The capture, transport, geological storage and re-use of

The capture, transport, geological storage

and re-use of CO2 (CCUS)

Strategic roadmap

2

Roadmap CCUS

List of members of the group of experts1

Nature of the body Experts Member bodies

Research bodies Pierre Agrinier IPGPDidier Bonijoly BRGMRégis Farret InerisEric Favre ENSIC – INPL NancyMinh Ha Duong CiredFrançois Kalaydjian IFP Energies nouvellesJacques Pironon CNRS/Université de Lorraine

Private companies Jean-Pierre Birat ArcelorMittalValérie Czop EDFMarc David Air LiquideLuc de Marliave TotalRobert Gresser RhodiaPierre Le Thiez GeogreenLouis Sonnois AlstomArnaud Van Der Beken Schlumberger

Public bodies Isabelle Czernichowski ANRFrançois Moisan ADEME

1 - The group of experts received support from a technical office comprised of Stéphanie Arnoux, Karine Filmon, Albane Gaspard, Michel Gioria and Nathalie Thybaud of the ADEME.

Table of contents

> 1. Subject area of this roadmap 7

> 2. International benchmark 10

> 3. Challenges 13

> 4. Key parameters 14

> 5. Visions 15

> 6. Obstacles 20

> 7. Research priorities 22

> 8. Deploying technology 37

3

Preamble

Since 2010, the ADEME has been managing four programmes within the scope of «Future Investments».2. Groups of research experts from various industrial fields, research bodies and research programming and financing agencies are responsible, within the scope of collective works, for producing strategic roadmaps. These are used to launch Calls for Expressions of Interest (CEI). The purpose of these roadmaps is to:

•highlight the industrial, technological, environmental and social issues faced;

•draw up coherent, shared visions of the sociotechnical system or technologies in question;

• identify the technological, organisational and socio-economic obstacles to be overcome;

•associate time-based objectives with the priority research themes in terms of technological availability and deployment;

•prioritise the industrial research, research demonstrator, preindustrial experimentation and technology test platform needs, which then act as a basis for:

> drawing up CEIs; > programming research within the ADEME and other institutions such as the French National Research Agency (ANR), the French national strategic committee for energy research (Comité stratégique national sur la recherche énergie) or the French national alliance for the coordination of energy research (ANCRE).

These research and experimentation priorities originate from a coming together of the visions and obstacles, however also take into account French capacities in the fields of research and industry.

Where applicable, these roadmaps may also contain a section on international benchmarks focused on the demonstrators implemented in countries that are particularly active in this field, in addition to recommendations in terms of industrial policy.

2 - Future Investments (Les Investissements d’Avenir) continue along the path set by the Research Demonstrator Fund managed by the ADEME. The four programmes involved are: Renewable, low-carbon energy and green chemistry (1.35 billion Euros), Vehicles of the future (1 billion Euros), Smart grids (250 million Euros) and Circular Economy (250 million Euros).

4

Roadmap CCUS

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions

The Kyoto protocol, which entered into effect in 2005, is a founding act when taking into account greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs)3. These gases absorb infrared radiation emitted by the Earth’s surface and are deemed responsible for climate change. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is, by quantity, the number one anthropogenic greenhouse gas, produced by human activity. Due to the massive use of fossil fuels (oil, natural gas and carbon), GHG concentrations have been on the rise since the xixth century, and in particular CO2 concentrations, the emissions of which rose by approximately 80% between 1970 and 20044 (in 2004, they were assessed to equal 26 billion tonnes). The atmospheric concentration of CO2 is assessed to equal 379 ppm5. Its natural growth rate is nearly 2 ppm and this rate will only drop progressively, even if all emissions are removed, as GHGs remain in the atmosphere for relatively long periods of time.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations considers that, by the year 2050, global CO2 emissions must be reduced by 50 to 85% in relation to levels in the year 2000, in order to limit the long-term increase in average temperatures throughout the world to a level of between 2 °C and 2.4 °C compared to the pre-industrial era, this limit being considered as a critical threshold4. This involves not exceeding an atmospheric concentration of 450 ppm of CO2.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA)6, in order to reduce global energy-related CO2 emissions to half their 2005 levels by 2050 (known as the Blue Map scenario), annual global emissions must be brought down to 14.6 billion tonnes (Gt) in 2050, i.e. for a current population of 6.5 billion inhabitants, 2.2 tonnes of CO2 per inhabitant per year.

France, with 65 million inhabitants and according to a breakdown proportionate to the number of inhabitants, would be allowed 143 million tonnes (Mt), i.e. a little over one quarter of its current emissions. This magnitude, qualified as «factor 4» was integrated into politics by the French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin upon opening the 20th plenary session of the IPCC on 19 February 2003 in Paris, when he declared that: «GHG emissions must be cut in half by the year 2050 on a planetary scale»; for France, an industrialised country, «this means dividing its emissions by four or five». This objective of reducing GHG emissions by a factor of four by the year 2050 compared to 1990 levels, has been integrated into Article 2 of the French Orientation Programme for Energy Policy Law dated 13 July 2005.

Cutting GHG emissions by a factor or 4 on a French level and a factor of 2 on a global level will require the application of a range of coherent measures over the next 20 to 30 years (economic mechanisms, regulations, institutional framework) in all six GHG-emitting sectors (agriculture and fishing, energy production, manufacturing industry, residential and tertiary buildings, transport and land use).

However, population growth and global wealth lead to an energy demand which, without taking ambitious measures, will progress from approximately 11 to 25 billion tonnes of oil equivalentby the year 20507, a large proportion of which originating from fossil energy. In order to limit the consequences of this growth in energy needs on the climate, a panel of solutions must be implemented in order to diversify energy resources and massively reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions (outlined below). From among these solutions, one option involves capturing the CO2 emitted in large quantities during industrial processes such as the production of electricity, steel or cement, for storage underground in order to isolate it from the atmosphere. This solution therefore relates to fixed CO2-emitting sources. In this document, this notion is referred to using the abbreviation CCS which stands for CO2 Capture and geological Storage.

3 -Six greenhouse gases are taken into account in the Kyoto protocol: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (CH4), perfluorocarbons (PFC), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

4 - «Climate change 2007», synthesis report, IPCC.

5 - Part per million.

6 - The IEA draws up scenarios for the evolution of the global energy system in the year 2050, updated in the new issue of its report « Energy Technology Perspectives » (ETP, 2010).

7 - World Energy Outlook, 2009

5

Options that can be mobilised to reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions

Several additional measures must be considered:

• reducing energy consumption in buildings, transport, industry, etc.,

• using energy sources that do not emit greenhouse gases (solar power, wind power, hydraulic energy, geothermy, nuclear energy, etc.),

• using low-emitting fossil energies for the same production (natural gas instead of coal), with the probable use of CO2 capture and storage technologies,

• improving the energy efficiency of electricity generation means based on fossil energies (gas or coal), by using improved available technology for designing new power plants and by increasing the efficiency of existing plants, for example via rehabilitation works,

• developing natural wells,

• capturing and geologically storing CO2

The most important potential means for limiting anthropogenic GHG emissions involves the end-use fuel and electricity efficiency. In the Blue Map scenario by the IEA, it counts for 38% of global emissions saved by the year 2050 when compared to a baseline scenario (trend) without any significant changes taking place in the current energy policy (Figure 1). CO2 capture and geological storage (applied to electricity generation and transformation industries) would lead to a 19% reduction in global emissions by the year 2050.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

60Gt CO2

Baseline emissions 57 Gt

BLUE map emissions 14 Gt

WEO 2009 450 ppm case ETP 2010 analysis

CCS 19%

Renewables 17%

Nuclear 6%

Power generation efficiency

and fuel switching 5%

End-use fuel

switching 15%

End-use fuel and

electricity efficiency 38%

Figure 1: Options for reducing CO2 emissions, 2005-2050 (source IEA)

On a European level, according to the first estimations made of the impact of the directive on the geological storage of CO2 (2009/31/EC), the CO2 emissions saved in 2030 could account for some 15% of the reductions required in the European Union, i.e. 160 million tonnes of CO2 stored annually. By exploiting the full potential of CO2 capture and geological storage, a reduction of more than 50% in CO2 emissions could be achieved by the year 2050, with a reduction of approximately 30% for the energy generation sector alone8.

8 - European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP) «CO2 Capture and Storage (CCS) – Why it is essential to combat global warming», 2008.

6

Roadmap CCUS

For France, a first analysis, based on current emissions from electricity generation in addition to concentrated industrial, energy-related and non-energy-related emissions (such as decarbonisation), set the following magnitudes: approximately 75 million tonnes of CO2 per year are potentially concerned by CCS, i.e. approximately 19% of all CO2 emissions in France assessed to equal 395 million tonnes9 (excluding land use, land-use change and forestry10). A technico-economic and environmental assessment11 has demonstrated that by the year 2050 CO2 storage applied to concentrated CO2 sources (ammonia production plants, etc.) and fixed sources emitting more than 0.9 MtCO2/year could lead to a reduction in these sectors of 33 to 54% of emissions, according to the number of industrial areas involved (Lorraine, Lower Seine, Paris region, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur). In order to achieve the factor 4 objective in the French industrial sector by 2050, CCS technology must be implemented as of 2020. According to this hypothesis, storage sites must be made available, accounting for a cumulated volume between 2020 and 2050 of 1 billion tonnes of CO2.

