市民のチカラで、気候変動を止める。

Position Paper 2023
July 2023 (revised Japanese)
July 2023 (revised English)
Kiko Network

Carbon capture, utilization andstorage (CCUS) is not a magic wandNo role for CCUS as a pillar of climate policy in Japan or Asia

CONTENTS
Introduction---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2
1. Current status of CCS implementation in Japan------------------------------------- 2(1) Capture------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4(2) Transport----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4(3) Storage------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
2. Implementation of CCS overseas, and related problems-------------------------- 7
3. Conclusions------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9(1) The perils of estimating required storage amounts--------------------------- 9(2) Unpredictable implementation----------------------------------------------------- 9(3) Economics------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 9(4) Hindering decarbonization in Southeast Asia-------------------------------- 10(5) In closing------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 101

Introduction
Kiko Network issued a position paper on carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) in June
20191. In it, we pointed out many problems with CCUS, including effectiveness, economic viability,
environmental concerns, and technical risks. We emphasized that not only is CCUS inadequate as apart of actions to address climate change, it is also inappropriate to be relied upon on or emphasized ingovernment policy.
Nevertheless, since then, the Japanese government has been moving steadily ahead to formulate
policies that would increase dependence on carbon capture and storage (CCS), trying to link it to carbon
emission reductions as part of the nation’s climate actions. The final report on a long-term roadmap for
CCS was released in March 20232, and in the consideration process, besides typical CCS projects inJapan, it also points to policies aimed at implementing CCS projects overseas. The Ministry of Economy,
Trade and Industry (METI) issued a final report in March 2023.
In addition, the Green Transformation (GX) Basic Policy, announced in December 2022 as the guiding
direction for Japan’s energy policies, presents CCS as one example of technologies to pursue in order
to secure flexibility in decarbonization, along with higher efficiency of power generation, promotionof co-firing or 100% firing with hydrogen or ammonia, maintaining and increasing pumped hydro,
and promoting storage batteries and carbon recycling technologies. Furthermore, in order to prime thebusiness environment for the launch of CCS projects by 2030, the government is accelerating project
development and operational support, as well as the development of a regulatory framework. It is also
aiming to promote CCS projects both in Japan and abroad by applying the Joint Crediting Mechanism(JCM, a bilateral carbon credit system) to accommodate large-scale projects such as CCS.
This paper summarizes the current status of CCS implementation in Japan based on the CCS longterm roadmap and the analytical findings of international organizations and think tanks related to CCS
and CCUS since we published our previous paper in 2019, and points out the problems that may arise if
CCS projects multiply overseas in the future. It concludes by once again calling for a reconsideration ofJapan’s CCS policies.

1. Current status of CCS implementation in Japan
Regarding the domestic implementation of CCS, the problems that we pointed out in our2019 position paper have not been resolved as of this point in time. Rather, the challenges of
implementation in Japan have become increasingly apparent as consideration of CCS has moved
1

2

Position Paper—Risky Dreams: Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) (June 2019) https://www.
kikonet.org/info/publication/position-paper-CCUS (in Japanese) and https://www.kikonet.org/wp/wp-content/
uploads/2019/08/pp-ccus-f.pdf (in English).
CCS Long-Term Roadmap Study Group: Final Report (March 2023) (in Japanese) https://www.meti.go.jp/
shingikai/energy_environment/ccs_choki_roadmap/pdf/20230310_1.pdf

2ahead. The following is a summary of issues at each stage of the CCS process of carbon capture,transport, and storage.
Regarding the utilization of captured carbon (the U in CCU), in this paper we will just state twopoints. First, even the Carbon Recycling Technology Roadmap3 [3] by METI fails to provide any
projections for large-scale expansion in the near future because the technologies have not reached
the commercial application stage and are still plagued by uncertainties. Second, analyses by thinktanks have concluded that many issues remain unaddressed in terms of economics and lifecycle
carbon and energy budgets4.
Figure 1: Carbon capture and storage

Source: Excerpted from a fact sheet prepared by Japan Beyond Coal5, from other sources such as Reference 1 at
the 35th session of the Basic Policy Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy.

345Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) Carbon Recycling Technology Roadmap (revised July 2021) (inJapanese) https://www.meti.go.jp/press/2021/07/20210726007/20210726007.pdf
Domestic and international trends of effective use of CO2 (CCU) by Mizuho Research & Technologies (2020)
https://www.mizuho-rt.co.jp/publication/report/2020/mhir20_ccu_01.html
Fact Sheet – Carbon capture and storage (CCS): Its significant risk. (in Japanese) https://beyond-coal.jp/beyondcoal/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/JBC_factsheet_07.pdf

