BEIS NETS0010
Written evidence submitted by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
What role can negative emissions technologies play in Net Zero Britain?
Greenhouse Gas Removal methods (GGRs) is the name given to a group of methods that actively remove greenhouse gases, predominantly CO2, from the atmosphere, also commonly referred to as Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) methods and Negative Emission Technologies (NETs)[1]. The range of GGR approaches fall broadly into two categories:
Q: What contribution could NETs (through DACCS, BECCS, and/or other NETs) make to achieving net zero by 2050?
Despite uncertainty about the exact mix of GGRs over the coming decades, we are clear that both nature-based and ‘engineered’ removal methods will be necessary to balance residual emissions from the difficult to abate sectors of the economy such as industry, agriculture and aviation by 2050. For engineered removals, a portfolio approach, supporting R&D, demonstration, and commercialisation of a wide range of removal solutions will be necessary in the 2020s. When considering the delivery of our Nationally Determined Contribution and Carbon Budget 6, BEIS’ analysis indicates that engineered removals could contribute at least 5MtCO2 by 2030 and around 23 MtCO2 by 2035, up from 0 MtCO2 today, based on the current evidence base and projects in the pipeline.
By the early 2030s, we expect the portfolio of GGRs deployed at scale to expand as other technologies mature and demand from end-use sectors increases. Beyond the contribution of power BECCS to the electricity grid, production of hydrogen, biogas/biomethane fuels with BECCS could also support the decarbonisation of transport, industry, waste sector and potentially power and heat in buildings. The early 2030s could also see progress in deployment of DACCS technologies, thanks to efforts in demonstration and piloting during the 2020s.
By 2050, deployment of engineered removals at large scale - between 75 and 81 MtCO2 per year, will be needed to help compensate residual emissions. This will be equivalent to around 45-80% of total emissions captured across the UK economy and will predominantly see the scale up of DACCS and BECCS with gasification technologies.
Q: Which ‘hard to decarbonise’ sectors could benefit most from NETs, and which should be prioritised?
The primary method of achieving net zero is to take ambitious decarbonisation measures across society. However, we must also acknowledge that sectors such as international aviation and shipping, agriculture and waste will be difficult to decarbonise completely by 2050. Greenhouse gas removals (GGR) are therefore essential to compensate for the residual emissions arising from these sectors.
Q: At what technological stage are current NETs, and what is the likely timeframe that will allow NETs to be operational at scale in the UK?
Q: What are, and have been, the barriers to further development of NETs? How can such barriers be overcome?
Evidence around scale-up potential of engineered GGRs in the UK is rapidly evolving, alongside innovation in the sector. This evidence[2],[3] suggests that the next decade will be critical and several GGR solutions will have to be scaled-up significantly during the late 2020s and early 2030s to contribute effectively to later carbon budgets and our net zero target, as well as to build our evidence and experience in the sector.
Technological readiness and scalability
The majority of engineered GGR methods are at a pre-commercial stage and require innovation and demonstration support to be ready for commercial deployment. To address this, GGR technologies were included as one of ten priority areas in the £1 billion Net Zero Innovation Portfolio (NZIP) announced in the Ten Point Plan for a green industrial revolution and confirmed in the Net Zero Strategy.[4] The government is investing £100 million in the research, development, and demonstration of greenhouse gas removals across multiple programmes. This includes BEIS’s £70m DAC and other GGR innovation competition which will support the construction of pilot plants for a range of promising technologies to help them achieve commercial realisation.[5] The programme’s pilot projects could remove between 100 and 1,000 tonnes of CO2e per year in 2025 and have the potential to scale up to millions of tonnes by the 2030s.
Through the government’s Strategic Priorities Fund, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) will invest £31.5 million in five land-based GGR demonstrator projects and a central hub. The hub will lead on coordination across the programme, as well as conducting cross-cutting research on the environmental, economic, social, ethical and governance implications of GGR approaches. The Biomass Feedstocks Innovation Programme is also funded as part of the NZIP and aims to increase the production of sustainable domestic biomass by funding innovative ideas that address barrier to production. We have recently published the outputs of two BEIS commissioned research projects designed to further our understanding and evidence base on GGR methods and their deployment[6]. An updated assessment of greenhouse gas removal methods and their potential deployment in the UK provides a comprehensive and up-to-date assessment of lifecycle costs, technology readiness level (TRL), deployment potential to 2050 and lifecycle net removal potential of GGR methods.
