catalytic reduction equipment fitted to meet the Industrial Emissions Directive, costing several hundreds of millions of pounds. Finally, the carbon price floor came along and only added to the burden,” said the source. A business plan for a power station in the UK had to be viable in its own right and should not be confused with a business plan for a CCS demonstration, the source said. Investing in Longannet under current market conditions was not viable, he said, CCS demonstration or not. New generating units using gasification technology or oxyfuel firing could be better placed to pick up some of the CCS funding, as could a retrofit to a gas plant such as SSE’s Peterhead in Scotland, the source said, but “a new shape to the competition is needed,” he said. “If you just re-open the old one you’ll end up with the same result.” UK’s Drax told Platts earlier Wednesday they would be interested in reapplying for the government funding. “We welcome the fact that the one billion funding is preserved. The option for UK government funding is of interest to us,” said Melanie Wedgbury of Drax. Drax has also submitted its CCS project as one of 13 being considered by the European Investment Bank for funding under the NER-300 scheme. 39

The investments made by Scottish Power and its partners advanced technological progress and would boost the UK industry, despite Longannet’s CCS project having now been wound up, said Scottish Power Wednesday.

“There will be turnover among the many projects in that program, some will go forward and some will not, that is partand- arcel of demonstrating any major low carbon technology.

“The Consortium submitted the most detailed and comprehensive design of a commercial-scale end-to-end CCS project ever conducted in the UK or Europe. In the process it invested more than GBP20 million ... working on CCS for four years,” the statement said.

The UK has five more CCS projects seeking EU funds under the NER-300 program.

“This project has significantly increased the UK’s expertise in CCS and will help us to compete internationally as a leader in CCS technology,” it said.

“It has more than enough candidates to move forward. We have to get used to this happening, and understand that it is project-specific. It in no way means that the technology itself cannot deliver commercially - our cost reports show that it can,” said Drosin.

The failure of Longannet should not be conflated with failure of carbon capture, said Eric Drosin of advisory group the Zero Emission Platform: “In order for the EU to deliver commerciallyviable CCS by 2020, as it has requested be done, it needs a demonstration program,” he said.


26. Title: Nature Climate Change (unit of Nature) Headline: CCS industry fights its corner Date: 10/2011



27. Title: European Energy Review Headline: CCS in Europe under serious threat Date: 17/11/2011 It foresees a maximum of just 2% CCS in the power sector in 2030, rising to between 7% and 32% by 2050. “CCS, if commercialised, will have to contribute significantly in most scenarios with a particularly strong role of 32% in power generation in the case of constrained nuclear production”, the document says. The key sticking point is “if commercialised”. Today, it is still not certain whether CCS will be commercialised. And industry representatives say that expecting a delay in commercialising the technology to after 2030, as the Commission is doing, does not improve its prospects. “We need to deliver widespread deployment by the early 2020s”, insists Sweeney. “The moment to push is now.”

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is facing strong headwinds in Europe. EU member states have so far failed to translate an EU CCS law into national legislation. In the UK, a prestigious demonstration project has been cancelled. The European Commission still supports CCS, but sees an important role for it only after 2030. Too late, say beleaguered industry representatives. They fear that the momentum for CCS will be lost and key players will desert their CCS activities if policymakers don’t take firm action soon. “The moment to push is now.” “The next 18 months will be make-or-break for carbon capture and storage”, announced Graeme Sweeney, Executive Vice-President for Future Fuels & CO2 at Shell, at a CCS event in Brussels last week, organised by the Scottish European Green Energy Centre. The man who also chairs the Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP), an industry-led consortium representing the European CCS industry, knows carbon capture and storage (CCS) is at a crossroads. There is a strange mix of emotions at CCS conferences these days: one by one, its supporters stand up and make their case, with defiance, conviction... and bewilderment. The defiance and conviction stem from continued belief that CCS has a future. The bewilderment comes from a dawning realisation that this is far from guaranteed. The European Commission seems unwavering in its support for CCS. At ZEP’s General Assembly in Brussels in October, Philip Lowe, Director-General for Energy at the European Commission said: “We need very much to include CCS in the most favourable pathways to 2050. It’s faster and cheaper if CCS is used, not only on coal but also on gas and for industrial applications.” Thirty gigawatts of CCS must be operational in the EU by 2035, he added. Nevertheless, according to a leaked draft of the Commission’s much-awaited 2050 Energy Roadmap, CCS will not really get going until after 2030. Due to be finalised in mid-December, the Energy Roadmap sets out different decarbonisation scenarios for the European energy sector.

2030 is too late, agrees Mike Farley, Director of Technology Policy Liaison at Doosan Power Systems. “We will lose the momentum, and all we’ve learned now. We will lose the interest of key players.” The recent cancellation of the Longannet CCS demonstration project in Scotland, which had been promised £1bn from the UK government, is a case in point. This did not only end a potentially important demonstration project but closed down a whole CCS R&D team along with it, Farley points out. Other energy companies are reportedly also shutting down CCS R&D facilities, putting at risk the technology’s future development. ZEP published a study this summer that predicts CCS will be cost-competitive with wind, solar and nuclear, in terms of power generated, from the early 2020s. It estimates that post-demonstration CCS will cost €70/MWh for coal and €95/MWh for gas, plus carbon costs for the 10% or so of emissions evading capture. This would render electricity produced by a fossil-fuelled power station with installed CCS competitive with that produced by wind, solar or nuclear, according to IEA calculations, says ZEP. It has calculated the costs of complete CCS value chains, from capture to transport to storage, for new coal- and gas-fired power plants in northern Europe. Unlike most analyses, it uses private, not scarce public, data. But there are several important assumptions underpinning ZEP’s conclusions. One is a successful demonstration programme; two is a handful of large-scale CCS plants built after the demonstration programme that enable vital technological improvements to further bring down the cost. The former is also clearly a pre-condition for the latter. The EU’s CCS demonstration programme is delayed and short of cash, however. Back in 2008, European leaders pledged to build up to 12 CCS demonstration plants by 2015. The goal was indeed to have the technology ready to go commercial by 2020. Earlier this year, industry representatives spoke about 5-8 demonstration plants by 2016-17. Last week, they said 4-6 was probably a more 43

