IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i12p4495-d843351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon Capture Utilisation and Storage Technology Development in a Region with High CO 2 Emissions and Low Storage Potential—A Case Study of Upper Silesia in Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Śliwińska

    (Department of Energy Saving and Air Protection, Central Mining Institute, Plac Gwarków 1, 40-166 Katowice, Poland)

  • Aleksandra Strugała-Wilczek

    (Department of Energy Saving and Air Protection, Central Mining Institute, Plac Gwarków 1, 40-166 Katowice, Poland)

  • Piotr Krawczyk

    (Department of Energy Saving and Air Protection, Central Mining Institute, Plac Gwarków 1, 40-166 Katowice, Poland)

  • Agnieszka Leśniak

    (Department of Energy Saving and Air Protection, Central Mining Institute, Plac Gwarków 1, 40-166 Katowice, Poland)

  • Tomasz Urych

    (Department of Geology, Geophysics and Surface Protection, Central Mining Institute, Plac Gwarków 1, 40-166 Katowice, Poland)

  • Jarosław Chećko

    (Department of Geology, Geophysics and Surface Protection, Central Mining Institute, Plac Gwarków 1, 40-166 Katowice, Poland)

  • Krzysztof Stańczyk

    (Department of Energy Saving and Air Protection, Central Mining Institute, Plac Gwarków 1, 40-166 Katowice, Poland)