In addition to geological storage, however for much smaller quantities, CO2 may be used as into a raw material. It is already used today in the agri-food industry for preserving foods (dry ice) or fizzy drinks. It is used in industry, for example as a reagent in the chemical industry, for industrial applications (coolants, solvents, etc.) or for EOR/EGR (Enhanced Oil/Gas Recovery12). In 2008, approximately 150 million tonnes of CO2 were used throughout the world (40 million tonnes of which were injected annually for enhanced oil recovery). This represents 0.5% of all annual anthropogenic CO2 emissions13 (figure 2). The main issue in using CO2 consists in finding new applications based on breakthrough technology thus increasing the volumes involved. When transformed, CO2 is either definitively stored (e.g.: plastic manufacture) or stored for a set period of time (e.g.: biofuel manufacture). The CO2 emitted when using the product created from the transformation activity must therefore be taken into account, for example via LCAs – life cycle analyses – if available, in order to reason in terms of «CO2 saved»)

100 MT CO2

• Methane• Methanol• Ethylene• Resins• Polycarbonates• Urea• ...

13.5 MT CO2

• Inert gas• Neutralising agent• Cleaning• Coolant gas• Lasers• ...

40 MT CO2

• Enhanced hydrocarbonrecovery

Chemicalindustry65%

Industrialapplications

9%

Oilindustry

26%

Figure 2: Use of CO2 throughout the world - Source: Gestinn Project, 2008

9 - MEEDDM/CITEPA/CCNUCC inventory – April 2010.

10 - CO2 emissions are expressed with or without LULUCF (land use, land-use change and forestry). This notion covers forestry harvest and increment, forest conversion (land clearing) and prairies in addition to soil, the carbon content of which is sensitive to the nature of the activities to which it is dedicated (forests, prairies, cultivated land).

11 - ANR Report SoceCO2: «Evaluation technico-économique et environnementale de la filière captage, transport, stockage du CO à l’horizon 2050 en France », 2009.

12 - CO2 is injected into oil or gas deposits to improve extraction. In the exploitation phase, part of the CO2 is stored in the space freed by the hydrocarbon and part exits with the hydrocarbon before being separated and re-injected into the system.

13 - Gestinn Project by Laurent Dumergues, 2008.

7

> 1. Subject area of this roadmap

Subject area This roadmap on CO2 capture, transport, re-use and storage (or CCUS) covers the following technology:

•CO2 capture technology, applied to industrial boilers or hydrogen and/or electricity generation industries:

> post-combustion CO2 capture: this aims at separating the CO2 from combustion flue gases using absorption technology (chemical solvents such as amine solvents, physical solvents, chilled ammonia, etc.), cryogenics, adsorption, calcium looping, etc. ;

> CO2 capture by oxy-fuel combustion: this consists in performing combustion in the presence of oxygen instead of air in order to produce more concentrated CO2 flue gases, which can then be separated, by cooling, from the water vapour with which it is mixed; the oxygen used can be produced in a conventional manner, by cryogenic distillation or by using a metal oxide (CLC or Chemical Looping Combustion);

> pre-combustion CO2 capture, specific to gas reforming and biomass or coal gasification industries: rather than undergoing direct combustion, the fuel is transformed into a syngas, a mixture of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen, then converted into a mixture of CO2 and hydrogen. The CO2 separation process, which is easier than for combustion flue gases, generates hydrogen, which can then be burnt to generate electricity or be used in chemical production or fuel production;

•technology for reducing the CO2 emissions produced by industrial methods such as cement works, metallurgy, petrochemistry, etc., specific to each sector, in view of geological carbon storage or use. For example, in order to reduce its CO2 emissions, the metallurgy industry is experimenting with a CO2 capture and blast furnace gas recycling principle.

LThe fuels considered for these two approaches are solid fuels (coal, brown coal, biomass, etc.), liquid fuels (fuel oil, etc.) and gaseous fuels (natural gas, blast furnace gas, etc.):

•technology for compressing and treating the flow of CO2 captured in order to obtain a composition and pressure adapted to suit transport and storage phases. The integration of this step in the capture unit promotes the technical and economic optimisation of the entire system, for example to reduce auxiliary energy consumption. Nonetheless, this step can be considered for CO2 injection and/or transport under certain conditions;

•technology for transporting CO2: > by pipeline including auxiliary equipment (recompression station, possible buffer storage, valves and gates, etc.),

> by boat, including loading and unloading infrastructures;

• injection technology including casing and successive casing sequences to reach the place of storage in addition to drilling techniques;

•technology for geological CO2 storage: > in deep saline aquifers, > in depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs (oil or natural gas), > in unusable deep coal seams, > in other types of geological formation (basalt, ultra-basic rock, etc.);

Off-shore and on-shore storage shall be studied. The following must be developed, irrelevant of the type of storage involved:

• risk management methodologies,

• site closure techniques,

• qualitative (alarm role) and quantitative (material balance) monitoring technology.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

8

Roadmap CCUS

•Technology for using CO2 after capture (figure 3): > use of CO2 without transformation (enhanced hydrocarbon recovery, industrial use: replacing coolant gases, use of supercritical CO2 as a solvent, etc.),

> use by chemical transformation for the synthesis of chemical products or energy products,

> use by biological transformation (algae, biocatalysis, etc.).

Agricultural or silvicultural uses are however excluded from the scope of this roadmap, due to the quantities involved.

According to the methods of use, CO2 is stored for a given period of time (e.g. for an energy product) or definitively (e.g. for mineralisation).

Some methods for using CO2, such as growing microalgae for producing biofuels, could consider the direct use of combustion flue gases without prior CO2 capture.

Segmentation of methods for using CO2

Usewithout CO2

transformation

Useby chemical

transformation

Useby biological

transformation

1. Enhanced Hydrocarbon

Recovery (EHR)*

2. Industrial use:

replacing coolant gases,

CO2, supercritical CO2, etc.*

* Methods for which some industrial applications already exist

** Some products such as methanol are used as energy products or intermediate products in the chemical industry

10. Microalgae

Open-air ponds*

11. Microalgae

Photobioreactors*

12. Biocatalysis

Chemical products **

3. Organic synthesis*

4. Mineralisation / carbonisation

Energy products**

5. Hydrogenation

6. Dry reforming (and alternatives)

7. Electrolysis

8. Photoelectrocatalysis

9. Thermochemistry

Figure 3: The different methods for using CO2

This roadmap also considers the environmental and health impacts created by this entire industry and integrates the socio-economic issues accompanying the emergence and large-scale deployment of CO2 capture, transport, storage and re-use.

9

Geographic perimeter and deadline Geographic perimeter:The observations made by the group of experts firstly apply within the perspective of deploying this industry abroad and positioning French stakeholders on the international market. Nevertheless, where relevant, local, national and European views may be introduced into these observations in order to:

•take into account the national or local characteristics, connected to the nature of emitters, infrastructures and CO2 use and/or storage possibilities,

•coordinate the research priorities and research demonstrator needs with the European initiatives, in particular on CO2 capture and storage (with the European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants14, the European fund for industrial demonstrators).

DeadlineGeological storage targets the permanent confinement of CO2, thus including the long-term control of this industry and its potential impacts in addition to monitoring storage sites for the length of time required to demonstrate their safety. When used, CO2 is either definitively stored or stored for a given period of time.

With regard to the deployment of this industry in itself (CO2 capture, transport, use and storage), this roadmap shall initially target the year 2020, then the year 2050, in particular to remain consistent with the factor 4 objective.

14 - The European platform for ZEPs was created in 2005 by the European Commission, the European industry, NGOs, scientists and ecologists to promote technological solutions in Europe enabling electricity to be generated from fossil fuels without the emission of CO2 by 2020.

The 2050 visions shall therefore be complemented by a 2020 vision, on the one hand in order to identify the different scenarios for achieving the European 2020 environmental objectives (a 20% reduction in greenhouse gases, 20% of all energy sourced from renewable energy sources and a 20% improvement in energy efficiency) and, on the other hand, in order to illustrate the connection between the deployment phase of the CCUS industry and the rate imposed by the implementation and successive revisions of the European Emissions Trading Scheme or ETS (outlined below).

The European emissions trading scheme

The CO2 emissions trading directive has been in application in the 25 Member States of the European Union since 1 January 2005. It stipulates that the States attribute CO2 emissions allowances to companies active in six intensive GHG-emitting industrial sectors (energy generation, cement, glass, ferrous metals, the mineral industry and the paper pulp industry). Companies subject to this directive then have the possibility of trading their allowances according to whether they are excessive or insufficient, so that a market price per tonne of CO2 is formed. At the end of each year, the facilities are required to return a number of allowances corresponding to their real emissions. To find out more: http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/ -Systeme-d-echange-de-quotas-.html

With regard to CO2 capture, transport and geological storage, commercial deployment between 2020 and 2050 could be broken down in the following manner:

•2020: CCS is not deployed on a large-scale, however the different links in the chain are capable of being commercialised,

•2050 : the deployment of this industry is consistent with the issues involving reduced CO2 emissions. According to the IEA, CCS could contribute to reducing global CO2 emissions by 19% in 2050 (figure 1).

10

Roadmap CCUS

> 2. International benchmark

This benchmark focuses on the policies supporting research and demonstration projects in addition to international cooperation.

The CCS industryInitiatives and projectsOnly five large-scale integrated CCS projects are currently in operation in the world. Four projects involve the underground injection of CO2 originating from natural gas production facilities:

•Sleipner, operated by Statoil in Norway: CO2 storage in saline aquifers;

• In Salah, operated by a consortium (BP, Statoil and Sonatrach) in Algeria: CO2 storage in saline aquifers;

•Snøhvit, operated by Statoil in Norway: CO2 storage in saline aquifers;

•Rangely in the United States: enhanced oil recovery (EOR).

A fifth project (Weyburn-Midale), operated by Encana in Canada, captures CO2 within the «Great Plains Synfuels» power plant producing synthetic natural gas by coal gasification, located in the United States, and transports it to Canada by pipeline to continue to exploit the Weyburn field by EOR.

These five projects feed the knowledge bases required to deploy the CCS industry.