realistic estimate. “We should focus on the vital few that need to get done”, Sweeney explained. Eight would have been needed to test all the different technological options, he added, but if the 4-6 that deliver are bound to share their knowledge, the whole industry will benefit. Here the critical importance of the knowledge-sharing requirement coupled to EU funds and creation of a CCS Network. A similar tale of dwindling numbers marks the story of money to finance the demonstration plants. So far, as part of its economic recovery package, the EU has split €1bn among six demonstration projects. The next round of EU funds is due from the sale of 300 million carbon allowances set aside from Europe’s carbon market specifically to raise money for CCS and renewables. But, points out Chris Davies, the British Liberal MEP who has led the European Parliament’s work on CCS, the 300 was 600 before political negotiations whittled it down and the carbon price at the time of the proposal (2008) was twice what it is today (less than €10 per tonne). At best, today, the CCS industry can hope to gain €1.4bn from the first batch of 200 million allowances, which will start being sold in the coming months. This is assuming it gets about two-thirds of the total, with the rest going to renewables. No more than 3-4 projects are expected to benefit from this first sale. Twelve projects (taking into account the cancellation of Longannet) have been put forward by member states for these funds, including the six that have already benefited from economic recovery money. They are currently being assessed by the European Investment Bank. Eligible projects will be announced in May 2012. Then, national governments are also expected to announce financial backing for those projects selected. The hope is that sufficient public backing will draw in private investors. So far, these have been reluctant to invest in CCS. A lawyer says investment banks still say “we do not see how we’re going to make enough money quickly enough”. It is not the CCS industry, but the world that has changed since 2008, says Sweeney. We have had the economic crisis, Fukushima, the hype around shale gas, the Arab spring, the warmest year ever (2010), the EU under unprecedented pressure (through the Euro-zone crisis) and a €10 carbon price. Some of these factors make life more difficult for a fledgling CCS industry seeking funds to develop a large-scale, capital-intensive new technology. Others, such as Fukushima and the discovery of shale gas, bolster it by strengthening the case for a long-term future for fossil fuels. “The platform believes Europe can still make a case for CCS”, says Sweeney. He points to what has already been achieved: an EU directive setting up a regulatory framework for storage, a €1bn investment from EU economic recovery funds, the promise of carbon market funds to come, and a strong base for knowledge sharing in the form of the CCS Network. “We want to get on with it”, says Farley.

The climate arguments for CCS still stack up, its supporters argue. In 2009 the International Energy Agency calculated that the cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius would cost 70% more without CCS. The European Commission does not foresee a long-term future for gas or coal without CCS. “For all fossil fuels, CCS will have to be applied from around 2030 onwards in the power sector in order to reach the decarbonisation targets”, says the draft of the 2050 Energy Roadmap. Gas is increasingly expected to take over from coal as a less polluting, more flexible partner to balance out renewables. At ZEP’s recent General Assembly, Philip Lowe suggested that industry and policymakers should perhaps concentrate less on CCS with coal plants and more on CCS with gas-fired power. In practice, this could mean revisiting the main criterion for handing out EU carbon market funds to demonstration projects. This is currently cost per unit of CO2 stored, which favours coal over gas. Gas would fare better if it was cost per unit of energy. The question policymakers must answer is: is the final goal to store the maximum amount of CO2 or to provide lowcarbon electricity at lowest cost? Today’s main incentive for the EU-wide deployment of CCS is the price of carbon allowances in the EU’s emission trading scheme, or carbon market, says ZEP. But, based on current trajectories, it adds: “This will not be a sufficient driver for investment after the first generation of demonstration plants is built.” Even if the troubled demonstration programme is successful, there will need to be fresh support from policymakers to bridge the gap between this and the carbon price being high enough to make CCS commercially viable. This would require an EU carbon price of €34 per tonne for lignite, €37 per tonne for hard coal and €90 per tonne for gas-fired power plants, ZEP has calculated. Crucially, this assumes a first postdemonstration handful of large-scale CCS plants to enable rapid technological learning – without them, the commercialisation price for CCS would be much higher, some €100 per tonne. Policymakers in Brussels are now starting to discuss how to ratchet up the carbon price. Energy and oil companies are getting interested in an idea that has been promoted mainly by NGOs and parts of the Commission to date: it is the idea of taking out (“setting aside”) carbon allowances from the pot for 2013-20 and legally cancelling them. “We need a set-aside and we need it now,” says Sweeney. The logic behind it varies depending on whom you speak to: it could be to take into account the recession (less production has led to lower emissions and hence a larger supply of allowances), proposals for a new energy efficiency directive (more efficiency also means lower emissions and therefore more allowances) or a belief that the EU should increase its overall emission reduction target for 2020 from 20% to 30% to lead the world in decarbonisation. 44

