ALBERT

Description: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a fundamental component of all life on Earth. Due to the considerable increase in emissions, particularly industrial emissions, CO2has, however, become a waste product and greenhouse gas damaging to the climate and, consequently, a threat to both humanity and nature. For almost 50years, chemical research has been pursuing the idea of making the CO2 molecule useful as a raw material(Aresta and Dibenedetto 2010). Within the context of the oil crises of the 1970s, and contingent on the currentneed for climate protection, there has been a rise in global interest in the research and development oftechnologies which could make CO2 useful as a source of carbon. Several regions in Europe, but also in North America and Asia have started sponsorship programmes to support the development of such technologies (BMBF 2014, Climate-KIC 2014, U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] n.d.).The goal of these efforts is to integrate this climatedamaging gas in extremely diverse industrial productionprocesses as a raw material. The use of CO2 would not only allow for the production of useful raw materials and products, such technologies could alsoemulate a natural carbon cycle (Peters et al. 2011). At the same time, they have the potential to reduce the consumption of other fossil resources and, in so doing, they might not only contribute to the extension of the resource base, but also reduce missionswhilst providing protection for natural resources (von der Assen et al. 2013). Technological breakthroughs and advancements are currently observedin carbon capture technologies in the catalysis and transformation of CO2 (Aresta 2010, Mikkelsen et al. 2010, Peters et al. 2011, Styring et al. 2011, Wilcox 2012, Smit et al. 2014, Klankermayer and Leitner 2015), and the first innovative CO2-based productsare already coming onto the markets.

Description: Kohlenstoffdioxid (CO2) ist ein Grundbaustein allen Lebens auf der Erde. Mittlerweile ist CO2 jedochdurch den starken Anstieg vor allem industrieller Emissionen als klimaschädlicher Abfall und Treibhausgas zu einer Bedrohung für Menschheit und Natur geworden. Bereits seit fast 50 Jahren verfolgt die chemische Forschung die Idee, das Molekül CO2 als Rohstoff nutzbar zu machen (Aresta & Dibenedetto 2010). Im Kontext der Ölkrisen in den 1970er-Jahren und bedingt durch die Erfordernisse des aktuellen Klimaschutzes stieg weltweit das Interesse an der Erforschung und Entwicklung von Technologien, die CO2 als Kohlenstoffquelle nutzen könnten.Etliche Regionen in Europa, aber auch in Nordamerika und Asien haben Förderprogramme ins Leben gerufen, die solche Technologieentwicklungen unterstützen (BMBF 2013, Climate-KIC 2014, US DOE o. D.-b).Das Ziel dieser Bemühungen ist es, das klimaschädliche Gas als Rohstoff in ganz unterschiedliche industrielleProduktionsprozesse einzubinden. Hiermit könnten mithilfe von CO2 nicht nur nützliche Grundstoffe und Produkte hergestellt werden. Vielmehr imitieren diese Technologien auch einen natürlichen Kohlenstoffkreislauf (Peters et al. 2011). Gleichzeitighaben sie das Potenzial, den Verbrauch anderer fossiler Ressourcen zu verringern und somit möglicherweisenicht nur zur Erweiterung der Rohstoffbasis, sondern auch zur Schonung natürlicher Ressourcenund zur Emissionsverminderung beizutragen (von der Assen, Jung & Bardow 2013). Technologische Durchbrüche und Fortschritte sind derzeit sowohl in den Abscheidungstechnologien als auch in der Katalyse und Umwandlung von CO2 zu beobachten (Aresta 2010, Klankermayer & Leitner 2015, Mikkelsen, Jorgensen& Krebs 2010, Peters et al. 2011, Smit, Park & Gadikota 2014, Styring et al. 2011, Wilcox 2012). Erste neuartige CO2-basierte Produkte erreichen aktuelldie Märkte.