Furthermore, five major CCS development poles can be identified: Australia, the United States, Canada, Europe and Japan, with specific programmes and strategies:

1. The United StatesCO2 injection projects involve enhanced oil recovery in addition to carbon storage projects using aquifers and basalt rock. The most studied CO2 capture technology involves pre-combustion in an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle thermal power plant (or IGCC) and post-combustion using amine solvents and chilled ammonia, even though oxy-fuel combustion is implemented in one large-scale project (FutureGen 2). Projects are mostly financed by private stakeholders with financial support from the DOE (Department of Energy).

2. CanadaCanada is involved in carbon storage using deep saline aquifers and in enhanced oil recovery. Canadian companies show interest in post-combustion CO2 capture technology in coal plants and in the capture of CO2 from asphalt sand plants and refineries.

3. AustraliaIn order to accelerate the commercial deployment of CCS projects and achieve its targets set for reducing CO2 emissions, the Australian government created the GCCSI in 2009 (Global CO2 Capture and Storage Institute). Integrated CCS projects have been launched, including one project in the Gorgon gas field. Australia also committed with Japan to the «CO2 Enhanced Coal Bed Methane» project and to a CO2 capture pilot project (0.5 tCO2/h) using post-combustion technology with amine solvents set up on the Gaobeidian Coal Power Plant (Beijing), operated by the Huaneng Group.

4. JapanJapan is increasing its support for developing its national CCS industry and via cooperations with Australia for example. R&D activities in Japan began at the end of the 1980s. These activities included studying the different storage options (ECBM «Enhanced Coal Bed Methane recovery»15, geological and ocean storage) in addition to R&D projects on CO2 capture by chemical adsorption, membranes and oxy-fuel combustion. R&D projects have been supported by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), mainly on the development of monitoring methodologies for carbon storage safety and on studies to ease CCS implementation. In 2008, a group of industrialists founded the company Japan CCS to conduct investigations for deploying CCS projects in Japan. The company is currently selecting a site for a demonstration project. Moreover, the Japan Bank of International Corporation can finance large-scale CCS demonstrator projects using Japanese technology implemented outside of the national territory.

5. NorwayThe Norwegian government will invest €326.5 M in 2011 for developing the CCS industry: financing R&D projects, the Mongstad technology centre and the Climit research programme, which works on the entire CCS chain for power stations. Furthermore, two new research centres for CCS development have been created with an annual budget of €2.3 M granted by the government. .

15 - This enhanced methane recovery method consists in injecting CO2 into unusable coal seams. This is adsorbed by the ore that releases the methane, the latter being trapped until this time.

11

6. European UnionEurope has been supporting research projects on CO2 capture and storage since 1993 within the Framework Programmes for Research and Technological Development (FPRTD). The pioneer project Joule II financed by the 3rd FPRTD led to a study on the feasibility of this concept and the SACS project, financed by the 4th FPRTD, supported the first industrial operation for carbon storage in deep saline aquifers within the scope of the Sleipner project in the North Sea.

Since the year 2000, 49 projects have been financed as part of the 5th, 6th and 7th FPRTD, for a total of almost €161 M, i.e. 60% of the €270 M sum granted for these projects. The last programme, the 7th FPRTD, was launched in 2007 and will continue until the year 2013.

In 2009, within the scope of the European Economic Recovery Plan, the European Commission announced the co-financing of six CCS demonstration projects to take place in Germany (Jänschwalde project), the Netherlands (Rotterdam project), Poland (Belchatow project), Spain (Compostilla project), England (Hatfield project) and Italy (Porto Tolle project), for a total sum of €1 Billion. Each of these projects will receive €180 M in aid, except for the Italian project, which will only receive €100 M.

Furthermore, in 2010 the European Union launched the first call for tenders (NER300) for the creation of industrial-scale CCS demonstration projects by the year 2015. The objective set by the European Commission is to accelerate the market introduction of innovate technologies in the field of renewable energy and CO2 capture and storage. The sale of 300 million CO2 allowances will act to help finance innovative projects within this field. The European device (both the Economic recovery Plan and NER300) will finance up to 50% of the selected projects.

R&D activities and European initiatives have therefore accelerated and intensified over the last few years. In addition to these actions, some Member States have developed their own national policy and strategies.

•Germany has financed approximately 300 R&D projects since 2004, firstly via the Cooretec programme «CO2-Reduction-Technology» (2004 - 2008) the aim of which was to promote the development of technology to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions produced by fossil fuel-based power plants, then with the Geotechnologien programme on CO2 storage (2005-2011).

• In Italy, CCS was identified as priority research theme in accordance with the Italian law No. 99 on energy adopted in 2009 and the national R&D plan on Energy, comprising two programmes on CO2 storage.

• In Spain, the total sum invested for reducing CO2 emissions was approximately €100 M between 2005 and 2010. Spain is currently supporting 4 R&D initiatives and 1 large-scale demonstrator project «The COMPOSTILLA Project».

• In the Netherlands, the government has been supporting the development of CCS since 2004 via various different research programmes such as Cato-1 and Cato-2. Within the scope of the European Economic Recovery Plan, the Dutch project Maasvlakte is carried by E.ON and GDF Suez.

• In France, the two main sources of public financing for R&D projects are the ANR (French National Research Agency) and the ADEME (French Agency for Environment and Energy Management).

In 2005, the ANR initiated a themed research programme on CO2 capture and storage. It finances 33 projects for more than €27 M in aid. In 2011, the ANR re-launched a call for proposals on CCUS within its new programme: Seed (Energy efficient and decarbonised systems).

Between 2001 and 2009, the ADEME financed 26 R&D projects on CCS. In 2008, the Agency launched a Call for Expressions of Interest which led to the financing of 4 research demonstrator projects for a total sum of €45 M:

> TGR-BF: an integrated project in metallurgy, operated by ArcelorMittal;

> France Nord: a project on the geological storage of CO2 operated by Total and GDF Suez;

> Pil-Ansu: a post-combustion CO2 capture project via anti-sublimation (frosting/defrosting CO2) carried by a consortium composed of EDF, GDF Suez, Alstom and Armines;

> C2A2: a post-combustion CO2 capture project using amine solvents, carried by EDF and Alstom in partnership with Veolia.

Moreover, following the 2010 French amended Finance Law, within the scope of Future Investments, the French government delegated the management of programmes covering the topic of CCUS:

> Demonstrators and technology platforms for renewable, low-carbon energy and green chemistry, managed by the ADEME (€1.35 Billion);

> Centres of excellence on low-carbon energy, managed by the ANR (€1 Billion)..

12

Roadmap CCUS

• In 2007, the United Kingdom launched a first call for tenders for the creation of CCS demonstrators. The government’s aim was to stimulate and structure this industry in order to position the country at the very forefront of this industry. This call for tenders resulted in the selection of two projects, the first at Longannet (Scottish Power) and the second at Kingsnorth (E.ON), the basic engineering study of which was financed. The government announced having maintained a budget of £1 Billion for the Longannet project, with E.ON having withdrawn. A second call for tenders (A Framework for the development of clean coal), launched at the end of 2009, led to the designing of a future programme comprising four CCS demonstrator projects. These projects could be conducted for CO2 capture on coal plants. At least one of these projects must capture the CO2 produced by a natural gas combined cycle plant.

7. Developing countriesDifferent positions are appearing:

•China considers CCS as a technology enabling it to not only achieve its objectives on reducing CO2 emissions, but also as a means for economic development and for distributing the country’s knowledge and technical know-how;

• India is showing a more reserved stance due to their complicated context for reducing CO2 emissions, and above all awaiting the economic and technical validation of CCS by developed countries;

•South Africa is looking to invest in developing CCS to reduce its CO2 emissions, while awaiting the implementation of an energy system founded on renewable and nuclear energy. In order to achieve this, there is an essential need for training and developing skills.

Therefore, a wide range of policies supporting large-scale projects can be added to those supporting R&D, in order to take part in deploying CCS on an industrial and commercial level. These public support policies vary from one country to another in terms of:

•national grants, for example in the United States with the DOE, or in France and Germany (to which European financing can be added);

• loans contingent upon the use of national technology, for example in Japan, on projects being developed on national territory or abroad to promote export;

•government calls for tenders, for example in the United Kingdom.

Furthermore, carbon storage via EOR, is being developed, more particularly in the United States, which is highly involved in pre-combustion technology..

International cooperationThe international scope of the CCS industry can be explained, on the one hand, by the issue of global warming, and on the other hand by its proximity to largely globalised industrial sectors, in particular that of energy. Furthermore, power plants generating fossil fuel-based energy and industrial sites such as cement works or steel works, capable of implementing CCS, are present in many countries. This is an emerging industry with high financial and social barriers requiring effort and risk sharing. International cooperations thus act as a driving force enabling the States involved to highlight the skills of national stakeholders so as to position the country on the future world market.

Many international initiatives have therefore arisen over the last few years. The list provided below provides a small preview of the European or international initiatives. It identifies the States highly involved on an international level, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and even Norway:

•ZEP: European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants;

•EERA: European Energy Research Alliance;

•CO2GeoNet: European Network of Excellence on CO2 geological storage;

•European CCS Demonstration Project Network;

• IEA WPFF: Working Party on Fossil Fuels;

• IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme;

•Biennial Regulatory Review;

• IEA Clean Coal Centre;

•CSLF: Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum;

•GCCSI: Global CO2 Capture & Storage Institute;

•Berlin Forum – Sustainable Fossil Fuels Working Group;

•CCUS: CO2 Capture Use & Storage Action Group.

France is today taking part in all of these initiatives. This involvement is vital in contributing to the visibility of the French industry abroad and in identifying market opportunities. This enables France to monitor the progress made by this industry abroad, to present French activities to an extensive circle of stakeholders and to take part in works for drafting roadmaps and drawing up a contacts network.

