Focus Questions for LoCaRe events(draft)
Issued by LoCaRe Working Group, 20th December 2010
The Working Group of LoCaRe has the task to condense the results of all events within the framework of
LoCaRe (conferences, workshops, site vistits) in a report about best practices within the Regions and an
analysis of the ‘Why and How’ of these good practices in order to generate conclusions and
recommendations for the Regions in energy- and climate policies.
This product will be presented to the Steering Group of Locare as important input for the final report of
Locare.
The Working Group needs information from the LoCaRe events and therefore a set of questions was
developed to focus on the main questions that needs answers. The Working Group offers this set as a
tool to organise these events effectively and to deliver the information needed for the report.
Questions for conferences, site visits and workshops:
1. Give a description of the subject; best practice ; theme that was chosen
2. Why was this subject choosen and what was the role or influence of the Region in this subject.
3. What is the legal position of the Region in this subject and why did the Region choose to act
as described. Which alternative approaches were possible or considered by the Region?
4. Describe the Strenghts and Weaknesses of the Regions in this subject in terms of:
 Social capital
 Economics
 Technical situation or considerations
5. Is this subject or best practice applicable to other Regions;? What are the conditions to be
met?
6. Describe the obstacles that prevent a smooth execution of the relevant policy in the Regions
and formulate (a) recommendation(s) to overcome this obstacle
Workshop on Carbon Capture and Storage, Carbon Capture and Recovery and
Carbon Sinks
Why capture CO2? And how? Do we have to store CO2 or do we need to recycle ? Which
methods are relevant and for which purposes? How do local project regional authorities
cope with strategies? Is there a business potential in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
and Carbon Sinks (CS)? The challenges on CCS and CS are rising and the questions are
numerous and therefore the theme is one of the Sub-themes in the LoCaRe project.
The Workshop and the connected site visit address both business potentials as well as
planning and leadership challenges in CCS and CS as a means of climate change
mitigation.
The workshop:
The workshop did not deal with technologies for capture or artificial storage of CO2, but it was
mentioned that the technologies has to be improved, as CCS are supposed to be part of the
future solution.
The intention with the workshop was to discuss the different strategies, and the role of the
regions.
All presentations from the workshop and sitevisist with theory, figures and numbers are
available at the LoCaRe website
CARBON CAPTURE, REGENERATION & STORAGE
Carbon constrain in fossil or non-fossil based future? / Lorie Hamelin from the University of
Southern Denmark/
All regions has to be aware of the need for energy in relation to available resources. As ironic
as it can be: while (too much) carbon is the problem of the fossil based society – (too little)
carbon is the bottleneck of the fossil free society.
At the same time studies show that there will be a gap in the 2050 plans for a fossil-free society.
Studies are based on energy from renewables (wind, solar, geothermal, biomass etc.) and need
for energy after integration of energy efficient technologies. The need is 5 times more biomass
on top of today’s agriculture output for full fossil substitution by biomass, and possible
solutions are:
- to increase land for agriculture/cultivation. But this land is difficult and expensive to cultivate
- to import more biomass/energy
- to regenerate CO2
We therefore have to find solutions in the non fossil society based on biomass. Lorie therefore
strongly promoted the idea of capturing, upgrading and recycling of bio-carbon as a
precondition for the non fossil system and to close the carbon-gap. The increasing non-stable
energy from wind, solar etc. will be used as energy supply for the process to recycle energy
from the captured carbon (hydrogenation and recycling) and make it to a stable energy supply
(methane and diesel).
Pro
It is expected to be a business
potential in technologies for
carbon recycling
Carbon recycling is seen as a
way to solve the carbon-gap
in the future non fossil based
society
Cons
Costs: recycling of carbon will
give an extra cost of appr.
275€/barrel oil equivalent
Development: the technique
are not yet ready to full scale
implementation and the Danish
company (Haldor Topsøe)
expect the technique to be
ready for implementation in 5
years
Regions influence
DK:
Regions political influence
is limited.
No administrative
responsibilities/possibilities
in planning or permitting
Carbon capture and storage:
Maurice Hanegraf presented “best practice on Carbon Capture and Storage” from the Rotterdam
area. Rotterdam harbour area was presented as CO2-hub because of a concentration of energy
production and the location at the harbour.
