The same is true for CCUS Technology (economic)Regulatory StakeholderFramework Support(environment) (society)
TechnologyNeed to bring all of the costs of CCS in order to make iteconomically/commercially viable and cost competitive withnuclear, wind, biomass and other renewables that have little orzero emissions.Need more demonstration projects at commercial scale,knowledge sharing for wide-scale deployment.Canada’s contribution: Shell’s Quest; SaskPower’sBoundary Dam, and Aquistore.
Regulatory FrameworkRegulatory frameworks are essential to ensure effective andsafe CO2 storage.At a high level, uncertainty regarding CO2 storage regulation isperceived to have impacted negatively on some projects.Canada’s contribution: A Standard for Geologic Storage;certainty around liability, carbon taxes (all be theysmall) and some regulations around GHG emissions forpower plants.
Demonstrationof technology Regulatory and Framework Confidence and StandardsCost Reduction
But…..Having a demonstrated, proven technology and a goodregulatory framework will not inspire confidence and supportamong stakeholders and the community without effectivecommunication and engagement.And….The international consensus is that sound stakeholderengagement in CO2 storage projects is essential for CCSdeployment even at the demonstration level.
Cancelled CCS ProjectsThree very important CCS projects have been cancelled:• Barendrecht – Netherlands 2010 – Lack of public support.• Mountaineer Project – West Virginia – Economic Reasons• Pioneer – Calgary 2012 – Economic reasons and a relatively low price for carbon.
Public EngagementEffective engagement and communication requires that you know and understand who you are communicating with.
When we talk about “stakeholders”, “public” and“community”…what do we mean?Stakeholder – an individual, group or organization that has aninterest in CCS policy or specific project.Public – refers to the general public at a national or regionallevel.Community – refers to local stakeholders comprising bothindividuals (the local public) and other local stakeholders(landowners, citizen groups etc) in the vicinity of a particularproject.
Levels of Engagement and CommunicationStakeholder (including general public) group support isgenerally the target of national CCS education and informationcampaigns.Whereas…Community education and information campaigns tend to beundertaken by developers or project proponents.
An important question to ask is: Who do the community trust to givethem accurate information about CCS?
CCS Awareness in Canada80% 67%70% 48% have heard of CCS60% in Canada (2012) 47%50% 28% have heard of CCS in Europe (2011)40% 31% Canada 201230% Europe 2011 18% 17%20% 10% 5%10% 4%0% Have heard of Have heard of Have not heard Don’t know CCS and know CCS but dont of CCS what it is know what it is
Levels of ConcernProvincial Concerns About CCS 71% of Quebec residents would be very or fairly concerned if carbon dioxide was stored underground within 1.5 to 3 kilometers from their home; 63% of B.C. residents think the same way; while only 43% of Saskatchewan residents would be concerned.
Effectiveness of CCS Perception Amongst Canadians Very effective 7.5 %34.5% Canadiansbelieve CCS would be very Don’t knowor fairly effective, while Fairly effective31% think it will not 34% 27 %be very or not alleffective.34% Don’t know. 9% Not very effective Not at all effective 22 %
Situating public debate about broader CCS issues at the levelof policy rather than at the project level will facilitateengagement.It enables basic/fundamental issues to be considered andaddressed before project-level activities begin.There should be a solid understanding of CCS and howgovernment will oversee its deployment well in advance of thestart of operations.
Local/Project LevelThe old “decide, announce and defend” approach no longerworks.Replace it with….Understanding the local community to determine the uniquecontext for the project. This is the first step in undertaking arisk assessment and site characterization.Then tailor the project tools and messages to suit the localcommunity in order to facilitate effective engagement andcommunication.Ensure active two-way communication that engages thecommunity early (not at finalization) in the decision-makingprocess.
Societal support is as important and vital to the futuredeployment of CCS as is the development of the technologyand regulatory frameworks.It is clear that guidance in the form of a Standard on effectiveengagement at both the National and project level (oftenincluded as regulatory requirements) is needed.This would augment, strengthen and enhance the developingStandard governing the technical aspects of CCS.
Remember the Goal: to reduce GHG emissions in order toreduce the possibility of catastrophic climate change and tokeep our energy production sustainable in the transition to alow carbon future.
Conclusion• Progress is underway.• Ongoing CCS projects have been helpful for the advancement in technology.• We will soon have a standard.• There is work to be done to gain stakeholders and community’s confidence.• Economic incentives and community engagement are critical for further progress.
Thank You Dr. Carmen Dybwad +1.306.206.0119 +1.306.591.2740 Carmen.dybwad@IPAC-CO2.comSubscribe to our newsletter by visiting our website: www.ipac-co2.com