13

CO2 re-useSince the 1980s, numerous research works have studied the potential ways of using CO2 as a raw material. CO2 can either be used, without transformation, in industrial processes (replacing coolant gases, EOR) or be transformed to obtain chemical products or energy products. CO2 may also be used in biological processes (algae, biocatalysis) to produce biofuels or pharmaceutical products.

CO2 re-use is an industry only beginning its development. Nonetheless, communication within the scientific community has significantly increased with numerous publications and international conferences taking place. The most involved countries include the United States and Japan, which initiate the most advanced pilot projects (in particular for the production of synfuels). The United States strongly encourages research and the DOE has identified photoconversion and electroconversion of CO2 and water as a priority research topic. China is also very active in researching new catalytic methods and is entering into partnerships with American laboratories, in particular to accelerate the development of technology using syngas. These three major industrial powers benefit from international alliances helping them position themselves on this emerging market. In Europe and in France, several research projects have also been conducted over the last five years, however French activity is behind other countries such as the United States.

> 3. Challenges

Achieving the objectives set by the Grenelle de l’Environnement for the year 2020 and the Factor 4 objectives for the year 2050 would structure the deployment of this technology, research priorities, research demonstrator needs and technology platform and experimentation needs.

Moreover, 5 critical challenges must be overcome and are presented in this document without any specific order of priority:

Challenge No. 1: implementing CCS in FranceAchieving the 2050 objectives set by the Factor 4 programme requires the implementation of CCS in France as of the year 2020. Approximately 75 Mt/year of CO2 emissions are potentially affected by this objective in the fields of electricity generation and various industries (metallurgy, cement works, oil refining).

Challenge No. 2: maintaining the competitiveness of French industriesDespite a restricted local market and its largely low-carbon electricity generation, France today is in a good position in terms of CCS due to its industrial sector and public research and training institutions. French stakeholders are present throughout the value chain, which groups together activities relating to CO2 capture, transport, use and storage.

CCS in France could involve, at least initially, more industrial facilities rather than fossil fuel-based power plants. Indeed, CCS is critical for many industries, for example waste treatment and transformation, metallurgy, oil refining or even cement works, which have very few solutions in terms of reducing their CO2 emissions. Progress can be made in these fields and make an excellent export vector for French stakeholders.

In the medium-term, with the development of a group of fossil fuel-based power plants in France (in particular natural gas plants), the electricity generation sector will be affected in a more significant manner.

For many French industrialists, this challenge also involves the issue of controlling technology in order to both win market shares abroad and set up their facilities abroad.

14

Roadmap CCUS

Challenge No. 3: increasing the attractiveness of the national territoryIn response to national regulations and if the economic environment so allows, French industries also see CCS as providing a potential solution to strengthening or maintaining their activity within France.

Challenge No. 4: guaranteeing chain safety, from capture to geological storageIn order to guarantee the sustainability and safety of the CCS approach in both the short and long-term, the main challenge involves the capacity to anticipate and manage the accidental risks and potential health and environmental impacts associated to each link making up this chain.

For CO2 capture, the risks involve that of the industrial processes used. With regard to transport, risks involve the supercritical state of the CO2 (in the event of accidental rupture of the pipeline, little is known on the propagation speed of this breakage and the dispersion rate of polyphasic CO2). The confinement risks inherent upon geological storage are specific and could affect the population, ecosystems and groundwater. The production of thresholds or safety criteria and in-depth knowledge of the impacts of the entire chain are decisive elements affecting the deployment of this industry. Methodologies and models must be developed to control not only accidental risks but also more long-term risks, by studying both the «normal» evolution of the storage and the possible scenarios referred to as «altered evolutions». Similarly, the precise definition of site liability after closure is a key factor.

The potential leakage or transfer of the CO2 itself must be considered, in addition to the role played by auxiliary substances, which are one of three kinds: on the one hand, the compounds injected with the CO2 (for example nitrogen or sulphur compounds, metals or organic compounds in trace quantities), on the other hand the trace elements potentially re-mobilised within the reservoir or overburden following chemical disturbance, and finally, where applicable, the native gases expelled by the injected CO2 (for example methane or hydrogen sulphide).

Challenge No. 5: re-using CO2 in addition to CCSIn addition to the geological storage of CO2, part of the CO2 captured via CCS can be used, either as a utility or as a raw material to provide added value products. In order to go beyond the current uses for CO2, this industry must be coordinated with the CCS industry, which would also contribute to improving the competitiveness of this industry.

> 4. Key parameters

The construction of long-term scenarios is based on the identification of key parameters, variables whose contrasting evolution will result in radically different visions of the deployment of this technology by the year 2050. Without claiming to be exhaustive in nature, the group of experts has highlighted those that will be capable of exerting a significant influence on the deployment of this industry.

• Incentive measures and more generally the nature of the regulatory policies supporting the development and deployment of CCS in France, Europe and throughout the world;

•The nature and magnitude of the technical and/or social restrictions hindering CCS deployment.

The nature and intensity of regulatory policies

This groups together all public policy measures that must/could be implemented to support the development, experimentation and deployment of CCS technology, i.e. a wide range of elements such as:

•the implementation of standards and regulatory restrictions and/or incentive mechanisms to support industries in the long-term until their deployment in France, Europe and abroad (support for R&D and demonstration works, the creation of an explicit or implicit cost for the right to emit CO2 via a carbon tax or allowance mechanisms);

•The definition of conditions for deploying, exploiting and maintaining transport and storage infrastructures in the long-term. The authority in charge of this mission will in particular be responsible for coordinating the collection infrastructure, forecasting the construction of major pipelines and contracting with current pipeline owners in order to ease their incorporation into larger networks. Two examples have been provided:

> the public authorities assumes public service responsibility for the deployment, operation and maintenance of transport or storage infrastructures,

> the public authorities defines a public service charter for the deployment, operation and maintenance of transport or storage infrastructures with this mission being entrusted to private structures according to compensation terms.

15

•The definition of long-term liability rules that are essential to the correct management of storage sites (definition of liability in the event of a leak, role and responsibility of the public authorities – impossibility of ending up with orphan sites).

All experts, both in France and abroad, agree to the fact that, without defining the role of the public authorities and without strict public regulations, in particular via a minimum CO2 price, the conditions required for the development and deployment of CCS as an option for massively reducing CO2 emissions, will not be met.

The nature and magnitude of the technical and/or social restrictionsIn this document, the term «restrictions» groups together the parameters, issues, challenges and uncertainties capable of limiting exploitation of the potential of the CCS industry to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The main challenges involve:

•reducing energy expenditure connected to CO2 capture and essentially reducing the cost of CO2 capture,

• feedback on industrial facilities,

•validating off-shore and on-shore storage facilities in addition to their accessibility,

•controlling environmental and health risks (understanding phenomena, adapted monitoring),

•organising a public debate on the values transported by this technology,

•the local acceptance issues for projects.

These challenges must be seen from a dynamic point of view insofar as their global or relative level of importance may evolve over time, in particular according to progress made in research and the development of regional or global climate policies.

> 5. Visions

The purpose of these visions is to describe, often in a caricatural manner, the different conditions for deploying the CCUS industry. They do not claim to describe the future reality in 2050, but to define that which is possible so as to deduce a set of obstacles, research priorities and demonstrator, technology platform and experimentation needs. Reality will probably be a combination of the 4 visions provided in this roadmap. The group of experts has also chosen to include one medium-term vision (2020).

The 2020 visionThe industries for CO2 use are developing in parallel with the development of CO2 capture, transport and storage, however in much smaller proportions.

By the year 2020, most industrial CCS demonstrations shall be using proven technology on an industrial pilot scale. They enable different links in this chain to be tested and check the economic equation of the different options within this industry. CO2 capture solutions (post-combustion, oxy-fuel combustion, pre-combustion) have reached a mature stage leading to a first generation of plants equipped with CO2 capture facilities. According to the previsions set out by the IEA, between fifty and one hundred facilities will be involved out of the 1,000 that should constitute the existing group of power plants throughout the world in the year 2030. Second generation CO2 capture methods are tested on research demonstrators.

In order to benefit from the feedback and accelerate the series effect, the international community is organised and shares knowledge while honouring intellectual property rights. With this in mind and in order to inform the public about this technology, the European Commission has already set up a network of CCS demonstrators.

On a European level, following the European Economic Recovery Plan and the NER300, a dozen industrial-size demonstrators have been in operation for several years.

16

Roadmap CCUS

To achieve the Factor 4 objectives set for the year 2050, France has become organised (public authorities intervention, stakeholder structuration, technology demonstration, etc.) in order to ease the implementation of CO2 capture, transport and geological storage as of the year 2020:

•the technology, already studied in the electricity generation sector, is in its demonstration phase, in particular in metallurgy with TGR-BF technology studied by ArcelorMittal.

•combined cycle gas turbines are taking over from thermal power plants for generating electricity from coal in order to meet the seasonal peak load and semi-base load needs (outlined below). CO2 capture technology specific to gas combustion facilities are tested on the scale of research demonstrators.

Peak, base and semi-base load

Equipment operating in a relatively constant manner throughout the day or throughout the year (cooling apparatus, industrial equipment used in a continuous manner) define the base load. Other equipment (electric light bulbs, certain radiators, air-conditioning systems) only operate over reduced time periods throughout the year or throughout the day: this is known as peak load. Other piece of equipment have a mode of operation between the two, for example operating only in winter, however with "unbroken" consumption throughout the day: this is known as semi-base load.