MH see CCS as a part of the climate-solution, an estimation shows that it can provide 24 % of
the needed CO2 reduction. The technologies are operable and it is the most cost – effective way
to reduce GHG, even it still is at a rather high cost. CCS is temporary until others solutions are
available for reasonable costs.
Captured CO2 will be stored offshore and part of it used in relation to extraction of oil.
Rotterdam expects Carbon capture & storage to have business potential (knowledge, technologies and
CO2)
Pro
Cons
Regions influence
DK:
Regions political influence
is limited.
Some of the pros for CCS
are that no matter the future
investment in renewable
energy and energy
efficiency, there will be a
need for energy supply from
oil- and coal fired CPH.
Thereby CCS will contribute
to reduce GHG-emissions
and improve CHP’s climate
profile.
Resistance from citizens due to
possible risk of CO2 leakage from
storage leading to health risk and
environmental damage.
Captured CO2 can replace other
resources in the task of
“enhanced oil recovery”
Lack of documentation for the
safety and long-term aspects
of carbon storage; e.g. the
risk of CO2 leakage and
possible threat to environment
and health
No administrative
responsibilities/possibilities
in planning or permitting
Waste of energy. The proces
of capture and storage has a
Possible political and
financial support to
The CCS technology is
known and possible to use
full-scale even though it is
still a new technology. It is
seen as the most cost effective GHG-reduction and
as a part of the solution for
immediate GHG-reductions
substantial energy
consumption
development and fullscale
test of new technologies
Expected business potential
in CCS; CO2 as a valuable
product, selling the
technology and knowledge
of CO2 capture and
storage?
CARBON SINKS
CARBON CARE Elena Tamburini from the University of Ferrara
The aim of the project is to develop a joint methodological approach to CO2 reductions and set up
recommendations and strategies for local sequestration in forest and agriculture. An important part
of the Sub-project is awareness raising and capacity building in local areas.
No results of the project were presented
Chestnut forests as Carbon Sinks Celia Martinez, CETEMAS, the Technical Forest Centre of
Madera in Asturias. CETEMAS aims at assessing the potential carbon stock change due to
improvement in management of Chestnut forests in Asturias. The knowledge about the potential of
mitigation of Carbon Capture in products will be transferred to local farmers and forest owners.
Pro
High business potential
Cons
Long term investments
Regions influence
DK:
Management of own land as
an example of best practice
High quality products
Most chesnut woods are small,
private owned areas
Increase carbon sequestration
Effect on biodiversity?
Effect on biodiversity?
No administrative
responsibilities/possibilities
in planning or permitting
Development of a business
plan,
Facilitate the process;
information about
economy, management,
financing the investment ,
– develop a business
plan
Carbon Sinks in Denmark – a Case Study, Anne Mette Benzon, COWI and Karsten Moeller,
University of Aarhus
There has been made a socio-economic comparison of the proposed land use in territorial planning, which
affects both the nitrogen, phosphorus and CO2. As an example, the study of CO2 footprint in Aarhus
Municipality (Denmark) was shown. The study was made to get an overview of the CO2-effects of approved
plans and future plans for territorial planning, where land use changed primarily from farm land to
afforestation, new wetlands, new buffer strips/buffer zones (next to streams and lakes), areas for new nature
and areas for new urban developmen
A case study on Carbon Sinks in the Aarhus area was presented. The objective of the case study
was to get an overview of the CO2 effects of approved future territorial plans. It was also to conduct
a socio-economic comparison of the proposed plans in the open areas, which affects both the
nitrogen, the phosphorus and the CO2.
Analyses of the measures show a synergy between reducing CO2 emissions and other objectives for
changing land uses. They also showed that reforestation is the most effective instrument as Carbon
Sinks.
The conclusions were that if the goal is solely to reduce CO2 emissions, carbon sinks are not the
cheapest way forward, compared with other common CO2 reduction measures such as sustainable
electricity, heat and traffic. However, CO2 reduction measures as carbon sinks based on changes in
use of areas should be regarded and valued as a positive side effect to planned effort to improve the
water environment, prevent pollution of groundwater, create more recreational areas and general
urban development.