Abstract

The region of Upper Silesia, located in southern Poland, is characterised by very high emissions of carbon dioxide into the air—the annual emission exceeds 33 Mt CO 2 and the emission ‘per capita’ is 7.2 t/y in comparison to the EU average emission per capita 6.4 t/y and 8.4 t/y for Poland in 2019. Although in the region there are over 100 carbon dioxide emitters covered by the EU ETS, over 90% of emissions come from approximately 15 large hard coal power plants and from the coke and metallurgical complex. The CCUS scenario for Upper Silesia, which encompasses emitters, capture plants, transport routes, as well as utilisation and storage sites until 2050, was developed. The baseline scenario assumes capture of carbon dioxide in seven installations, use in two methanol plants and transport and injection into two deep saline aquifers (DSA). The share of captured CO 2 from flue gas was assumed at the level of 0.25–0.9, depending mainly on the limited capacity of storage. To recognise the views of society on development of the CCUS technologies in Upper Silesia, thirteen interviews with different types of stakeholders (industry, research and education, policy makers) were conducted. The respondents evaluated CCU much better than CCS. The techno-economic assessment of CCUS carried out on a scenario basis showed that the economic outcome of the scenario with CCUS is EUR 3807.19 million more favourable compared to the scenario without CO 2 capture and storage.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Śliwińska & Aleksandra Strugała-Wilczek & Piotr Krawczyk & Agnieszka Leśniak & Tomasz Urych & Jarosław Chećko & Krzysztof Stańczyk, 2022. "Carbon Capture Utilisation and Storage Technology Development in a Region with High CO 2 Emissions and Low Storage Potential—A Case Study of Upper Silesia in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:12:p:4495-:d:843351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/12/4495/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/12/4495/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krawczyk, Piotr & Howaniec, Natalia & Smoliński, Adam, 2016. "Economic efficiency analysis of substitute natural gas (SNG) production in steam gasification of coal with the utilization of HTR excess heat," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1207-1213.
    2. Richard Heede, 2014. "Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and cement producers, 1854–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 229-241, January.
    3. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Misato Sato, 2017. "The Impacts of Environmental Regulations on Competitiveness," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 183-206.
    4. Pérez-Fortes, Mar & Schöneberger, Jan C. & Boulamanti, Aikaterini & Tzimas, Evangelos, 2016. "Methanol synthesis using captured CO2 as raw material: Techno-economic and environmental assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 718-732.
    5. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    6. Lebunu Hewage Udara Willhelm Abeydeera & Jayantha Wadu Mesthrige & Tharushi Imalka Samarasinghalage, 2019. "Global Research on Carbon Emissions: A Scientometric Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-25, July.
    7. Aleksandra Koteras & Jarosław Chećko & Tomasz Urych & Małgorzata Magdziarczyk & Adam Smolinski, 2020. "An Assessment of the Formations and Structures Suitable for Safe CO 2 Geological Storage in the Upper Silesia Coal Basin in Poland in the Context of the Regulation Relating to the CCS," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    8. Li, Wenqing & Qiao, Yuanbo & Li, Xiao & Wang, Yutao, 2022. "Energy consumption, pollution haven hypothesis, and Environmental Kuznets Curve: Examining the environment–economy link in belt and road initiative countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PE).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    2. Themann, Michael & Koch, Nicolas, 2021. "Catching up and falling behind: Cross-country evidence on the impact of the EU ETS on firm productivity," Ruhr Economic Papers 904, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    3. Piotr Krawczyk & Anna Śliwińska, 2020. "Eco-Efficiency Assessment of the Application of Large-Scale Rechargeable Batteries in a Coal-Fired Power Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    4. Naegele, Helene & Zaklan, Aleksandar, 2019. "Does the EU ETS cause carbon leakage in European manufacturing?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 125-147.
    5. Simone Marsiglio & Nahid Masoudi, 2019. "Transboundary Pollution Control and Competitiveness Concerns in a Two-Country Differential Game," CFDS Discussion Paper Series 2019/1, Center for Financial Development and Stability at Henan University, Kaifeng, Henan, China.
    6. Muhammad Imran & Azlan Zahid & Salma Mouneer & Orhan Özçatalbaş & Shamsheer Ul Haq & Pomi Shahbaz & Muhammad Muzammil & Muhammad Ramiz Murtaza, 2022. "Relationship between Household Dynamics, Biomass Consumption, and Carbon Emissions in Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-16, May.
    7. Wang, Xiaoling & Zhang, Tianyue & Nathwani, Jatin & Yang, Fangming & Shao, Qinglong, 2022. "Environmental regulation, technology innovation, and low carbon development: Revisiting the EKC Hypothesis, Porter Hypothesis, and Jevons’ Paradox in China's iron & steel industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    8. Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint Jean, 2020. "Mind the gap: Investigating the impact of implementation gaps on cleaner technology transition," Post-Print hal-03490256, HAL.
    9. Böning, Justus & Di Nino, Virginia & Folger, Till, 2023. "Benefits and costs of the ETS in the EU, a lesson learned for the CBAM design," Working Paper Series 2764, European Central Bank.
    10. Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint-Jean, 2019. "Dura lex sed lex: why implementation gaps in environmental policy matter?," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2019-04, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    11. Chen, Xinmin & Huang, Yuhong & Gao, Yajia, 2024. "Can urban low-carbon transitions promote enterprise digital transformation?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    12. Liu, Donghua & Ren, Shenggang & Li, Wenming, 2022. "SO2 emissions trading and firm exports in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    13. Zhang, Ming & Zhao, Yingxue, 2023. "Does environmental regulation spur innovation? Quasi-natural experiment in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    14. Filippo Maria D'Arcangelo & Marzio Galeotti, 2022. "Environmental Policy and Investment Location: The Risk of Carbon Leakage in the EU ETS," Working Papers 2022.27, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Forin, Silvia & Radebach, Alexander & Steckel, Jan Christoph & Ward, Hauke, 2018. "The effect of industry delocalization on global energy use: A global sectoral perspective," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 233-243.
    16. Si, Shuyang & Lyu, Mingjie & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia & Chen, Song, 2021. "The effects of environmental policies in China on GDP, output, and profits," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. D'Arcangelo, Maria Filippo & Galeotti, Marzio, 2022. "Environmental Policy and Investment Location: The Risk of Carbon Leakage in the EU ETS," FEEM Working Papers 327158, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    18. Beöthy, Ákos & Kácsor, Enikő & Bartek-Lesi, Mária & Kerekes, Lajos & Kotek, Péter, 2019. "Energiaköltségek hatása a feldolgozóipar költség-versenyképességére [Energy costs and cost competitiveness in the manufacturing sector]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 256-285.
    19. Peng, Jiaying & Xie, Rui & Ma, Chunbo & Fu, Yang, 2021. "Market-based environmental regulation and total factor productivity: Evidence from Chinese enterprises," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 394-407.
    20. de Miguel, Carlos & Pazó, Consuelo, 2017. "Environmental protection, innovation and price-setting behavior in Spanish manufacturing firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 116-124.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:12:p:4495-:d:843351. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.