•CO2 capture (and its geological storage) is also applied to facilities using biomass and CO2 sources from fermentation processes (paper mill, energy production, biofuel production, etc.): this is known as Bio-CCS. This can lead to a negative CO2 emissions report according to the percentage of biomass involved (in combustion facilities, the fuel is rarely made from 100% biomass). Bio-CCS must also be considered when taking into account problems such as land use (for food or energy purposes) or the selection of biomass according to its carbon footprint. A suitable incentive mechanism must be developed, with biofuels (wood, biomass, etc.) and CO2 produced by fermentation processes benefiting today, by convention, from a zero CO2 factor within the scope of the European Emissions Trading Scheme.

•the implementation of CCS is promoted in industrial areas (Dunkerque, le Béarn, Le Havre, Lorraine, Fos-sur-Mer), which group together numerous CO2-emitting fields of activity and potential CO2 users. CO2 use therefore contributes to reducing costs on the scale of an industrial site.

• in addition to the already industrialised means of using CO2, some methods (hydrogenation, microalgae, etc.) are reaching commercial maturity.

•the regulatory and financial frameworks (set-up and management of infrastructures, long-term site liability, incentive character, etc.) are clarified so as to encourage rapid deployment.

•feedback from the first demonstrations is subject to exchanges in the scientific and industrial communities.

17

2050 visionsThe coming together of the 2 key parameters identified in this roadmap leads to the creation of 4 different visions for the deployment of CCUS technology by the year 2050.

2050 Visions

High technical and/or social restrictions Low technical and/or social restrictions

Low incentive and regulatory measures

Vision 1: the marginal deployment of CCS

Vision 2: CCS reserved to a few major emitters and industrial sectors not able to apply alternative measures for reducing CO2

High incentive and regulatory measures

Vision 3: high level of pooling and preferred off-shore geological CO2 storage

Vision 4: large-scale off-shore and on-shore CCS deployment

The marginal deployment of CCSHypothesesThe lack of incentive measures, associated with social, national or local impasses and with technological or economic obstacles, leads to the marginal deployment of CCS.

ConsequencesThe barriers hindering the development of this industry remain high and projects remain few in number, with low industrial diffusion. The industrial sectors that cannot make use of alternative technology for reducing CO2 emissions, resort to purchasing allowances or credits, the price of which is high. The CO2 capture technology deployed is therefore specific to each industry, which has shared the financing of its own research and demonstration operations. Moreover, social restrictions limit the development of geological storage and transport.

Projects are concentrated on cases where industrial activities are experiencing growth and in geographical areas promoting CCS via:

•a context of regulatory incentives,

•reduced implementation costs,

•a geographical location suitable for storage.

In this context, CO2 use is promoted, however for limited quantities of CO2, which remain low when compared to the Factor 4 objectives. Nonetheless, the competitiveness of this industry does improve.

This vision is associated with a low training offer which does not enables French engineers and technicians to expand abroad.

18

Roadmap CCUS

CCS reserved to a few major emitters and industrial sectorsHypothesesIncentive and regulatory measures are low: the public authorities does not intervene to provide incentives for the deployment of the CCS industry. No notion of public service exists. The main operators in the field of CO2 transport and storage originate from the private sector.

The technical and/or social restrictions remain nonetheless more moderated than in vision 1. Concerted management for storage projects (for both off-shore and on-shore projects) is implemented locally. This vision is based on controlling the technical restrictions listed hereinafter (refer to Section 6).

ConsequencesCCS deployment is solely based on private stakeholders from high emitting sectors and/or for which alternative GHG reduction solutions (energy efficiency, renewable energy, etc.) do not suffice (for example metallurgy or cement works). Costs for implementing this technology and the liability for infrastructures and storage sites are supported by private operators, however the liability for storage sites is transferred to the State at the end of the operating and monitoring period (period of time defined according to the European directive on the geological storage of CO2). The deployment of the CCUS industry remains fragmented.

The scale and learning effects are limited and technology costs and CO2 emissions are only fractionally reduced, which is far from meeting the national and international objectives set. Similarly, the possibilities for pooling the different links of this industry are restricted: the sharing of transport infrastructures and storage sites between different stakeholders only occurs locally, for example within an industrial area.

Despite overcoming the technical obstacles and local social obstacles encountered, CCS remains a relatively expensive option for reducing GHG emissions. CO2 use nonetheless contributes to reducing costs within industrial sites where this can be applied, for example for oil industries where hydrocarbon recovery leads to a return on investment.

The training offer available to engineers and technicians is limited to only a few industrial sectors. This is not recognised on an international level.

High level of pooling and preferred off-shore geological CO2

storageHypothesesThe public authorities play a key role in deploying CCS technology. Incentive systems (taxes, allowances, etc.) are in place. Nonetheless, high technical and/or social restrictions hinder the large-scale deployment of CCS (international impasses for a global agreement on the climate preventing the global deployment of CCS, national or local stumbling blocks, technical impasses).

ConsequencesThe technical and economic restrictions push towards the pooling of storage sites between different operators. This limits real capacity problems suffered by storage sites and reduces the financial risks connected to the consequences of the impossibility of injecting the quantities intended.

The sociological restrictions hinder the development of on-shore CO2 storage, the consequence of which promotes off-shore storage, provided cost and use conflicts are controlled.

This vision is represented by:

• the predominance within Europe of North and West European countries in the carbon storage industry. The deployment difficulties encountered in East European countries are overcome by political agreements guaranteeing access to off-shore storage sites. In mainland France, the use of storage sites is limited to R&D needs;

•an increase in the size of off-shore storage facilities;

•an increase in storage operating costs (drilling, injection, monitoring) due to environmental hostility (sea);

•storage activities steered by the oil and gas industry, enabling them to thus compensate for the end of their North Sea production activities;

•an increase in transport costs leads to stresses within this link. The sharing of investments between stakeholders becomes a key factor. Third party access to transport networks and storage sites in return for compensation is possible, provided that strict rules are complied with on CO2 specifications. This pooling also leads to the birth (or strengthening) of large specialised public or private companies managing the transport networks and/or storage sites. A control body (such as the Energy Regulatory Commission) could be created;

• the prioritised orientation of monitoring activities for environmental and social purposes;

• the local deployment of alternative solutions to CCS for limiting CO2 emissions (energy efficiency, new production methods, CO2 re-use, etc.);

•few integrated projects given the high level of pooling. The chain can be broken down into 3 links (capture, shared transport, shared storage) with, where appropriate, different stakeholders according to the links and centralised stakeholders for transport and storage.

The training and research offer is essentially based on CO2 capture and transport.

19

Large-scale off-shore and on-shore CCS deploymentHypothesesThe notion of public service plays a key role in deploying CCS technology. Transport and storage operations are performed by supervised private or public operators (the operation and maintenance of transport infrastructures and storage sites are similar to the system in place for rail transport, telecommunications or the electric or gas grid). Incentive systems (taxes, allowances, etc.) are in place.

Technical and/or social restrictions are mild. Storage capacities are validated and environmental and health impacts are controlled throughout the industry. Concerted management for storage projects (for both on-shore and off-shore projects) is implemented locally.

ConsequencesCCS is progressively deployed on a large scale, both on-shore and off-shore.

Scale and learning effects lead to reduced costs except in the event of under capacity suffered by technology suppliers.

CO2 re-use is therefore, in terms of the volume of CO2 considered, implemented in a marginal manner.

In terms of infrastructure, this vision is represented by:

•the creation in Europe of on-shore storage hubs16, storage networks between Poland, Germany, Spain and France. They enable the exploitation of coal resources in Eastern Germany and Poland, thus guaranteeing a higher level of energy independence within the European Union;

•the creation in the rest of the world of on-shore and off-shore storage hubs based on a regional network mapping of the multiple sources of CO2;

•monitoring for safety and prevention purposes over long periods of time. This additional on-shore monitoring cost is nonetheless compensated by lower development costs for on-shore storage infrastructures compared to off-shore storage. The consultation process will without doubt lead to an agreement on the type of monitoring operations to be set up;

•a densification in transport networks in the long-term. Transport and storage costs are low and the industry develops in a more homogeneous manner on a global scale. This eases the attribution of a higher cost to CO2.

16 - The term hub describes a commercial concept developed by American airlines: this is their operations base (correspondence platform, main maintenance site). By extension, it is also used in other fields such as for telecommunications networks or in this case for carbon transport and storage of CO2.

Due to the relatively generalised geographical deployment of this technology, service providers can be developed alongside the main operators, offering emitting industries transport, storage or turnkey solutions (integrated chain).

The main CCS operators (publics or private) and service providers can export their know-how, initially within Europe then to other continents.

This vision is based on a comprehensive training offer to ensure the deployment of a high-tech industry.

20

Roadmap CCUS

> 6. Obstacles

The 2020 and 2050 visions lead to the identification of technological, economic, organisational and transversal obstacles, on the one hand for the CCS industry and on the other hand for CO2 use.

CCS obstacles2020 obstaclesThese appear to revolve around:

•CO2 capture costs. The main issue involves reducing technology costs for investments and operation (including via incentive mechanisms or international policies). Operating costs are mainly affected by the energy expenditure of capture processes;

•the flexibility of capture methods. These must be adapted, for example, to suit the transient state of the power plant and possibly to suit shorter operating times;

•the technical feasibility of CO2 storage, which must be demonstrated according to the following approaches:

> real storage capacity and reservoir integrity; > location (on-shore or off-shore, depth, characteristics of the reservoir and overburden, etc.);

> the injectivity and integrity; > storage-related phenomena, mainly using saline aquifers such as managing brine, a new problem connected to controlling storage pressure which may require extraction of the brine;

> the validation of monitoring and surveillance tools over the short and long-term.