Aside from pushing up the carbon price, there are other options open to policymakers to promote CCS, says the industry. “You need to be offering some sort of revenue for electricity generated from a CCS plant, a feed-in tariff just like for renewables”, says Giles Dickson, Vice President for Government Relations at French engineering firm Alstom. The UK is the first EU member state to be introducing such a tariff through its electricity market reform proposed in July. One or two other member states are reportedly also looking into it. A CCS feed-in tariff could be coupled with a deployment target, Dickson adds. This is what Farley argues for. “We need a 2030 [CCS] target and it must not be too modest”, he says. A CCS target could take the form of a percentage of fossil fuel-fired power generation that must be fitted with the technology, for example, or a gCO2 /KWh target. This could prove more palatable than a feed-in tariff, one policymaker suggests. Others, such as Sweeney, argue for a more general decarbonisation target for 2030, without specifying what the contribution of different technologies would be. But economics is only half the story. The other half is public acceptance. And here CCS faces, if possible, an even higher mountain to climb. “If you do not have a reservoir, you do not have a project”, as Sweeney succinctly puts it. He admits that the industry has perhaps underestimated the role of storage so far, to its peril: politics and public opposition have held up the transfer into national law of the EU directive on CO2 storage in Germany. After being rejected by the German parliament’s upper house (the Bundesrat) in September, a proposal is currently being discussed by a Conciliation Committee. A verdict is due by the end of the month. Germany is not the only country to have missed this summer’s deadline for turning the EU directive into national law – only one country, Austria, had done so by early October. The problem for countries that are hosting CCS demonstration projects, like Germany, is that these projects will not be eligible for EU funds if the directive is not transposed. Wolfgang Dirschauer, Head of Climate Policy at Vattenfall Europe, which is the only utility still leading a CCS project in Germany, says: “The transposition has been delayed to the point that we face a situation where the lack of commitment to CCS in German politics endangers our demo project.” Further delay and the shortcomings of the draft law put all EU funds for the project at risk, he adds, because “it might not be feasible any more to comply with the strict EU timeframe for the demo plants.”

A third important question is how to implement CCS in the industrial sector. For industries such as steel, CCS offers the only way of cutting emissions substantially, as they will be required to do. The capture costs could be comparable, if not lower than, for coal, ZEP says. The fact that the EU ETS exempts most industries in Europe from paying for most of their carbon emissions for the time being – out of concern that they might move their production abroad – explains their low interest in CCS so far. But the IEA predicts that by 2050 half of all CCS will be applied in the industrial manufacturing sector. Meanwhile, for the CCS industry the clock is ticking. The Commission says it will issue policy proposals for a fresh push for CCS next year, which will analyse a potential role for targets, and will look at funding to take demonstration projects to completion, and for infrastructure development. Dirschauer says: “If you believe in a Europe entirely relying on nuclear and/or renewables, CCS will not be needed. Otherwise it is a dire necessity. The alternative is: no ambitious climate policy.” The industry is studying options for offshore storage of CO2, as this would probably lead to less public antagonism than onshore. The problem is that offshore storage is more expensive. ZEP is calling for a risk reward mechanism from policymakers to explore deep offshore saline aquifers. Scotland has half of all EU-27 offshore storage capacity, says David Rennie, Director for Oil, Gas, Thermal Generation and CCS at Scottish Enterprise. He says Scotland should start marketing this storage capacity as an asset. 
 One variation on the offshore option is to pump captured CO2 into depleted oil and gas fields for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR). This is already done in the US, but has gained little traction in Europe so far, because offshore is more expensive than onshore EOR. But at least one company, 2Co Energy, which is running the Don Valley CCS demonstration project in the UK, is looking into this. Based on the US experience of one of its two co-founders, Gareth Roberts, the company believes it could recover enough oil to generate some £5-6bn in tax revenues for the UK government. This could halve the cost of CCS to the UK, 2Co says, and create jobs and expertise.

Public acceptance is top of the list for the CCS industry right now and it is looking to successful examples, in Spain for example, where local communities have been brought on board through a diligent engagement campaign. A second priority is to develop a transport infrastructure. A consortium of companies and research institutions has just published a detailed report on what it takes to build a European CO2 transport infrastructure, showing that it is technically and economically feasible but difficult to organise. 45

28. Title: ENDS Europe Daily Headline: Durban: path cleared for including CCS in CDM Date: 08/12/2011 Kyoto carbon credits from carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects in developing countries will soon become a reality after international climate negotiators in Durban agreed on implementation modalities and other outstanding issues. A final text has yet to appear but the negotiators were jubilant over the breakthrough. Carbon capture’s inclusion in Kyoto’s clean development mechanism (CDM) was agreed in Cancún but only on condition a list of specific issues could be resolved. A key issue was liability and who should bear responsibility for the stored CO2. According to sources, it was agreed developers will be liable during the projects’ crediting period. Liability then will be transfer onto host countries 20 years after that. But Iris Cheng of Greenpeace said it was unfair to make countries liable for projects that they have not benefited

from, she said. If there is transfer of liability, it should be 20 years from site closure and not from the end of the crediting period, she added. “If ministers approve CCS in the CDM, then the fossil fuel industry will have won in Durban,” Ms Cheng continued. “Carbon capture and storage projects will lock the world more firmly in fossil fuel dependency as it will justify building new coal plans”. Eric Drosin of the Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP) welcomed the deal, saying developing nations will now be able to set up CCS projects under the CDM. The decision also sets a precedent for the inclusion of CCS in other funding mechanisms for low-carbon initiatives. The liability regime envisaged at the Durban meeting closely resembles rules laid out by the EU’s 2009 CCS directive, said one negotiator. Further details of the agreement are expected to emerge late on Thursday evening, when a final text is due to be published.

