IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cec/wpaper/1402.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Carbon prices and CCS investment: comparative study between the European Union and China

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Renner

Abstract

As policy makers assess strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), they need to know the available technical options and the conditions under which these options become economically attractive. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) techniques are widely considered as a key option for climate change mitigation. But integrating CCS techniques in a commercial scale power plant adds significant costs to the capital expenditure at the start of the project and to the operating expenditure throughout its lifetime. Its additional costs can be offset by a sufficient CO2 price but most markets have failed to put a high enough price on CO2 emissions: currently, the weak Emission Unit Allowances price threatens CCS demonstration and deployment in the European Union (EU). A different dynamic is rising in China: a carbon regulation seems to appear and CCS techniques seem to encounter a rising interest as suggest their inclusion in the 12th Five-Year Plan and the rising number of CCS projects identifies/planned. However, there are very few in-depth techno-economic studies on CCS costs. This study investigates two related questions: how much is the extra-cost of a CCS plant in the EU in comparison with China? And then, what is the CO2 price beyond which CCS power plants become more profitable/economically attractive than classic power plants, in the EU and in China? To answer these questions, I first review, analyze and compare public studies on CCS techniques in order to draw an objective techno-economic panorama in the EU and China. Then, I develop a net present value (NPV) model for coal and gas plants, with and without CCS, in order to assess the CO2 price beyond which CCS plants become the most profitable power plant type. This CO2 value is called CO2 switching price. I also run some sensitivity analyses to assess the impact of different parameter variations on this CO2 switching price. I show that CCS power plants become the most profitable baseload power plant type with a CO2 price higher than 70 €/t in the EU against 30 €/t in China, without transport and storage costs. When the CO2 price is high enough, CCS gas plants are the most profitable power plant type in the EU whereas these are CCS coal plants in China. Through this study, I advise investors on the optimal power plant type choice depending on the CO2 market price, and suggest an optimal timing for CCS investment in the EU and China.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Renner, 2014. "Carbon prices and CCS investment: comparative study between the European Union and China," Working Papers 1402, Chaire Economie du climat.
  • Handle: RePEc:cec:wpaper:1402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.chaireeconomieduclimat.org/RePEc/cec/wpaper/14-01-Cahier-R-2014-02-Renner.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2014
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giovanni, Emily & Richards, Kenneth R., 2010. "Determinants of the costs of carbon capture and sequestration for expanding electricity generation capacity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6026-6035, October.
    2. Rubin, Edward S. & Yeh, Sonia & Antes, Matt & Berkenpas, Michael & Davison, John, 2007. "Use of experience curves to estimate the future cost of power plants with CO2 capture," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt46x6h0n0, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    3. Jos Sijm & Karsten Neuhoff & Yihsu Chen, 2006. "CO 2 cost pass-through and windfall profits in the power sector," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 49-72, January.
    4. Wu, Ning & Parsons, John E. & Polenske, Karen R., 2013. "The impact of future carbon prices on CCS investment for power generation in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 160-172.
    5. Jouvet, Pierre-André & Solier, Boris, 2013. "An overview of CO2 cost pass-through to electricity prices in Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1370-1376.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7761 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. M. C. Grimston & V. Karakoussis & R. Fouquet & R. van der Vorst & P. Pearson & M. Leach, 2001. "The European and global potential of carbon dioxide sequestration in tackling climate change," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 155-171, June.
    8. Matthias Finkenrath, 2011. "Cost and Performance of Carbon Dioxide Capture from Power Generation," IEA Energy Papers 2011/5, OECD Publishing.
    9. Rubin, Edward S. & Chen, Chao & Rao, Anand B., 2007. "Cost and performance of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 capture and storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 4444-4454, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Muratori, Matteo & Ledna, Catherine & McJeon, Haewon & Kyle, Page & Patel, Pralit & Kim, Son H. & Wise, Marshall & Kheshgi, Haroon S. & Clarke, Leon E. & Edmonds, Jae, 2017. "Cost of power or power of cost: A U.S. modeling perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 861-874.
    2. Jiongwen Chen & Jinsuo Zhang, 2022. "Effect Mechanism Research of Carbon Price Drivers in China—A Case Study of Shenzhen," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-17, August.
    3. Fan, Jing-Li & Xu, Mao & Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian, 2019. "Benefit evaluation of investment in CCS retrofitting of coal-fired power plants and PV power plants in China based on real options," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    4. Yang, Lin & Lv, Haodong & Wei, Ning & Li, Yiming & Zhang, Xian, 2023. "Dynamic optimization of carbon capture technology deployment targeting carbon neutrality, cost efficiency and water stress: Evidence from China's electric power sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    5. Yang, Lin & Xu, Mao & Fan, Jingli & Liang, Xi & Zhang, Xian & Lv, Haodong & Wang, Dong, 2021. "Financing coal-fired power plant to demonstrate CCS (carbon capture and storage) through an innovative policy incentive in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    6. Michalski, Sebastian & Hanak, Dawid P. & Manovic, Vasilije, 2020. "Advanced power cycles for coal-fired power plants based on calcium looping combustion: A techno-economic feasibility assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    7. Paes, Carlos Eduardo & Gandelman, Dan Abensur & Firmo, Heloisa Teixeira & Bahiense, Laura, 2022. "The power generation expansion planning in Brazil: Considering the impact of greenhouse gas emissions in an Investment Decision Model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 225-238.
    8. Fan, Jing-Li & Xu, Mao & Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian & Li, Fengyu, 2019. "How can carbon capture utilization and storage be incentivized in China? A perspective based on the 45Q tax credit provisions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1229-1240.
    9. Hanak, Dawid P. & Manovic, Vasilije, 2016. "Calcium looping with supercritical CO2 cycle for decarbonisation of coal-fired power plant," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 343-353.
    10. Fang, Guochang & Tian, Lixin & Liu, Menghe & Fu, Min & Sun, Mei, 2018. "How to optimize the development of carbon trading in China—Enlightenment from evolution rules of the EU carbon price," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 1039-1049.
    11. Herui Cui & Tian Zhao & Ruirui Wu, 2018. "An Investment Feasibility Analysis of CCS Retrofit Based on a Two-Stage Compound Real Options Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, July.
    12. Fan, Jing-Li & Xu, Mao & Li, Fengyu & Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian, 2018. "Carbon capture and storage (CCS) retrofit potential of coal-fired power plants in China: The technology lock-in and cost optimization perspective," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 326-334.
    13. Hanak, Dawid P. & Kolios, Athanasios J. & Manovic, Vasilije, 2016. "Comparison of probabilistic performance of calcium looping and chemical solvent scrubbing retrofits for CO2 capture from coal-fired power plant," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 323-336.
    14. Alshammari, Yousef M., 2021. "Scenario analysis for energy transition in the chemical industry: An industrial case study in Saudi Arabia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    15. Abdul Manaf, Norhuda & Qadir, Abdul & Abbas, Ali, 2016. "Temporal multiscalar decision support framework for flexible operation of carbon capture plants targeting low-carbon management of power plant emissions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 912-926.