•the environmental and health impacts of the entire chain (capture, transport, injection, storage);

•the inclusion of social feasibility17. Feedback from the first CO2 capture and storage demonstrator projects throughout the world place this issue at the very heart of the concerns expressed by project carriers, and make up a key condition affecting the development of this industry. The development of this technology raises issues on:

> a national and international level in terms of informing the population, which knows relatively little about this technology, and value debates,

> a local level with the need for information and efficient mediation terms regarding the impacts and risks associated with projects. This involves projects being managed with the populations concerned.

17 -The notion of social feasibility has been drawn up according to the same principle as technical feasibility. Studying the technical feasibility of a project means accepting that not everything is technically feasible and that physical and natural limits exist for these projects. Similarly, the notion of social feasibility insists on the fact that not everything is socially feasible and that value debates and interests exist that it may not be possible to overcome within the society.

•regulatory mechanisms which may go beyond the minimum framework imposed by the CO2 storage directive and thus accelerate CCS deployment;

•France’s involvement («lobbying») in setting up European and international regulations;

•the incorporation of CCS into devices such as Clean Development Mechanisms(CDM18);

•the integration into the ETS of the amount of emissions saved by CO2 capture for biomass combustion facilities or the installation of any other system taking this into account;

•the implementation of a financial architecture compatible with the specific characteristics of this industry, thus encouraging private stakeholders to invest in this technology. CCS investment costs are high, as are those of alternative energy sources. In energy markets, where trends lean towards liberalisation and reduced deadlines for profitability on investments, the public authorities play a key role by creating a regulatory framework promoting the deployment of this industry (incentive, demonstration aid, CO2 re-use, etc.).

2050 obstaclesBetween 2020-2050, other obstacles add to those previously described. These must be overcome so that the most ambitious visions provided in this roadmap are achieved. These involve:

•building a transport infrastructure (location, cost), major challenge: the distance between CO2 capture and storage facilities will be decisive in terms of costs;

•uncertainties on the price of CO2 emission allowances in the long-term. In addition to incentive mechanisms, the market must have a high CO2 allowance price;

•the competition for access to CO2 storage sites (low storage capacity, capacity limitations to avoid conflicts).

18 - As the main device of the Kyoto protocol, the Clean Development Mechanism incites Northern companies to finance operations for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Southern countries, in exchange for carbon allowances enabling them to compensate for their own emissions.

21

Obstacles hindering CO2 re-use2020 obstaclesThese appear to revolve around19:

•the validation of CO2 capture demonstrators so that high enough quantities of CO2 are available in the long-term;

•the mode and cost of the energy required to break down the CO2 molecule. Energy can be provided in the form of electricity, heat or solar energy;

•the production of green or low-carbon hydrogen at low costs;

•the level of purity of the CO2 from combustion flue gases, the use of CO2 containing impurities (sulphur compounds, dust, oxygen, heavy metals) capable of disrupting the catalysts and affecting product quality;

•the compliance of synthetic products. For example, cement produced by mineralisation must meet the same levels of performance (properties, quality, etc.) as classic cement. Similarly, the properties of chemical molecules (polycarbonates, other polymers, etc.) produced from CO2 must also equal those of synthetic molecules produced by traditional techniques;

•the integration into the ETS of the amount of emissions saved by CO2 use, or by any other incentive mechanism with similar effects;

•the validation of life cycle analyses and carbon footprints, according to the nature of the product (substitution product or new product) and the storage duration, one of the objectives of CO2 use being reducing CO2 emissions in the long-term.

2050 obstaclesBetween 2020-2050, other obstacles add to those previously described19, which, by this time, should have been overcome. These involve:

•the capacity to design quantities of products that can be marketed in the long-term. The main obstacle therefore involves fundamentally understanding the reactions taking place (chemical, biological reactions);

•the presence of a market with high CO2 prices;

•the mass production of low-carbon and carbon-free energy, as, in order to add environmental importance to CO2 use, the energy required to break down the CO2 molecule must not emit CO2 during production.

19 - «Panorama des voies de valorisation du CO2 », ADEME study, June 2010.

22

Roadmap CCUS

> 7. Research priorities

In accordance with the aforementioned obstacles, the table below presents the research topics that must be prioritised according to the group of experts in addition to the validation objectives (source: ZEP, experts of this roadmap). With regard to the latter, it is assumed that, at the deadline provided, the technology has been demonstrated on the basis of the objectives stipulated and is ready for deployment. The inventory of research projects financed by the ADEME or the ANR highlights the topics that are beginning to be covered on a national level, however also highlights any existing voids.

23

CO2 capturePost-combustion

Priority research topicsValidation objectives

ADEME/ANR research projects conducted or underway on this topicBefore 2020 2020-2030 After 2030

Optimising the energy efficiency of CO2 capture systems

• efficiency loss due to capture 10 percentage points in efficiency

< 10 percentage points in efficiency

< 5 percentage points in efficiency

• level of energy required for the regeneration of liquid solvents

< 3 GJ/t CO2 < 2 GJ/t CO2 < 1.5 GJ/t CO2

Optimising and developing new CO2 capture methods (absorption, adsorption, membrane, cryogenic, hydrate-based systems):

• more efficient contactors (reduced equipment sizes)

• minimised sensitivity to impurities or the co-capture of CO2/impurities

• …

1st generation20 2rd generation21 3rd generation22 ANR Gascogne: structured lining with carbon/carbon composites for CO2 capture by amine cleaning

ANR ACACIA 31: development of a new CO2 capture method by adsorption on a solid

ANR CapCO2: adsorption on a mineral phase

ANR NoMAC: new adsorption materials for CO2 capture

ANR CICADI: innovative contactor for CO2 capture

ANR MECAFI: membrane methods for CO2 capture from incinerator flue gases

ADEME Antisublimation: capture by anti-sublimation and co-capture of pollutants

ANR CO2 Sublim: capture by anti-sublimation of CO2-enriched flue gases

ANR SECOHYA : CO2 capture by gas hydrate

Recirculation of flue gases in gas turbines to optimise capture on combined cycle plants (combustion with flue gas recirculation)

Optimised method for CO2

Gas turbine operating with flue gas recirculation (stable and complete combustion)

ADEME CLOE: technico-economic study on recycling flue gases emitted by gas turbines

Energy integration of CO2capture systems in the full energy production scheme:

ANR CAPCO2: integration study for 4 types of emitters (cement furnace, blast furnace, gas and coal thermal power plants)

ADEME éCO2: energy integration study for two coal-based energy generation systems (post-combustion (amines) and oxy-fuel combustion)

• optimising the steam cycle Optimised steam cycle to minimise the overall energy penalty

• energy efficiency of flue gas treatment

Optimised energy efficiency of flue gas treatment

Energy efficiency of CO2

• capture by amine solvent (compression represents 31% of the overall energy penalty connected to CO2 capture)

85 kWh/t CO2 < 85 kWh/t CO2 82 kWh/t CO2

• capture by chilled ammonia 33 kWh/t CO2 < 33 kWh/t CO2 30 kWh/t CO2

20 - 1st generation technology corresponds to the CO2 capture methods currently available for an industrial-scale demonstration.

21 - 2nd generation technology represents the improvements made to existing technology (e.g.: improving solvent-based methods) or technology currently at a pilot stage.

22 - 3rd generation technology is currently in the research stage.

24

Roadmap CCUS

Oxy-fuel combustion

Priority research topicsValidation objectives ADEME/ANR research projects conducted or

underway on this topicBefore 2020 2020-2030 After 2030

Optimising the energy efficiency of air separation units23:

• advanced cryogenic distillation

• separation by membranes or adsorbents

14024 – 17025 kWh/t O2

12024 – 15025 kWh/t O2

9024 – 12025 kWh/t O2

ANR OXYBAC: oxygen production with low energy consumption levels dedicated to oxy-fuel combustion

Combustion in oxygen and flue gas recirculation within a boiler:

• combustion

• heat transfer

• corrosion and fouling

• pollutant control

• …

Pressurised combustion (pressurised CO2)

Combustion in the presence of a high of O2

ADEME OXYFUEL: oxy-fuel combustion with flue gas recirculation in a boiler

ANR TACoMA: oxy-fuel combustion with flue gas recirculation

ADEME OXYCOMB: risk control for oxy-fuel combustion boilers with flue gas recycling

Combustion in oxygen and flue gas recirculation within a gas turbine:

• combustion

• heat transfer

• design of the steam cycle

• …

Gas turbine operating in the presence of oxygen and flue gas recirculation

Flameless combustion

Integrated methods (chemical looping, membrane reactor):

• Development of materials for oxygen supply

• Development of reactors with efficient fuel conversion

Chemical looping

Membrane reactor

ANR CLC-MAT: materials for the "Chemical Looping Combustion" process

ADEME Chemical looping: improving the oxy-fuel combustion method by chemical looping on coal-based power plants

Energy integration of CO2 capture systems into the full energy production scheme.

Optimised steam cycle (heat recovery on compression)

ADEME éCO2: energy integration study for two coal-based energy generation systems (post-combustion (amines) and oxy-fuel combustion)

Energy efficiency of CO2 compression (compression represents 38% of the overall energy penalty connected to CO2 capture)

101 kWh/t CO2 < 101 kWh/t CO2

23 - Under ISO conditions: 1 bar, 15 °C, 60% relative humidity, O2 at atmospheric pressure. For O2 at 140 kPa (kilopascal), 10 kWh/tonne is added.

24 - With thermal integration of the ASU

25 - Without thermal integration of the ASU

25

Pre-combustion



Optimising the energy efficiency of air separation units26:

• advanced cryogenic distillation

• separation by membranes or adsorbents

250-310 kWh/t O2 (with nitrogen integration)

210-270 kWh/t O2 (with nitrogen integration)

Gasification/Reforming Upscaling to: large gasifiers (1200-1500 MWth)

CO2 separation Physical solvent Cryogenic separation

Hydrate-based separation

Separation in a membrane reactor

Development of hydrogen gas turbines:

• combustion control

• Low-NOx burner

• high-temperature materials

• …

H2

Highly efficient H2 gas turbine with low nitrogen oxide emissions

Energy integration of CO2 capture systems into the full energy production scheme in order to minimise auxiliary power consumption.