29. Title: Point Carbon Headline: EU to keep unclaimed CCS cash - EC Date: 08/12/2011 The European Commission said Thursday that cash destined for Vattenfall’s carbon capture and storage (CCS) project will be absorbed back into EU coffers rather than allocated to another project, diverting funds from the technology seen as vital if the EU is to meet it emission reduction goals. The Commission had granted Vattenfall’s CCS project at its Janschwalde coal-fired power plant in Germany 180 million euros in 2009 as a part of the 1 billion euro EU Energy Programme for Recovery scheme to help fund the fledgling technology. Earlier this week the company abandoned its plans to proceed with the project, citing delays in Germany’s CCS law. But the EC told Point Carbon News in an email that funds allocated to the project would not be re-directed to other CCS projects, even though a reserve list of schemes was in place. “The reserve list was set up only until the European Commission finally took the grant decision for the six CCS demonstration projects. All six grant agreements were

signed with the beneficiaries in 2010. The reserve list was closed,” said Marlene Holzner, a Commission spokesperson. The Commission said Vattenfall had received around 30 percent of its allocated cash, meaning some 126 million euros will be lost from the scheme. Meanwhile lobbyists in favour of carbon capture voiced their disappointment at the EC’s decision to retain the funding. “If the EU is going to deliver on its (emission reduction) targets it needs to ensure it has a successful CCS demonstration programme and with this capital intensive technology every penny counts,” said Eric Drosin, director of communications at Zero Emissions Platform, which acts as an adviser to the European Commission. The EU had earmarked CCS technology as a vital tool in ensuing the bloc reaches its goal to slash emissions by 50 percent by 2050. In a bid to achieve this, EU officials launched the world’s largest funding programme for CCS, promising to finance up to half the cost of at least eight demonstration plants.


The money is to be provided through the sale of up to 300 million 2013-vintage carbon permits under the bloc’s flagship emissions trading scheme.

plummet to around 8.5 euros, which would generate a cash pot of just 2.5 billion euros, barely enough to build just two CCS projects.

Based on a notional price of 20 euros, sales could have raised around 6 billion euros.

“The funding that has been allocated to CCS by the EU drops by the day so it is vital any money that has already been earmarked should be distributed to other projects if one withdraws from the process,” Drosin said.

However, fears about the euro zone debt crisis and a lack of demand for credits has seen the value of EUAs value

30. Title: Bloomberg Headline: UN Agrees to Carbon-Capture Rules, Allows for CO2 Credit Date: 09/12/2011 Dec. 9 (Bloomberg) -- The United Nations agreed to rules for carbon-capture plants as part of climate negotiations in Durban, South Africa, allowing such projects to receive emissions credits for the first time, according to a draft document obtained by Bloomberg News. “This is vital given the continued use of fossil fuels in power generation, heavy industry, and the global need to reduce CO2 emissions as rapidly as possible,” Eric Drosin, a spokesman for the Zero Emissions Platform lobby group, said by e-mail from Brussels. “Crucially, this decision sets the precedent for how CCS can be included in other future funding mechanisms.” The world needs to have about 32 percent of its coal-fired stations equipped with carbon-capture equipment by 2035 in order to keep temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), estimates from the International Energy Agency published on Nov. 9 showed. The rules for the technology have been in negotiation for six years, Drosin said.

Some 5 percent of credits will be reserved in an account in case of seepage of the gasses, according to the text. Individual governments must decide who will ultimately be responsible for any such leakages. The set-aside credits will be returned to investors once the project reaches the end of its life and financial plans to monitor the buried carbon-dioxide must be detailed, according to the document. CCS pumps carbon dioxide from power plants and factories for permanent underground storage to prevent the heat-trapping gas from entering the atmosphere. Treaty negotiators last year approved it for inclusion in the CDM, which allows companies in industrialized countries to meet emissions targets through cuts made in developing nations. The buried carbon-dioxide must be monitored for at least 20 years after it stops getting credits.




Events 1. Title: 2-day course on CCS at the University of Nancy Venue: University of Nancy, France Date: 10 January 2011 ZEP Participation: Schlumberger Carbon Services leveraged ZEP material on public communications/engagement.

2. Title: 2nd CCS Summit Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 26 January 2011 Description: The CCS Summit sought to identify and explore in detail what can be done to clarify and progress the demonstration of CCS, focusing particularly on the issue of finance and regulation, poses the question: Will the technology be ready in Europe by 2020? ZEP Participation: Keynote speaker = Dr. Graeme Sweeney; official conference partner; distribution of publications.


3. Title: 5th Annual European Carbon Capture and Storage (Platts) Venue: London, UK Date: 18-19 February 2011 Description: The largest specific CCS event in the UK bringing together companies, organizations, researchers, scholars and industry representatives in the field of CCS to discuss policy developments in the UK and beyond. ZEP Participation: Panel moderator: Eric Drosin; partnership agreement = visibility in the conference booklet, the website, and other distribution materials.

4. Title: DECC Talk on CCS (internal event) Venue: London, UK Date: 28 February 2011 Description: As part of DECC’s regular Talk series, ZEP was invited to deliver a presentation on the state-of-play for CCS in the EU. The audience consisted entirely of DECC employees, numbering approx. 70 people, and ZEP was the only speaking body.

5. Title: CGS Europe CCS awareness-raising meeting Venue: Vilnius, Lithuania Date: 13-14 April 2011 Description: The workshop provided a basic overview and status of the CCS concept in Europe, with a focus on EU Member States and Candidate Countries of the Baltic Sea Region and Central & Eastern Europe. The workshop brought together experts from leading research institutions and companies to share their knowledge with other stakeholders on various CCS issues. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Eric Drosin; distribution of 70 CCS leaflets.


6. Title: Science on Stage – Europe Venue: Copenhagen, Denmark Date: 16-19 April 2011 Description: Science on Stage is a European initiative designed to encourage teachers from across Europe to share best practice in science teaching. ZEP Participation: ZEP stand; 250 CCS leaflets; animations; 250 call-to action cards; cooperation with Shell to man stand.