Description: As a major contributor to climate change, the cement sector urgently needs to develop and implement greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation technologies to drastically lower its emissions to reach carbon neutrality by 2050. Among the most promising technologies is CO2 mineralisation in which CO2 is transformed into a thermodynamically stable carbonate. CO2 mineralisation not only offers permanent storage of CO2 but also potentially avoids emissions by partially substituting conventional cement with the obtained carbonation products. Besides overcoming technical barriers, successful development and implementation of CO2 mineralisation require support from key stakeholders. While existing studies already provide technology-related data and assess CO2 mineralisation pathways, knowledge remains scarce about stakeholder priorities and perceptions. Using a multi-stakeholder expert survey, the present study examines: a) the priorities of different stakeholders in supporting CO2 mineralisation, b) their perceptions on the performance of CO2 mineralisation concepts, and c) their priorities if tasked with communicating CO2 mineralisation technologies to other groups. Hereby, we follow a multi-criteria decision analysis approach, based on an analytical hierarchy process, by comparing indicators from the three common sustainability pillars (i.e., environmental, economic, and social impacts). Our results indicate that key stakeholders strongly prioritise the health implications of CO2 mineralisation technologies and generally value social impacts highly. Hence, an in-depth research is needed to provide knowledge-based guidance on health issues and ways to fairly distribute costs and create positive employment outcomes. Additionally, stakeholders of all affiliations give second priority to reducing carbon footprint of cement, showing that they discount potential environmental and economic trade-offs associated with emission reduction goals. The results reveal that these concepts are perceived as compatible with other GHG mitigation approaches, such as carbon capture and storage. Moreover, if tasked with convincing different target groups to support CO2 mineralisation, stakeholders prioritise diverse themes, recognising that communication strategies must address the specific concerns of each group. Overall, the results can help investors, managers, and policymakers to ensure that upcoming decisions in R&D, investments, and the design of support mechanisms align with the priorities of key stakeholders. Our results facilitate communicating technological potentials and risks and can foster successful development and implementation of CO2 mineralisation pathways.

Description: Deutschland will seine Treibhausgasemissionen bis 2050 um 80 bis 95 Prozent vermindern. Die bereits vorgesehenen und umgesetzten Maßnahmen sind jedoch trotz der bisherigen Erfolge nicht ausreichend, um dieses ambitionierte Ziel zu erreichen. Neben dem Sektor der Energiewirtschaft als größter Quelle der Treibhausgasemissionen werden in Deutschland erhebliche Mengen im Industriesektor freigesetzt. Im Klimaschutzplan 2050 hat die Bundesregierung erstmals ein Sektorziel für die Industrie festgelegt. Die vorliegende acatech POSITION analysiert die Optionen der Verwertung und Speicherung von CO2 – Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU) und Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) –, die für die Minderung von Treibhausgasemissionen aus Industrieprozessen infrage kommen. Es wird empfohlen, zeitnah Diskussionen über Potenziale und Bedingungen des Einsatzes von CCU und CCS unter Beteiligung einer breiten Öffentlichkeit zu führen. Nur dann können Vorbehalte gegenüber CCU und CCS berücksichtigt, geeignete Technologien rechtzeitig fortentwickelt und zur Marktreife gebracht werden, damit auch die nötige Infrastruktur geplant, genehmigt, finanziert und errichtet werden kann.

Description: Einen spannenden, aktions- und forschungsorientierten Einstieg in die Themenfelder Klima und Rohstoffe ermöglicht die Zukunftsbox Kohlenstoff, die das IASS in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Futurium entwickelt hat. Die Materialien eignen sich für Schülergruppen jeder Schulform ab Klassenstufe 8. Die Zukunftsbox kann fachübergreifend eingesetzt werden. Mit ihr will das IASS einen Beitrag zur Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung leisten.

Description: The implementation of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is indispensable for building a sustainable and just future for all humans and our planet. The SDGs are global goals. However, their implementation equally calls for action by a variety of actors in government, business, and civil society. Thus, policy making as well as industrial innovation efforts need to be designed to facilitate rather than hinder the implementation of the SDGs. Consequently, it is necessary to ensure that the possible environmental, economic, and societal impacts of technological innovations aiming for public support and funding in research, development, and market implementation are aligned with the respective objectives of the SDGs. Carbon capture and utilization (CCU) applications are an example of such innovations. By capturing and utilizing CO2, they are intended to have positive impacts on economy, society, and environment. Next to industries’ own efforts to advance such technologies, CCU is currently funded by governments in several countries, and such funding is likely to increase. Therefore, an assessment of the compatibility of CCU technologies with the SDGs is as much necessary as it is overdue. Hence, this paper elucidates on how CCU might contribute to or hinder the delivery of the SDGs. By comparing CCUs against the SDGs, it can be concluded that, under certain conditions, they might deliver contributions to several SDGs. The main contributions are expected within the context of energy transition processes, and in societal advancements that are linked to technological progress. For eight out of the seventeen SDGs, positive and indirect negative effects can be predicted. Therefore, the development and implementation of CCU aligned with the SDGs poses a challenge for policy makers when designing frameworks and funding schemes. Specific risks need to be monitored and considered in policy making. This paper therefore argues that the SDGs should be used as a framework for assessing potential societal effects of CCU technologies. The findings demonstrate that such an approach is necessary in order to identify and enhance the positive (and avoid indirect negative) effects that CCU technologies might have on people, prosperity and planet.