Integration of different units (air separation, CO conversion, CO2 separation unit) within the IGCC process

Energy efficiency of CO2 20-30 kWh/t CO2

26 - Under ISO conditions: 1 bar, 15 °C, 60% relative humidity.

26

Roadmap CCUS

CO2 capture systems specific to or adjusted to suit high-emitting industrial processes



CO2 capture systems for metallurgy CO2 separation integrated into the cast iron production process (e.g.: ULCOS-BF)

Separation demonstrators on smelting-reduction (Hisarna) and direct-reduction (ULCORED) methods

Deployment of this technology; pooling of transport networks and storage sites; transborder CO2 transport

ANR IMCAT: optimised absorbents for capturing CO2 from blast furnace gases

CO2 capture systems for cement works upstream

• integration of CO2 separation in the cement

• process pooling of CO2 collection

Integrated CO2 separation

Network-related logistics (connection, flow mixtures, variations in production, etc.)

in relation to network-related problems (VII B.3)

Pooling

in relation to network-related problems (p.30

ADEME Carbonatation: capture by calcium cycle for cement works

ADEME CARGESE : CO2 capture by calcareous adsorbents

ANR ACACIA 31 : development of a new CO2 capture method by adsorption on a solid

ANR CAPCO2 : adsorption on a mineral phase

27

Transversal



Improving the energy efficiency of power plants (ISO conditions, efficiency without CCS):

• high-temperature materials

• implementation of materials

> 46 % (LHV) for a pulverised coal power plant

> 60 % (LHV) for a natural gas combined cycle plant

> 48 % (LHV) for a pulverised coal power plant

> 62 % (LHV) for a natural gas combined cycle plant

> 50% (LHV) for a pulverised coal power plant

> 65% (LHV) for a natural gas combined cycle plant

Adapting capture methods to power plant load variations (flexibility)

Base load operation

Base and semi-base load operation

The environmental and health impacts of CO2 capture

• atmospheric emissions

• water consumption

• management of solid and liquid effluents

Acquiring knowledge on the environmental and health impacts and their control

Demonstrating the lack of impact via feedback from demonstrator sites

CO2 conditioning

• purification

• dehydration

Flue gas treatment methods adapted to the specific characteristics of the CO2 capture industry

28

Roadmap CCUS

CO2 transportPipelines

Priority research topicsValidation objectives ADEME/ANR research projects

conducted or underway on this topicBefore 2020 2020-2030 After 2030

Transport infrastructure Standards adapted to suit the different pipeline transport conditions

Materials Material strength of pipelines in the presence of impurities produced from various different processes (power plants, industrial processes, capture methods)

ADEME Transport CO2: knowledge on the role of impurities, corrosion and transport safety

Thermodynamics of dense fluids Control of polyphasic flows, acquisition of thermodynamic data on complex fluids

ADEME Transport CO2: knowledge on CO2 thermodynamics

ANR TRANSCO2: thermodynamics of CO2 + impurity mixtures

Security/monitoring

• leak-detection methods

• modelling atmospheric dispersion

Atmospheric dispersion model

Developing leak-detection techniques

Improving models and technology via feedback

29

Boats



Transport infrastructure Standards adapted to suit the different ship transport conditions

ANR TRANSCO2: study on CO2 shipping

Materials Material strength of ship tanks in the presence of impurities produced from various different processes (power plants, industrial processes, capture methods)

ADEME Transport CO2: knowledge on the role of impurities, corrosion and transport safety

30

Roadmap CCUS

Networks



Network economics Socio-economic modelling of transport

Transport infrastructure French transport infrastructure atlas This atlas shall also be intended to provide data for a European atlas.

Network-related logistics (connection, flow mixtures, variations in production, etc.)

Pooling

31

CO2 storageCharacterisation of storage sites



Assessing CO2 storage capacities Standardised methodology (v1)

Update via feedback received (v2)

Methodology (v3)

ANR Géocarbone PICOREF: pilot project for injecting CO2 into geological reservoirs in France

French atlas (v1), integrating sociological and social data on storage sites and associated transport infrastructure. This atlas shall also be intended to provide data for a European atlas.

Atlas (v2): assessing unconventional storage options (could a rock with low permeability be a good candidate for carbon storage tomorrow?)

Atlas (v3) ANR Géocarbone PICOREF: pilot project for CO2 injection in geological reservoirs in France

ADEME METSTOR: mapping storage sites in the Paris basin

ANR CHARCO: systematic acquisition of isotherms for CO2 and CH4 adsorption in order to better identify the most promising coals for carbon storage

ANR CO2FIX: [Bio]-mineralisation of CO2 in situ in basalt and ultra-basic rock

New storage site characterisation techniques

2nd generation technology with a low environmental impact (e.g.: electromagnetic method)

Geological modelling of storage sites

3D modelling of geological formations and their properties. Treatment of heterogeneities and uncertainties.

Improving models via data collected from injection and drilling operations

ANR Géocarbone PICOREF: pilot project for CO2 injection in geological reservoirs in France

ANR HETEROGENEITES CO2: assessing the effects of physical and mineralogical heterogeneities on the physicochemical processes associated with CO2 storage in an aquifer formation

ANR SHPCO2: high-performance simulation of geological CO2

32

Roadmap CCUS

Drilling and injection (1/2)

Priority research topicsValidation objectives ADEME/ANR research projects conducted

or underway on this topicBefore 2020 2020-2030 After 2030

Specification of drilling and injection techniques for the geological storage of CO2

Fracturing control (increase in injectivity)

ANR Géocarbone Intégrité: effect of pressure increases

Acquiring knowledge on the sustainability of well materials.

Demonstrating the sustainability of well materials and managing other existing wells

ANR INTERFACE: developing knowledge on the behaviour of the cement-overburden interface in order to control and prevent its alteration

ANR Puits-CO2: studying the degradation mechanisms for well materials (cement and steel) and their contact interfaces with CO2 containing auxiliary gases

Acquiring knowledge on the impact of minor compounds (co-injected gases, metals or gases potentially released into the natural environment) on the reservoir/well/overburden assembly.

Updating the minor compounds injected according to feedback

ANR Puits-CO2: studying the degradation mechanisms for well materials (cement and steel) and their contact interfaces with CO2 containing auxiliary gases

ANR Gaz annexes: role played by auxiliary gases on CO2

Acquiring knowledge on the physicochemical phenomena taking place around the well

ADEME SALTCO: influence of crystallisation phenomena on CO2 injectivity in aquifers

ANR Proche Puits: the behaviour of the sink and its surroundings upon CO2 injection

ANR Géocarbone Injectivité: controlling CO2 injectivity in geological storage reservoirs

Monitoring operations during CO2 Development and implementation of qualitative (alarm role) and quantitative (material balance) monitoring technology

Reference base for monitoring technology and feedback on the techniques used (optimal techniques according to the storage formation in question)

ADEME Programme IPGP: monitoring techniques

ADEME CO2VADOSE: geochemical monitoring of CO2 retention capacity in the area closest to the surface (Vadose zone)

ANR EMSAPCO2: development of active and passive seismic and electromagnetic methods for monitoring CO2 storage reservoirs

ANR Géocarbone Monitoring: surveying and monitoring geological CO2 storage

ANR HPPP-CO2: geophysical monitoring of fluid-rock interactions in the subsurface

ANR Optique CO2: in situ monitoring of leaks in real time (infrared technique)

ANR SENTINELLE: surface monitoring (upper overburden, soil, biosphere and nearby atmosphere)

33

Drilling and injection (2/2)

Priority research topicsValidation objectives ADEME/ANR research projects conducted

or underway on this topicBefore 2020 2020-2030 After 2030

Dynamic modelling of the reservoir rock and overburden during CO2

Methods and models for simulating thermal-hydrological-mechanical-chemical processes (THMC)

Improving models via the data collected from storage operations

Systemic treatment of uncertainties and deviations

ANR Géocarbone PICOREF: pilot project for CO2 injection in geological reservoirs in France


ANR SHPCO2: high-performance simulation of geological CO2 storage

ANR Carbonatation: modelling the dissolution and precipitation of carbonates in reservoir rock on pore, core and site scales.

ANR Proche Puits: the behaviour of the well and its surroundings upon CO2 injection

ANR Géocarbone Injectivité: controlling CO2 injectivity in geological storage reservoirs

ANR Géocarbone Intégrité: simulations coupled with hydromechanics and reactive transport for assessing the integrity of overburden rock

ANR INTERFACE: modelling coupled with the cement-overburden interface in order to control and prevent its alteration

34

Roadmap CCUS

Security/monitoring

Priority research topics

Validation objectives ADEME/ANR research projects conducted or underway on this topicBefore 2020 2020-2030 After 2030

Risks and impacts Development of methodologies and tools for analysing and assessing risks

Feedback from demonstrator sites improving risk analysis and assessment tools

ANR CRISCO2 : safety criteria for CO2 storage: qualitative and quantitative approach to risk scenarios

ADEME MANAUS: unified analysis and management methodology for storage-related risks

ADEME DIS-CO2: risk control for CO2injection wells

Acquiring knowledge on the environmental and health-related impacts and their control

Demonstrating the lack of impact via feedback from demonstrator sites

ADEME EUREKA: knowledge on the environmental and health-related impacts from CO2 storage

New leak-prevention devices

Development of prevention techniques (membranes, fluids, etc.)