7. Title: CCS Project Network event Venue: Rotterdam, Netherlands Date: 10 May 2011 Description: The event featured presentations on project progress, lessons learned and the challenges faced by the 6 large-scale demonstration projects in the CCS Project Network. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Dr. Graeme Sweeney (concluding remarks).

8. Title: EU-GCC Clean Energy Network Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 11-12 May 2011 Description: The EU-GCC Clean Energy Network is an initiative created and supported by the European Commission and by the relevant GCC (Gulf Co-Operation Council) authorities, aiming to enhance the long term strategic EU – GCC energy relationship, addressing specifically clean energy issues (including CCS). ZEP Participation: Speaker: Eric Drosin (communicating CCS).


9. Title: CCS 2020 Venue: Bucharest, Romania Date: 12 May 2011 Description: The CCS 2020 event focused on CCS overview at global and European Levels, CCS projects (NER 300 Candidates), CCS financing and CCS R&D, particularly in Romania. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Carmencita Constantin.

10. Title: European Business Summit Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 18-19 May 2011 Description: This year’s theme was “Europe in the world: leading or lagging?” The event brought together policy makers and key stakeholders of the business world. The Summit attracted the dozens of high-level political, industry and academia experts discussing a wide variety of topics. The Summit had several thousand participants across the two days, with high visibility in national and international media. ZEP Participation: Event sponsor, with advertisement in official programme brochure; Panelist: Dr. Graeme Sweeney (“From Cancún to Durban: New energy for growth” together with Climate Action Commissioner Connie Hedegaard).


11. Title: World Climate Summit - EU Roundtable Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 26 May 2011 Description: As part of World Climate Summit sponsorship package, ZEP participated in the EU Roundtable meeting attended by EU Commissioner for Climate Action, Connie Hedegaard, UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Christiana Figueres and forty sustainability and climate change leaders from global businesses and institutions. The World Climate Roundtable report ( provides a brief summary of the main discussion areas and recommendations across the session’s three central themes, namely that of: going beyond EU 2020 targets; private sector influence into the UNFCCC negotiations; and supporting the transition to a global green economy. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Speaker and session keynote: Frederic Hauge (Bellona) + branding on relevant collateral.

12. Title: Carbon Expo Venue: Barcelona, Spain Date: 1-3 June 2011 Description: In 2010 around 3,000 participants from 110 countries and 240 exhibitors attended the event. The event combined a trade fair with conferences on emissions trading, carbon abatement solutions and new mitigation technologies. ZEP Participation: Sponsorship package: stand (manned in cooperation with Endesa staff), material distribution, chairing a panel titled: “CCS: Where are we today in building tomorrow’s technology?” ZEP distributed 250 CCS leaflets, and 150 Call-to-Action cards during the conference.

13. Title: CCS Project Network Advisory Forum Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 16 June 2011 ZEP Participation: Speaker: Dr. Graeme Sweeney.

14. Title: NEAR CO2-Conference Venue: London, UK Date: 23 June 2011 Description: “Strategies of communication and effective engagement in CCS projects: Results of the European NEARCO2 project” Under the European Commission’s DG Research and the 7th Framework Programme. ZEP Participation: Participation in discussions (Eric Drosin).


15. Title: Kazakhstan Delegation workshop (workshop and study visit) Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 27 June 2011 Description: A one day event with updates on Coal Policy developments and actions from the 1st workshop. Day 2-3 had a visit to Liège University and RWE facilities, the Coal Innovation center in Niederaussen. Day 4: a visit to the Limburg coal basin. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Philipe Paelinck.

16. Title: CIRCE Institute Summer School Venue: Teruel (Andorra), Spain Date: 4-6 July 2011 Description: An intensive conference for students, focused on issues surrounding the future of coal and CCS technologies in Spain. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Eric Drosin.

17. Title: IEAGHG Summer School Venue: Champaign, Illinois, USA Date: 15 July 2011 Description: Aim of the IEAGHG Summer School is to improve the CCS-knowledgeable human resource pool for CCS development and deployment, with participation of over 80 graduate students from around the world, aided by mentors. ZEP Participation: Sponsorship included logo visibility; Mentor: Eric Drosin.


18. Title: CCS Cost Reports (ZEP) Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 15 July 2011 Description: Presentation of ZEP’s CCS Cost Reports to media and key EU/EC contacts. ZEP Participation: ZEP held an extensive media briefing to promote the report; meetings were also held with the European Parliament and the European Commission. Over 300 copies of the report were printed. Media coverage in over 13 titles. Distribution to ZEP database of 3,500 contacts.

19. Title: One Young World Venue: Zurich, Switzerland Date: 1-4 September 2011 Description: One Young World is the leading global forum for young people of leadership caliber. Winner of ‘Best Conference 2010´. A reference event for future leaders. ZEP Participation: Dr Graeme Sweeney played a significant role for ZEP at the conference as counsellor: presenting with ZEP delegates on energy and climate change on Business Day; speaking on the role of sustainable business approaches on the global CEO panel; and in the global business plenary session. ZEP sponsored 8 graduate students and was the official Low Carbon Technology sponsor. ZEP delegate gave speech on CCS during Environmental Plenary Session. Dedicated page published on ZEP website. Link to videos of sessions:



20. Title: XXI Economic Forum Venue: Krynica, Poland Date: 7-9 September 2011 Description: The 21st edition of the Economic Forum was an important event in the context of the Polish presidency of the EU in the second half of 2011. ZEP Participation: ZEP played a key part in the CCS discussion at the conference: as an official sponsor and advertiser (in a brochure distributed to over 2000 delegates); hosting a dedicated CCS panel session with DemosEuropa on September 9th.