Wetlands are important sources and sinks of green house gases due to huge carbon pool in the soils.
However only improved knowledge of restoration projects can help maximise the carbon sinks
processes while minimising the carbon sources in the wetlands.
Pro
Cons
Studies and calculation on
the carbon footprint, including
CCS and CS for territorial
planning, makes the impact
on climate visible for
politicians and other
stakeholders
Carbon footprint – cost-benefit - or
others; the assessments are hard
to quantify and are often only
valueable in combination with
other assessments. It is a
challenge that Carbon sinks is
most valuable on long term and
pay back time is a problem for
most investors/politicians
increased carbon
sequestration will be a
positive element in the
decision process for territorial
planning
Risk of misinterpretation of the
results of carbon footprint
Calculation of carbon
footprint gives a valuable
In most cases change in use of
areas can not only be planned
Regions influence
No administration of
territorial planning
Can provide local
authorities with some
general analysis to
describe the potential
for carbon sinks in
different planning
situations
demonstration of the
synergetic effects of a
planned change in territorial
planning.
because of its impact on CO2reduction, but has to integrate the
synergetic effects and to be
planned in combination with
objectives of more recreational
areas, protection of ground water
resources through afforestation,
implementation of national/EU
regulations e.g. nature protection
and conservation, reduction of
nitrogen and phosphorus
emissions etc.
Aarstiderne and Barritskov; “The Season” is a company, who integrate agriculture, production and sale
of different kind of crops, raise of cattle, energyproduction ect. “The Season” has a strategy to be a part
af the CO2-solution rather than a part of the problem. “The Season has a strategy to sequester carbon
equal to a minimum of 3000 tonnes of CO2-equivalents.
The task of the GreenCarbon initiative is to develop CO2 storage in eco-systems to become a
workable tool to mitigate climate change. The first step has been to make a case study on the
medium-sized Danish farm called Barritskov where the enterprise Aarstiderne is located.
Grass is more climate friendly than corn. All plants absorb CO2 from the atmosphere in the
photosynthesis and bind it in leaves and root system. The difference is that grass stores CO2
much better than corn. A field of grass that is not cultivated every year, develops a
comprehensive root system that binds CO2 efficiently in the soil.
Pro
Business potential as CO2agri certificates and/or
knowhow
Positive for both CO2,
biodiversity and sustainability
Cons
Trade of CO2-certificates; to
be decided if they should be
managed on local, regional,
national or EU
Regions influence
No administration of
territorial planning
No administrative
responsibilities/possibilities
in permitting for
farmers/agriculture
CO2-certificates for foodstuff
The BlackCarbon initiative at Barritskov is based on a combined heat and power unit that
converts biomass into biochar which is a charcoal-like product. Through the process of
pyrolysis, bioenergy is released and the biochar can be applied to the soil. Biochar is good for
both soil and climate: because of its fibrous composition, biochar is able to retain water,
minerals and nutrients. Also, biochar is an extremely effective carbon sink that sequesters
carbon for centuries with very little degradation.
Pro
Biochar may be useful for
improving yields in poor soils
to increase production of food
and biomass for bioenergy
it improves water use
efficiently and avoids
leaching of pesticides
The business potential in
production and sale of biochar
is huge
Cons
Regions influence
No administration of
territorial planning
Effective ways to apply
biochar to the soil has to be
developed further
Storage of biochar is difficult
and there is no solution so far
to eliminate the risks
No administrative
responsibilities/possibilities
in permitting
CCS & CS in the Danish context:
In the Danish context, there has been made some studies and plans for the energy supply in
2050. The ambition is to base the energy on renewable and more efficiency. But due to the
urgent need of reducing GHG, there are also lots of debate on the possibility of using CCS at the
coal fired CHP.
There is quite some political resistance against CCS, as there is more perspective in investments
in renewable and energy efficiency and further more, there are massive resistance from the
Danish population against artificial Carbon Storage, especially from the people nearby the
planned storage site.
The regions in Denmark have no formal authority in questions about CCS, but only possible
political influence.
The Region can to some extend support the business potential for CCS and/or CCR for the
purpose of regional growth and development by allocating eg. EU-funding to the project.