Remediation Economic study and design guide for techniques and remediation (v1)

Conducting tests under real conditions and updating guides (v2)

Updating guides (v3) ANR CO-LINER: integrity of damaged overburden: characterisation, modelling and remediation

Site closure Economic study and design guide for site closure techniques (v1)

Conducting tests under real conditions and updating guides (v2)

Updating guides (v3)

Long-term monitoring

Techniques specific to CO2 storage and adapted to suit long periods of time

Alarm systems with passive technology

Organisational feasibility to maintain surveillance and keep site records (see digital assets).

Guides and tools made available by a public operator to perform site maintenance, monitoring and recording operations

Modelling of the dynamic evolution of sites in the long-term

3D Modelling of the evolution of CO2 stored over long periods of time in addition to the interactions taking place with nearby formations (aquifers, other wells)

Long-term comprehensive 3D modelling

Improving models via feedback


ANR SHPCO2: high-performance simulation of geological CO2 storage

Conflicts of use and synergies formed for different subsoil uses

Modelling of the conflicts and synergies connected to subsoil use and developing legal and economic methodologies

Decision-aid tool supporting an agency in charge of managing carbon storage sites

35

Transversal to the CCS industry



Logistics on the capture/transport/storage chain (e.g.: managing variations in production, a defect within one link of the chain on the other links).

Mathematical tools for helping to manage networks and control flows

Economic modelling (business model):

• interactions between energy industries

• technico-economic analysis of the different technological options available to the CCS industry

Economic scenarios

ANR SOCECO2: economy and sociology of the CO2 capture and geological storage industry

Life cycle analyses (LCA) Validated LCAs throughout the industry

Production of bio-energy with CO2 capture and storage (BECCS)

Technico-economic feasibility of the BECCS industry, financial incentives, regulations, pooling

Demonstrators on 1st and 2nd generation biofuels, thermal power plants, industries, biogas

Social feasibility Sociological analysis of sensitivities (opportunities, impasses, local and national context)

Understanding impasses and setting up new communication means

Social feasibility of the CCS industries for large-scale deployment

ADEME Etude au Havre: a technical and social pre-feasibility study for the installation of a CO2 capture, transport and storage chain grouping together emitters within the same catchment area (pooling)

ANR SOCECO2: economy and sociology of the CO2 capture and geological storage industry

36

Roadmap CCUS

CO2 re-use

Topic Priority research topicsValidation objectives

Before 2020 2020-2030 After 2030

Methods for re-using CO2

27The development of new methods for re-using CO2

Algae production (bioconversion) in tanks, hydrogenation

Algae production (bioconversion) in reactors, dry reforming

Biocatalysis, photoelectrocatalysis, electrolysis, thermochemistry, mineralisation

Transversal The development of efficient catalysts (efficiency, resistance to impurities, costs, etc.) for improving the methods for re-using CO2 with transformation

The role played by auxiliary compounds produced from various different processes (power plant, industrial processes, capture methods) on the methods for re-using CO2

Low-carbon hydrogen production

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) Validated LCAs for the methods implemented

27 - The methods of re-use to be prioritised in French research programmes are described in-depth in the study «Panorama des voies de valorisation du CO2 de l’ADEME (2010).

37

> 8. Technology deployment

Demonstrators provide the advantage of overcoming the main technological obstacles, identifying new potential research programmes, implementing economic reports, accelerating marketing operations and assessing the social acceptability of certain technology.

CCS demonstrator needsA research demonstrator must overcome the technological obstacles connected to the size of a system or its complexity born from a systems integration process. This makes up part of the technology research/development/industrialisation process, which occurs downstream of the research process and upstream of the industrialisation phases and which may lead to the launching of applied and/or fundamental research. The choice in size of the demonstrator passes from the laboratory stage to a size enabling the technology to be validated under real use conditions.

According to the panel of experts, two approaches must be considered for the implementation of new research demonstrators in the CCS industry:

•second generation CO2 capture methods (second generation solvents, chemical looping, etc.), the first call for expressions of interest involving first generation technology;

• issues relating to transport and storage safety (monitoring facilities, modelling, storage management, wells completion, etc.).

Bioenergy production with CO2 capture and storage (BECCS) could also be taken into account as this involves technology that would result in negative carbon footprints, thus contributing in a significant manner to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. BECCS must however complement other CO2 reduction measures such as land use or biomass selection.

Large-scale integrated demonstration projects could also be implemented with first generation technology, according to the NER300 calls for proposals.

The table hereinafter specifies the vision drawn up by the panel of experts for the demonstrator implementation periods (research demonstrator and industrial-scale demonstrator) in order to remain consistent with the notion of deploying this industry from the year 2020.

38

Roadmap CCUS

Table 2: Demonstrator implementation period (operational start-up) before commercial deployment

Research Demonstrator

Industrial-scale Demonstrator Deployment

1st generation CO2 capture technology 2010-2015 2015-2017 2020

2nd generation CO2capture technology 2010-2020 2017-2022 2025

CO2 transport 2015-2020 From capture to a storage site

After 2020, the progressive implantation of networks

CO2 storage in depleted hydrocarbons reservoirs 2010-2015 2015-2020 2020

CO2storage in deep saline aquifers 2010-2015 2015-2020 2020-2025

CO2storage in unusable coal seams 2015-2020 2020-2030 2030

CO2storage in basalt formations 2015-2020 2020-2030 2030

CO2storage in other types of geological formation 2020-2030 2030-2035 2035

Demonstrator needs for CO2 re-useThe means for re-using CO2 in France are represented in figure 4 below. Some of these means, for example algae culture, CO2 hydrogenation or mineralisation (means 4, 5 and 10) have reached a sufficiently high degree of maturity to begin the development of demonstrator projects.

Research

Demonstrator

Optimisation

Minor Intermediate Major

French maturity

Industrialassets

12 8

6

9

4

10

113

5

1

2

7

Industrialised

Short-term

Medium-term

Long-term

List of methods for CO2 re-use

1. Enhanced hydrocarbon recovery

2. Industrial use

3. Organic synthesis

4. Mineralisation

5. Hydrogenation

6. Dry reforming

7. Electrolysis

8. Photo(electro)catalysis

9. Thermochemistry

10. Microalgae - Open tanks

11. Microalgae - Photobioreactors

12. Biocatalysis

Figure 4: Methods of use in France

39

Given the international context and the presence of leading countries such as Japan or the United States, which already support and finance several means of use (pilot hydrogenation units, financial aid for start-up businesses involved in microalgae culture, etc., French stakeholders could consider developing international partnerships and consortiums..

Technology platform needsWhether this involves research or the implementation of proven technology, the dynamics around CCS or CO2 re-use in France must be supported by organised stakeholder networks, which could launch a structuration of these industries.

The purpose of a technology platform is to ensure that technology is transferred between the research sector and industrial sector. It pools the means available for providing services or resources, which enable an open community of users (public or private) to successfully undertake their R&D and innovation projects. It enables users to conduct tests and trials with access to efficient means that they could not develop themselves.

In accordance with the creation of Institutes of Excellence in the field of Low-Carbon Energy (IEED30), the creation of technology platforms promotes:

•symbiosis between industrialists and research laboratories or between industrialists,

•the testing of technology to support the choices made and their implementation,

•the overcoming of specific obstacles.

Multipurpose CCUS technology platforms could have the following properties:

•be positioned in a location containing a source of CO2 (preferably a natural site or combustion unit),

•enable the testing and development of different processes, tools and methodologies,

•be open to any researcher or organisation, according to access conditions and ad hoc procedures,

•be R&D locations, however also training, information and communication locations for the CCUS industry.

28 - The IEED are public research/industry interdisciplinary platforms in the field of low-carbon energies.

Other needsTrainingThe CCUS industry could only exist if high-level training is developed, offering international opportunities. Training centres of excellence (BMD31 or university institutes, engineering schools, further training programmes) must become strategic exchange centres for training French and foreign engineers, thus ensuring the sustainability of French CCUS know-how.

Analysing the French industrial sectorsIn order to develop a competitive French offer on CCUS, all stakeholders must become mobilised, including major groups and SMEs comprised of both service and technology providers. Given the proximity with the oil industry, the existing company must be analysed in order to determine to what extent existing skills can be used in CCUS.

Promoting French skills abroadA coordinated and coherent international approach is fundamental. Participation in international initiatives not only enables French stakeholders to follow the progress made within this industry on an international level, but also presents French activities to an extensive circle of participants and enables French stakeholders to take part in drawing up roadmaps and in creating a contacts network. Bilateral encounters with chosen countries could be organised in order to bring together stakeholders and identify areas of cooperation. This approach requires coordinated actions between the public authorities, research institutes and industrialists.

29 - BMD: Bachelors, Masters, Doctorate.

The ADEME in short

The French Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME) is a public agency under the triple authority of the Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development, Transport and Housing, the Ministry of Higher Education and Research and the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Industry. The agency is active in the implementation of public policy in the areas of the environment, energy and sustainable development.

ADEME provides expertise and advisory services to businesses, local authorities and communities, government bodies and the public at large, to enable them to establish and consolidate their environmental action. As part of this work the agency helps finance projects, from research to implementation, in the following areas: waste management, soil conservation, energy efficiency and renewable energy, air quality and noise abatement.

www.ademe.fr

ADEME 20, avenue du Grésillé BP 90406 l 49004 Angers Cedex 01

www.ademe.fr

97

82

35

83

82

11

3

Ref.

: 731

8 - I

SBN

: 97

8-2-

3583

8-21

1-3

- Avr

il 20

11 :

AX

EL C

lient

.com

Ph

oto

: Pho

tos.c

om -

Mon

tage

: A

XEL

Clie

nt.co

m

MINISTRY OF ECOLOGY, SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPEMENT

AND ENERGY

MINISTRYOF HIGHER EDUCATION

AND RESEARCH

Documents

The capture, transport, geological storage and re-use of