21. Title: Sustainable Fossil Fuels Working Group of the Berlin Forum Venue: Berlin, Germany Date: 21 September 2011 Description: EU supported event for specialists in the field, supporting the main Berlin Forum event. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Niels Peter Christensen presented ZEP’s CCS cost reports.

22. Title: ZEP General Assembly Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 4 October 2011 Description: ZEP’s annual general assembly. Almost 200 attendees from all key stakeholder groups: European Commission (DG Energy/DG Climate Action/DG Research); MS government representatives; industrial + power CCS participants; local communities; NGOs/Academia/ Research; Media. EC underlined crucial role for CCS within energy roadmap and requested ZEP’s assistance in aiding/ advising MS and national CCS stakeholder communities to deliver demonstration projects. Link to videos of sessions:


23. Title: WEC Italy: Legal framework development and supply chain perspectives Venue: Rome, Italy Date: 18 October 2011 Description: Specialist conference for CCS stakeholders in Italy held by World Energy Council Italia, with significant industry and expert participation. ZEP Participation: Speaker: Eric Drosin (CCS Cost Reports); contribution on CCS Costs to event report.

24. Title: CCS in Iron and Steel Industry Workshop (IEAGHG) Venue: Dusseldorf , Germany Date: 8-11 November 2011 Description: IEAGHG organised workshop addressing the Challenges and Opportunities of CO2 Capture and Storage in the Iron and Steel Industry. Other backers of the event: Stahl & Swerea/Mefos. ZEP Participation: Speakers: Wilfried Maas (CO2 Storage Costs) & Per Arne Nilsson (CO2 Transport Costs).

25. Title: Sustainable Earth Science Conference on CCS Venue: Valencia, Spain Date: 8-11 November 2011 Description: EAGE (European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers) promotes the development of geosciences and related engineering subjects, to promote innovation and technical progress and to foster the communication, fellowship and cooperation between those working in, studying or otherwise being interested in these fields. Valencia hosts the first Sustainable Earth Sciences Conference & Exhibition - Technologies for Sustainable Use of the Deep Sub-surface by AEGE. ZEP Participation: Shell speaker spoke to ZEP CCS Cost Reports, the latter also included in distributed materials. 58

26. Title: Scottish European Green Energy Centre: North Sea Infrastructure for CCS Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 9 November 2011 Description: Seminar on North Sea CO2 Storage infrastructure status and investment position. Bringing together policymakers, EIB, commercial players, govt. ZEP Participation: Event sponsor; speaker: Dr. Graeme Sweeney

27. Title: World Coal Association Workshop Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 17 November 2011 Description: Annual November WCA workshop on the subject of the current EU energy and environment policy and its impact on the future of coal. Discussion around future financing of CCS (post-demonstration period). ZEP Participation: Speaker/panelist: Eivind Hoff (panel on “EU’s Climate Policy: fit for purpose?”).

28. Title: 17th Conference of the Parties meeting (COP17) Venue: Durban, South Africa Date: 28 November - 9 December 2011 Description: The top yearly international political conference around climate change. Since the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) entered into force in 1995, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC have been meeting annually to assess progress in dealing with climate change. ZEP Participation: ZEP has worked with international CCS stakeholders to ensure cooperation and coordination on issues related to CCS during COP17. A dedicated online CCS Library was created and ZEP communications tools were provided to a broad group of CCS stakeholders at COP17 (key reports; CCS leaflet; USBs; CCS Library). ZEP collaborated with the European Commission and Bellona on dedicated side-events at COP17, and worked with ZEP members to ensure maximum exposure of CCS-related issues. ZEP also issued a key statement ahead of COP17. Link to dedicated ZEP web page on COP17:



29. Title: World Climate Summit Venue: Durban, South Africa Date: 3-4 December 2011 Description: The second World Climate Summit is the largest parallel event of the COP17 negotiations, and serves as a climate leadership springboard for leaders in business, finance and governments. ZEP Participation: Sponsor with branding, publication distribution (CCS leaflets; USB; CCS Cost Reports and Knowledge Sharing report) and speaker slot in plenary session on movement toward a low-carbon economy (Frederic Hauge, Bellona); communicating climate change breakout session (Eric Drosin) and dedicated workshop on CCS (David Hone, Shell, moderated on behalf of ZEP; Alstom; SACCCS; WWF and GCCSI). Videos of select sessions to be available shortly.


Explored Events NOTE: The following events were explored, but not pursued, by ZEP due to a number of reasons, including: relevance to strategy; quality of organization/event; funding requirements and ZEP speaker availability.

1. Title: ECO:nomics Conference Venue: Santa Barbara, USA Date: 2-4 March 2011 Description: A Wall Street Journal conference organized in Santa Barbara on March 2-4 brought together the world’s top CEOs, entrepreneurs, policymakers and industry experts to assess the risks and opportunities emerging across sectors and countries.

2. Title: 10th Annual Conference on Carbon Capture and Sequestration Venue: Pittsburgh, USA Date: 2-5 May 2011 Description: The leading CCS conference in North America brought together a large number of young professionals, academics, and business people to discuss global issues with regards to CCS.

3. Title: CCS 2011 Venue: London, UK Date: August 2011 Description: The CCS 2011 event will be hosted over two days providing in-depth analysis by leading industry professionals on the hottest CCS topics; Understanding the future direction of CCS, the event will open the final session to post graduate students, with an expert panel providing critique and debate.

4. Title: ACCEunited: Global Carbon Capture Utilization & Storage Summit Venue: Beijing, China Date: 13-14 September 2011 Description: Initiated by Asian Coalition for Climate and Energy (ACCE) it is one of the leading events in China on CSS.