Description: The use of carbon dioxide as a feedstock for a broad range of products can help mitigate the effects of climate change through long‐term removal of carbon or as part of a circular carbon economy. Research on capture and conversion technologies has intensified in recent years, and the interest in deploying these technologies is growing fast. However, sound understanding of the environmental and economic impacts of these technologies is required to drive fast deployment and avoid unintended consequences. Life cycle assessments (LCAs) and techno‐economic assessments (TEAs) are useful tools to quantify environmental and economic metrics; however, these tools can be very flexible in how they are applied, with the potential to produce significantly different results depending on how the boundaries and assumptions are defined. Built on ISO standards for generic LCAs, several guidance documents have emerged recently from the Global CO2 Initiative, the National Energy Technology Laboratory, and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory that further define assessment specifications for carbon capture and utilization. Overall agreement in the approaches is noted with differences largely based on the intended use cases. However, further guidance is needed for assessments of early‐stage technologies, reporting details, and reporting for policymakers and nontechnical decision‐makers.

Description: This report provides guidance to decision makers in all types of public and private organizations involved in the planning and development of CCU. It is prepared within the scope of the CO2nsistent project funded by the Global CO2 Initiative and EIT Climate-KIC, and is based on the published TEA and LCA Guidelines v.1. This report provides user-centered guidance on how to commission and understand TEA and LCA studies for CCU, and how to determine whether existing studies are eligible to be used in a decision making process. Another primary goal of this report is to ensure that disciplinary expertise is effectively taken up by decision makers and all potential audiences. The remainder of this document is structured in two parts. Part A introduces the reader to the concept of TEA and LCA studies: What types of input can such assessments provide for decision making? What are the limitations of their explanatory power? This part focuses on the goal and scope definition for such studies, and on other aspects that are particularly relevant for decision making. The document presents how the decision maker (or commissioner) and the assessment practitioner can jointly set the various assessment phases. These terms are explained in the boxes below. The approach and main components of TEA and LCA studies are described, with the specific goal of making the most sensitive disciplinary concepts clear and comprehensible to all audiences. Part B consists of practical tools to guide actors interested in commissioning TEA and LCA studies, and to support decision makers when evaluating and assessing TEA and LCA studies submitted by third parties. A series of consecutive steps, displayed as decision trees, provide support for checking the completeness of key aspects and requirements of TEA and LCA studies.

Description: On October 1st, 2019, the CO2nsistent Project (co-financed by the Global CO2 Initiative and EIT Climate-KIC) and the PHOENIX Initiative jointly organized a workshop in Brussels on the topic of CO2 utilization technology and assessment methodologies such as Techno-Economic and Life Cycle assessment (TEA and LCA). The event brought together LCA and TEA practitioners, national and European policy agencies, and the corporate field. To stimulate and enhance participation, diverse session formats were offered: thematic presentations by experts, a panel discussion, as well as a break-out session modeled on the “world café” method. The foci of the day were two-fold: Learning how to support European policymakers when assessing the environmental and economic aspects of CO2 utilization, and initiating an exchange with parallel European initiatives conducting research on CCU assessment methodologies and their environmental and economic perspectives. The event shed light on some unresolved issues raised by industrial actors with regard to the upcom-ing European policy and funding mechanisms (such as ETS Phase IV and Innovation Fund), while national and European decision-makers described the difficulties they face when evaluating CO2 utilization. The current ETS rules are inadequate to properly quantify the climate benefits of indus-trial CCU application, while the Renewable Energy Directive (REDII) lacks requirements for broad-er environmental and social assessments. Workshop participants broadly agreed that the harmoniza-tion of LCA approaches could help to quantify the extent to which CCU can contribute to achieving the GHG emission targets described in the REDII, should address all environmental aspects, and can provide sound guidelines for implementing CCU in the ETS. At the same time, solution-oriented collaborations with LCA and TEA experts (e.g. the CO2nsistent group and others) were considered and examined, also with regard to new instruments and strategies to reduce complexity for policy-makers. The event also aimed at expanding the networks between the organizers and relevant actors in the field, with a particular focus on national and European policymakers. Members of CO2nsistent, LCA4CCU and the Joint Research Centre – all of whom are engaged in CCU assessment methodol-ogies – scrutinized alignments of proposed solutions and elaborated on specific divergences such as low-TRL technology. The likelihood that this effort could ultimately lead to standards for LCA and TEA for CCU was extensively debated with the direct support of the French (AFNOR) and German (DIN) associations for standardization.