Financial barriers
One of the fundamental barriers to GGR deployment is the lack of an established market or customer demand for engineered removals, especially one that values permanence of CO2 removal. GGR technologies are associated with high capital and operational costs, making private investment unattractive in the absence of a stable revenue stream for the provision of negative emissions. The government’s vision is to establish a liquid market for carbon removals, in which polluters have a strong policy or financial incentive to invest in GGRs to compensate for their remaining emissions.
To advance our ambition to stimulate the GGRs sector, we will consult on business models for engineered GGRs in spring 2022. This will set out details of our preferred mechanisms to incentivise early investment and enable commercial demonstration of a range of GGR technologies from the mid-to-late 2020s. The consultation will consider how GGR incentives interact with policies and business models currently under development for CCUS, hydrogen production, sustainable aviation fuels and other relevant sectors, along with wider carbon pricing policy. It will also consider how near-term policy incentives can most effectively leverage private investment and enable a transition towards a market-led framework as the sector matures.
Ability to verify the effectiveness of a GGR process
There is a need to ensure that GGRs are ‘genuine’ and that they result in a permanent net reduction in atmospheric carbon. This is a complex task which, at least in the near-term, may require case-by-case scrutiny of the supply chains and indirect emissions of GGR projects. In April this year, BEIS established a GGR monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) Task and Finish Group, comprised of experts across government, industry, academia, and regulatory services. The role of the group was to provide advice and guidance on the development of a MRV policy approach for GGR methods. One of the group’s recommendations is to establish an independent function to provide robust monitoring, reporting and verification of GGRs. In the Net Zero Strategy, government committed to exploring options for an MRV function.
Transport and storage networks
We are mindful that the availability of CO2 transport and storage infrastructure as part of the development of carbon capture, usage and storage (CCUS) will be crucial to the deployment of engineered GGR solutions, which must geologically store their gross captured carbon. The UK has some of the best offshore CO2 storage potential in Europe[7] allowing it to store UK emissions and potentially CO2 imports from other countries.
As outlined in our Net Zero Strategy, the Prime Minister’s Ten Point Plan established a commitment to deploy CCUS in a minimum of two industrial clusters by the mid-2020s, and four by 2030 at the latest. Our aim is to use CCUS technology to capture and store 20-30MtCO2 per year by 2030, forming the foundations for future investment and potential export opportunities. Alongside its importance for deploying engineered greenhouse gas removal technologies, CCUS will be crucial for industrial decarbonisation, low carbon power and delivering our 5GW by 2030 low carbon hydrogen production ambition.
Q: What, if any, are the links and co-benefits to other technological innovations, such as sustainable aviation fuel or sustainability in the energy sector?
In general, sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) achieve lifecycle emissions savings of 70% compared with conventional jet fuel, when fully replacing kerosene. Complementing SAF with CCUS enables CO2 to be used or stored during the production process, potentially resulting in carbon neutral or carbon negative aviation fuels. Thus, CCUS technologies are viewed as pivotal in achieving net zero aviation.
The Government has brought forward proposals to introduce a SAF blending mandate that rewards credits for SAF proportionate to the amount of GHG savings achieved. If this goes ahead, it is expected to incentivise the use of CCUS technologies as suppliers will receive greater rewards for their fuel. The Jet Zero Council have also indicated that CCS policies will influence the commercial feasibility of SAF.
In terms of links and co-benefits in the energy sector, there are numerous other routes for BECCS to deliver both low-emission energy and negative emissions. For example, BECCS could be deployed alongside technologies such as conventional combustion, gasification, steam methane reforming and anaerobic digestion- which could provide electricity, heat, or hydrogen alongside negative emissions. Future expansion of BECCS will be focused where it can be coupled with technologies where additional benefits can be gained (e.g. more valuable energy products, waste management etc.).
Q: What are the trade-offs between availability of land and availability of sustainable biomass to make NETs a viable option in and beyond the UK?
Land use change will be required to accommodate GGRs, either directly through nature based GGRs such as afforestation or indirectly from increased production of biomass, such as perennial energy crops or short rotation forestry, to use for BECCS.
Land availability is a considerable challenge to the expansion of supply of domestically grown biomass to the UK, and will be a key consideration as policy is developed. We will need to manage land-use trade-offs to ensure we grow perennial energy crops and short rotation forestry for energy generation and other end-uses, while allowing for afforestation and peatland restoration to sequester and avoid emissions. We will also need to consider wider demands from land such as agriculture, housing, infrastructure, and environmental goals.
In order to manage these multiple demands on land, Government is taking a systemic and geographically-targeted approach, which considers the complex range of interacting social, economic, and demographic factors, and acknowledges the important of appropriate local governance and delivery structures. As such, Government is undertaking spatial modelling and developing tools which aim to allow decision makers to gain new insights and understanding. This will help to inform Defra’s biomass policy.