5. Title: CCS Workshop in Beijing Venue: Beijing, China Date: 19-20 September 2011 Description: The workshop aims to present recent advancements on carbon abatement technologies and disseminate results obtained from collaborative R&D activities between Europe and China within the EU funded projects iCap, CACHET II, CO2PipeHaz.

6. Title: The 6th Dubrovnik Conference on sustainable development of energy, water, and environment systems Venue: Dubrovnik, Croatia Date: 25-29 September 2011 Description: The 6th edition of this biannual conference sponsored by UNESCO and organized by European technical universities brings together experts to discuss sustainability issues including CCS.

7. Title: European Energy Forum Venue: Geneva, Switzerland Date: 4-6 October 2011 Description: The 6th edition of this biannual conference sponsored by UNESCO and organized by European technical universities brings together experts to discuss sustainability issues including CCS.

8. Title: Committee of Regions Venue: Brussels, Belgium Date: 10-13 October 2011 Description: The theme will be Cutting Edge Solutions to make Future Energy Ideas a Reality and will take an in depth look at five main streams of debate- technology, policy, finance, infrastructure and renewables.


9. Title: Berlin Forum Plenary Venue: Berlin, Germany Date: 24-25 October 2011 Description: Headline: ‘Investing in Europe’s future: Regions and cities delivering smart, sustainable and inclusive growth’

10. Title: CCS Business Platform Venue: Rotterdam, Netherlands Date: 22 November 2011 Description: Key CCS conference in The Netherlands




Online ZEP website/online performance 2011 2011 stats

Total Visits: Unique Visits: Pageviews: Pages/Visit: Bounce Rate: New Visits:

34,640 18,424 95,724 2.76 52% 50%

2010 stats

Increase of 8% Increase of 6.5% Decrease of 12% Decrease of 40% Increase of 6% Increase of 4%

Direct Traffic – increase of 8% since September 2011 showing an increase of traffic from search engines and referral websites as a result of SEO.

SEO activity – September to November From September - November, overall traffic increased 12% due to referral websites and improved search engine performance (SEO). - Total visits has increased by 12% in the past 3 months • SEO has increased awareness of the ZEP website - Referral traffic has increased by 15% in the past 3 months • SEO has increased ZEP’s online visibility on other websites through link sharing - Percentage of new visitors to the site increased by 5% overall - Search Traffic increased by 7% in these three months


Other online outlets Twitter: Followers: 194 News items from ZEP site Number of tweets: 758 automatically sent to twitter.

Following: 34

Youtube: ZEP Animation Views: 9,304 VIMEO: ZEP Animation Views: 8,378

Increase of 8% in 2011 Decrease of 5% in 2011

RSS Feed: No. of news feeds 468


ZEP Online Presence - 2011 ZEP Online Collateral Use ZEP News Feed ZEP Twitter account Event Tracker in Members Area CCS Review (Policy page) Dedicated Video Sections CCS Cost Reports General Assembly 2011 Page One Young World Page COP17/World Climate Summit Page Search Engine Optimisation activities Animation source files purchase


Title: UK Department of Energy and Climate Change ZEP collateral leveraged: • Hard Facts and Inside CCS animations • Customised imagery for CO2 storage • Hard Facts leaflet • CCS symbol


Title: France Ministry of Research and Higher Education ZEP collateral leveraged: • All animations • All text related to CO2 capture, transport and storage • About CCS text and imagery


Title: CCSA ZEP collateral leveraged: • Inside CCS animation (CO2 capture technologies)


Title: ICO2N ZEP collateral leveraged: • Inside CCS animation (CO2 capture technologies)


ZEP Animations • Translation of all 3 ZEP animations into German and Italian by ZEP members • ZEP to develop multi-lingual online library to facilitate use of collateral by MS and national CCS stakeholders

ZEP News feed What? • Dedicated news feed custom-designed for ZEP site, allowing uploading of all free content from relevant media sources, online aggregators, etc. • News can be filtered by category of jnterest • ZEP retains full content management control (uploads are selected manually) • Potential to share news feed for free with CCS stakeholders


ZEP Twitter Account – @EUCarbonCapture What? • Dedicated Twitter account for ZEP • Majority of tweets automated news items, library uploads • Intention to upscale activities in 2012


Event Tracker in Members Area What? • Replace the event module in the Members area with a new event tracker xls module Details • Project management, back-end • Development and tweaks


CCS Legal & Regulatory Review (IEA) What? ZEP has collaborated with the International Energy Agency to create a dedicated page on the ZEP website featuring the IEA’s regular review of CCS regulatory progress worldwide, to provide a forum for sharing knowledge on CCS legal and regulatory issues and help countries develop their own CCS regulatory frameworks Details • Project management, back-end • Development and tweaks


Dedicated Video Sections What? ZEP has created a dedicated video section for each category on the website to allow upload of relevant videos. Details • Project management, back-end • Development and tweaks

CCS Cost Reports What? 4 Cost reports implemented into the ZEP website Details • Dedicated page for reports • Links from homepage & technology Pages • Back-end development • Integration with ISSUU (online document viewer)


General Assembly 2011 page What? Creation of General Assembly 2011 page in the events section Details • Uploading of new content • Transfer, adaptation & upload of videos • Visual link from events page Link


One Young World Page What? • Dedicated page for the One Young World event • Visual link from Events page Details • Details • Back-en development • Uploading of new content & videos Link


COP17 What? Dedicated page for COP17 and World Climate Summit (Durban, South Africa), outlining all events ZEP was involved in and all-new CCS Library containing key publications in relevant CCS areas for use by all CCS stakeholders (in cooperation with CCSA). Link


Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) What? • Optimisation and promotion of the website relative to the content. Details • On-page SEO to increase quality visitors to the site • Off-page SEO to increase total traffic to the site Next Step • Start On-page SEO and Off-page SEO Timeline • 2 months (ongoing)

SEO statistics September-November

SEO results Increase of total visits compared to previous 3 months Total visits - increase of 5% Average time on site increase of 15% Increase of 3% in search traffic Increase of 5% in referral traffic




Other ZEP reports/statements/contributions:

Title: Living in a Low Carbon Society Date Published: 15 April 2011 Publisher: Atomium Culture (ZEP sponsor and contributor to section on CCS) Description: In recognition of the complexities of the issue of living in a low carbon society the Permanent Platform of Atomium Culture organised the writing of this Report and the HighLevel Workshop on Living in a Low-Carbon Society (HLW) to stimulate new insights and ideas from bringing together leading thinkers from university, industry, media and policy makers to discuss on the real issues and barriers of this debate. Link to download report: publication/172-living-in-a-low-carbon-society.html


Title: Statement on EC Guidance Documents for CCS directive implementation Date Published: 5 May 2011 Description: ZEP statement on Guidance Document 4 – which inter alia explains options available to Member States in establishing financial security requirements for CO2 storage operators in order to cover their obligations under the directive.


Title: Statement - EU CCS Plans Achieve Major Milestone for Clean Energy Future Date Published: 9 May 2011 Description: ZEP statement marking submission of MS CCS projects for NER300 funding & also used as op-ed submission (see Media Coverage).


Title: Statement on Amine-Based Solvents (CO2 Capture) Date Published: 24 May 2011 Description: ZEP statement on issues related to amine-based capture technology; distributed to key stakeholders as reactive statement only.


Title: World Climate Summit – Accelerating Green Growth in Europe Date Published: 21 June 2011 Publisher: World Climate Summit (ZEP sponsor and participant in roundtable EU discussion – Frederic Hauge) Description: The World Climate Roundtable EU Summary Report provides a snap-shot summary of key considerations and recommendations of how to accelerate green growth and tackle climate change, put forward by a selected number of high-level global leaders from the public and private sector. The report summarises main discussion areas and recommendations across the session’s three central themes, namely that of: going beyond EU 2020 targets; private sector influence into the UNFCCC negotiations; and supporting the transition to a global green economy. Link to download report: publication/174-world-climate-summit-accelerating-greengrowth-in-europe.html


Title: The Costs of CO2 Capture, Transport and Storage Date Published: 12 July 2011 Description: Summary report of 51 pages published containing CDROM with all 4 reports and key message pull-out (300 copies original + reprint of 1,000).


Title: Sound Energy Policy for Europe - Pragmatic Pathways to a Low-Carbon Economy Date Published: 19 July 2011 Publisher: IHS CERA (input from ZEP during previous roundtable in Brussels – Philippe Paelinck) Description: This report aims to contribute to the discussion of longterm energy policy within Europe and specifically to provide independent input as DG Energy develops its 2050 Energy Roadmap and its own long-term energy scenarios. Link to download report: publication/175-sound-energy-policy-for-europepragmatic-pathways-to-a-low-carbon-economy.html


Title: Statement on CCS at COP17 Date Published: 22 November 2011 Description: ZEP statement on key issues related to CCS to be discussed during COP17 (CCS in CDM; technology transfer; Green Fund/NAMAs).


Further examples of ZEP communications tools use (not exhaustive): • 250 CCS leaflets + 100 call-to-action cards at Carbon Expo (Spain). • Stanford University used ZEP’s images outlining the workings of the three CO2 capture technologies in a book published by the Material Research Society about CCS. • ClydeUnion Pumps (UK) leveraged all three of ZEP’s animations on CCS to encourage funding for CCS. • ESB (Ireland) leveraged ZEP’s animations in presentation on CCS • ZEP contributed content on public engagement related to CCS for chapter in book entitled: Geoscience of carbon dioxide (CO2) storage, published by Centre for Research into Earth Energy Systems (UK) • ZEP communications material leveraged at teacher- level course at the University of North Dakota covering CO2 storage. • Aberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Plan (Scotland) leveraged ZEP imagery for discussion document on CCS • ZEP capture process images used in a book on CO2 storage edited by the Polytechnic University of Madrid (Spain) • For COP17, ZEP distributed the following material to CCS stakeholders, including the European Commission, Bellona, CCSA, GCCSI, World Climate Summit, etc.: • 490 copies of the CCS Costs Report • 470 copies of Knowledge Sharing report • 1,210 copies of CCS leaflet (ENG) + 560 (ES) • 175 USB sticks containing CCS Library + ZEP reports/communications tools • 250 CSS leaflets to Science on Stage event (Denmark) • 200 CCS leaflets sent to Shell for use at Signals & Signposts – Friends of Europe event (Brussels) • Animations translated into German by E.ON for use at its Annual General Meeting. • ZEP animations displayed at European Association of Communication Directors by ENEL + 50 CCS leaflets distributed. • DECC (UK government) all staff event to use ZEP Hard Facts animation to outline CCS • 220 copies of CCS Cost Reports distributed within ZEP (AC; TFT; all TF co-leads; branch organizations/sponsors) • 250 CCS leaflets (IT) sent to Museo Energia in Rome, Italy.

• ZEP images used by OCCS (UK government) for FEED study CD-ROM cover art (5,000 copies distributed)


ZEP advertising:

Title: European Voice Date Published: 27 October 2011

Title: Europe’s World Date Published: Summer 2011

Title: The Parliament Magazine Date Published: June 2011




Communications Report 2011


Communications Report 2011