    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. Renner, Marie, 2014. "Carbon prices and CCS investment: A comparative study between the European Union and China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 327-340.
    2. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12983 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Wu Haibo & Liu Zhaohui, 2018. "Economic research relating to a 200 MWe oxy‐fuel combustion power plant," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 8(5), pages 911-919, October.
    4. Dominic Woolf & Johannes Lehmann & David R. Lee, 2016. "Optimal bioenergy power generation for climate change mitigation with or without carbon sequestration," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Zhou, Wenji & Zhu, Bing & Chen, Dingjiang & Zhao, Fangxian & Fei, Weiyang, 2014. "How policy choice affects investment in low-carbon technology: The case of CO2 capture in indirect coal liquefaction in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 670-679.
    6. Lai, N.Y.G. & Yap, E.H. & Lee, C.W., 2011. "Viability of CCS: A broad-based assessment for Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3608-3616.
    7. Escudero, Marcos & Jiménez, Ángel & González, Celina & López, Ignacio, 2013. "Quantitative analysis of potential power production and environmental benefits of Biomass Integrated Gasification Combined Cycles in the European Union," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 63-75.
    8. Herui Cui & Tian Zhao & Ruirui Wu, 2018. "An Investment Feasibility Analysis of CCS Retrofit Based on a Two-Stage Compound Real Options Model," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, July.
    9. Tim Laing & Misato Sato & Michael Grubb & Claudia Comberti, 2013. "Assessing the effectiveness of the EU Emissions Trading System," GRI Working Papers 106, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    10. Cotton, Deborah & De Mello, Lurion, 2014. "Econometric analysis of Australian emissions markets and electricity prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 475-485.
    11. Wang, Dandan & Li, Sheng & Liu, Feng & Gao, Lin & Sui, Jun, 2018. "Post combustion CO2 capture in power plant using low temperature steam upgraded by double absorption heat transformer," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 227(C), pages 603-612.
    12. Ma, Ning & Li, Huajiao & Zhang, Jinwei & Han, Xiaodan & Feng, Sida & Arif, Asma, 2021. "The short-term price effects and transmission mechanism of CO2 cost pass-through in China: A partial transmission model," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    13. Moura, Maria Cecilia P. & Branco, David A. Castelo & Peters, Glen P. & Szklo, Alexandre Salem & Schaeffer, Roberto, 2013. "How the choice of multi-gas equivalency metrics affects mitigation options: The case of CO2 capture in a Brazilian coal-fired power plant," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1357-1366.
    14. Rammerstorfer, Margarethe & Eisl, Roland, 2011. "Carbon capture and storage—Investment strategies for the future?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7103-7111.
    15. Yang, Hang & Zhang, Yongxin & Zheng, Chenghang & Wu, Xuecheng & Chen, Linghong & Fu, Joshua S. & Gao, Xiang, 2018. "Cost estimate of the multi-pollutant abatement in coal-fired power sector in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 523-535.
    16. Pettinau, Alberto & Ferrara, Francesca & Tola, Vittorio & Cau, Giorgio, 2017. "Techno-economic comparison between different technologies for CO2-free power generation from coal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 426-439.
    17. Wehrle, Sebastian & Schmidt, Johannes, 2016. "Optimal emission prices for a district heating system owner," Discussion Papers DP-64-2016, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    18. Traber, Thure & Kemfert, Claudia, 2011. "Refunding ETS proceeds to spur the diffusion of renewable energies: An analysis based on the dynamic oligopolistic electricity market model EMELIE," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 33-41, January.
    19. Viebahn, Peter & Vallentin, Daniel & Höller, Samuel, 2014. "Prospects of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in India’s power sector – An integrated assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 62-75.
    20. Andrianesis, Panagiotis & Biskas, Pandelis & Liberopoulos, George, 2021. "Evaluating the cost of emissions in a pool-based electricity market," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 298(C).
    21. Wang, M. & Zhou, P., 2017. "Does emission permit allocation affect CO2 cost pass-through? A theoretical analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 140-146.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cec:wpaper:1402. 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: Chaire Economie du Climat (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.chaireeconomieduclimat.org .

    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.