The upcoming Biomass Strategy (due to publish in 2022) will review the amount of sustainable biomass available to the UK and set out a framework for how this resource can be best utilised across the economy to help achieve our net zero target. The Strategy will also assess the UK’s current sustainability standards, to see where and how we can improve them even further.
Q: What are the options for the storage of captured carbon, whether onshore or offshore?
CO2 transport and storage infrastructure will be crucial to the deployment of engineered GGR solutions, which must geologically store their gross captured carbon. The UK has some of the best offshore CO2 storage potential in Europe allowing it to store UK CO2 emissions and potentially CO2 imports from other countries.6 A number of projects are currently developing CO2 storage sites in the UK in either depleted oil and gas reservoirs or saline aquifers and we have a robust regulatory framework in place to scrutinise plans and ensure that these stores are operated in a safe and secure manner.
Q: What other drawbacks for the environment and society would need to be overcome to make NETs operational?
We must ensure that GGR technologies do not create new environmental risks. For instance, feedstock production for BECCS, biochar and wood in construction have potentially significant land requirements which, if mismanaged, could pose risks to biodiversity. The deployment of BECCS could also potentially impact local air quality and we must ensure that regulation and abatement on emissions other than CO2 develop to reflect this. It is also necessary to ensure resilience to the impact future climate change might have on the feasibility to deliver GGRs and wider environment objectives.
We are conscious of the effects that GGR development could have on UK businesses and consumers. The cost of support for GGRs is likely to be shared between the public and private sector. We will also seek to develop an appropriate balance of risk allocation over the short, medium, and long term to ensure that any costs associated with development of Negative Emission Technologies (NETs) are distributed in an equitable way.
We are also committed to assessing the impact of our net zero policies, and any inequalities which may arise, to assess the need for targeted support for disproportionately impacted groups.
Q: Given the proposed role of NETs in climate change modelling, is there a danger of over-reliance on these technologies in net zero strategies?
Despite uncertainty about the exact mix of GGRs over the coming decades, we are clear that both nature-based and ‘engineered’ removal methods will be necessary to balance residual emissions from the difficult to abate sectors of the economy such as industry, agriculture and aviation by 2050.
The UK has made strong progress on delivering against our long-term greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. Between 1990 and 2019, we grew our economy by 78% and cut our emissions by 44%[8], decarbonising faster than any other G7 country[9]. we have set out ambitious plans with bold policy action across key sectors of the economy to enable us to meet our carbon budgets and net zero. We have published the Prime Minister’s Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution, the Energy White Paper, North Sea Transition Deal, Industrial Decarbonisation Strategy, Transport Decarbonisation Plan and the Hydrogen Strategy. We have already made important progress in the last year delivering on the commitments in the Prime Minister’s Ten Point Plan, including by beginning to invest £100 million in the research, development, and demonstration of greenhouse gas removals across multiple programmes.
The Net Zero Strategy builds on this and goes further. We present an economy-wide perspective on the route to net zero by 2050 and raise ambition by detailing how we will meet our Sixth Carbon Budget (2033-2037). It also demonstrates how we will meet our 2030 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement and will be submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as the UK’s updated long-term low greenhouse gas emission development strategy. The strategy considers net zero as a whole system, or collection of connected systems, rather than purely as individual sectors or policies.
Q: How should the UK Government support the further development of NETs?
To advance our ambition to stimulate the GGRs sector, we will consult on business models for engineered GGRs in Spring 2022. This will set out details of our preferred mechanisms to incentivise early investment and enable commercial demonstration of a range of GGR technologies from the mid-to-late 2020s. The consultation will consider how GGR incentives interact with policies and business models currently under development for CCUS, hydrogen production, sustainable aviation fuels and other relevant sectors, along with wider carbon pricing policy. It will also consider how near-term policy incentives can most effectively leverage private investment and enable a transition towards a market-led framework as the sector matures.
Whilst seeking to capitalise on the economic benefits of GGR development in the UK, we are also mindful of potential disruption to existing markets and the effects on consumers and businesses. The cost of support for GGRs is likely to be shared between the public and private sector. We will seek to develop an appropriate balance of risk allocation over the short, medium, and long term. Potential policy frameworks to enable developing GGR solutions will require careful consideration to guard against unintended effects. We will ensure that support for GGRs does not distort the development and commercialisation of decarbonisation technologies in other sectors.
Q: What policy changes, if any, are needed to ensure the UK gains a competitive advantage and remains at the cutting edge of this sector?
The UK is well placed to take a leading role in GGR policy development and deployment. We have world leading academic and industry expertise in relevant sectors, as well as a rapidly developing carbon capture usage and storage (CCUS) sector and access to large volumes of quality geological CO2 storage. Enabling GGR deployment will not only help us hit net zero but can support the UK’s ability to export skills and expertise to other nations with comparable ambitions for the sector.
To achieve the level of negative emissions indicated by our central delivery pathway to 2037 and keep us on track to deliver net zero, we will need additional public and private investment of around £20 billion across the economy. Developing the GGR sector has the potential to regenerate communities and open up new employment opportunities right around the UK. It will be crucial to ensure that future GGR policy maximises the economic and regional development opportunities of developing the low carbon economy in our industrial heartlands.
Q: The Government has indicated it will publish a Biomass Strategy in 2022, including the role of BECCS. What should be included in this strategy?
In the government’s response to Climate Change Committee’s (CCC) annual progress report to Parliament in 2020, we announced that we will publish a new Biomass Strategy in 2022. The Strategy will review the amount of sustainable biomass that could be available to the UK, and how this resource could be best utilised across the economy to help achieve our net zero greenhouse gas emissions target by 2050. The Strategy will also establish the role which Bioenergy with Carbon Capture & Storage (BECCS) can play in reducing carbon emissions across the economy and set out how the technology could be deployed.
The Strategy will also assess the UK’s current biomass sustainability standards, which are some of the most stringent in the world, to see where and how we can improve them to ensure that biomass is sustainably used, and that where BECCS is deployed it delivers genuine net-negative emissions.
October 2021
Background and Terms of Reference
In the latest stage of its Technological Innovation and Climate Change inquiry, the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) has today announced that it is to look at negative emissions technologies (NETs).
The Government has previously indicated that negative emissions technologies will play a role in meeting net zero, with a specific focus around two proposed technologies that will both store captured CO2 underground:
As part of the EAC’s work in this field, these two technologies, alongside newly emerging NETs focusing on marine carbon capture, will be explored further and the wider pros and cons of negative emission technologies will be considered.
Environmental Audit Committee Chairman, Rt Hon Philip Dunne MP, said:
“Achieving net zero will only be possible if industries across the economy decarbonise. But for some of our energy-intensive industries, this will be harder to achieve than other sectors. The role of negative emissions technologies could hold the key, and our Committee looks forward to exploring the feasibility of this approach and the current role of NETs in the Government’s net zero plans.
“I urge anyone with specific interest in negative emissions technologies to submit their thoughts to the Committee.”
Terms of reference
The Committee is inviting written submissions by Thursday 28 October by 17:00, predominantly but not exclusively looking at BECCS and DACCS. Written evidence submissions should focus on, but not be limited to, answering the following questions:
[1] BEIS modelling at the time of the Net Zero Strategy publication suggests negative emissions from engineered removals between 75 and 81 MtCO2/year by 2050 could be required to balance residual emissions in hard-to-abate sectors.
This is consistent with other organisation’s views on the role of GGRs in helping reaching net zero, including the CCC, National Grid and NIC. The CCC has estimated 97 MtCO2/year of greenhouse gas removals could be required annually in the UK to reach net zero in 2050 – equivalent to over 20% of current UK emissions. This includes 58 MtCO2/year of engineered emissions removals, in addition to nature-based sinks of 39 MtCO2/year from UK land (including afforestation).
[2] CCC (2020). The Sixth Carbon Budget: The UK’s Path to Net Zero.
[3] Element Energy and UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (2021). Greenhouse Gas Removal Methods and Their Potential UK Deployment.
[4] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-ten-point-plan-for-a-green-industrial-revolution
[5] A summary of the 23 projects currently in Phase 1 of the innovation competition can be found here.
[6] Greenhouse Gas Removals summary of responses to CFE: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/greenhouse-gas-removals-call-for-evidence
Power-BECCS: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investable-commercial-frameworks-for-power-beccs
Monitoring, reporting and verification of GGRs: task and finish group report: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/monitoring-reporting-and-verification-of-ggrs-task-and-finish-group-report
Greenhouse Gas Removal methods: technology assessment report: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-removal-methods-technology-assessment-report
[7] https://www.eti.co.uk/programmes/carbon-capture-storage/strategic-uk-ccs-storage-appraisal
[8] ONS, ‘Gross Domestic Product: chained volume measures: Seasonally adjusted £m’, https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/abmi/ukea; BEIS, ‘Final UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics’, https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/final-uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-national-statistics
[9] World Bank, ‘GDP, PPP (constant 2017 international $)’, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.PP.KD; UNFCCC, ‘GHG emissions with LULUCF’, Emissions figures exclude IAS, https://di.unfccc.int/time_series