3

（1）Capture
According to the R&D and Social Implementation Plan related to the Green Innovation Fund
Project "Development of Technologies for CO2 Capture and Separation" by Agency for Natural
Resources and Energy6, the difficulties with CO₂ capture mainly involve exhaust gas pressure
and CO₂ concentrations. Moreover, because emissions from power generation such as coalfired and natural gas-fired thermal power plants are at low pressure, it is difficult to achieve highcapture rates and economic efficiency compared to carbon capture from the hydrogen or ammonia
industries or from by-product gases produced in natural gas production.
Regarding emissions from power generation, the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy(ANRE) states that CCS is already in the demonstration to commercial stages at coal-fired power
plants where there are higher CO₂ concentrations in emissions. However, to date this has not beenachieved within Japan, and Petra Nova7, cited as an example of commercial operations overseas,
was suspended in 2020 due to problems with profitability, with many malfunctions occurring since
operations started in 2016, operations being unstable, and CO₂ capture targets not being achieved8.
Furthermore, ANRE says that CO2 capture at low-pressure and from low-concentration emissionsof power plants fired by natural gas have not yet been established, so the component technologies
still need to be developed and tested.
At present, the cost of capture is in the 6,000 yen/t-CO 2 range for low-pressure, lowconcentration emissions, and estimated to be in the 4,000 yen/t-CO2 range for plants currently
being planned, with a technology development target of achieving the 2,000 yen/t-CO2 range in2030.

（2）Transport
The method of transporting the captured CO2 will differ depending on where it is to be stored.
If the storage site is close to land, it will have to be transported by pipeline, and if far from land,
it must be liquefied and then transported by ship9. Since Japan has few suitable storage sites on
6

7

8
9

Green Innovation Fund Project "Development of Technologies for CO 2 Capture and Separation"
by Agency for Natural Resources and Energ y (in Japanese) https://www.met i.go.jp/pre
ss/2021/01/20220120007/20220120007-2.pdf
R&D and Social Implementation Plan (January 20, 2022) for “CO₂ Capture Research and Development” project(main report). (The report does not name the project, describing it only as “a coal-fired power plant in North
America by a Japanese company,” but Petra Nova is the only plant it could be.) (in Japanese) https://www.meti.
go.jp/press/2021/01/20220120007/20220120007-2.pdf
Reuters “Japan’s Eneos to buy out operator of U.S. CO2 capture project Petra Nova” (September 14, 2022) https://www.reuters.com/article/japan-eneos-holdings-idUSL1N30L0RX
JGC Corporation, Ueno Transtech Co., Ltd., Chiyoda Corporation, the University of Tokyo and Taisei Corporation“Transportation Technology for Eco-Friendly CCS Demonstration Project” (March 5, 2019) (in Japanese) https://www.env.go.jp/earth/ccs/ccus-kaigi/2-2_CCUS_transport.pdf

4

land, if it is to carry out CCS on a scale envisioned by the government, it will be necessary tostore carbon in geological formations offshore, remote from the coast, and that involves marinetransport.
Transportation to the storage area will require the construction of new transport vessels, which
is an expensive proposition. Shipping will also be affected by natural conditions such as weather
and marine conditions during transport10, so it will be difficult to guarantee stable operations.
The Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE) estimates11 the current
cost of transport by ship to an offshore seabed storage site at 9,300 yen/t-CO2 for a distance of 1,100
km and an annual storage capacity of 500,000 t-CO2, and 6,000 yen/t-CO2 for an annual storage
capacity of 3 million t-CO2 in 2050.

（3）Storage
In the interim report of the long-term roadmap, the government estimates Japan’s annual CO2
storage capacity in 2050 at 120 million to 240 million tons. Although the validity of this estimate
itself remains in question12, if those numbers are accepted, the government estimates that the
number of injection wells capable of handling 500,000 tons per year would have to increase at apace of 12 to 24 wells per year over 20 years from 2030 to 2050.
As for the feasibility of CCS at this scale, the only achievement to date in Japan is the
Tomakomai demonstration project, where 300,000 tons of CO 2 were injected in 2019 andmonitoring is being conducted. One can only question how realistic it will be to achieve thosenumbers.
In addition, the implementation of CCS requires solid geological formations to properly store
CO2. However, Japan is in an earthquake-prone region with many active faults, and there arefew geological formations suitable for stable storage of CO2 over long periods of time, ranging
from hundreds to thousands of years. In addition, since Japan has almost no oil and natural gas
development areas, there is very little capacity for storage through the enhanced oil recovery (EOR)
techniques seen overseas, and very little potential for injection into depleted gas and oil fields.
Based on the surveys conducted in the final report, METI estimated storage capacity at about 16

10 Ibid. https://www.env.go.jp/earth/ccs/ccus-kaigi/2-2_CCUS_transport.pdf
11 RITE CCS value chain cost (October 31, 2022) (in Japanese) https://www.meti.go.jp/shingikai/energy_
environment/ccs_choki_roadmap/jisshi_kento/pdf/003_04_00.pdf
12 The government estimates annual CO₂ storage in Japan in 2050—the basis of these projections—by multiplying
3.6 to 7.2 billion tons annually (the required global annual amount of CO₂ capture from CCS in 2050 under theCO₂ emission scenario prepared by the IEA) by 3.3% (Japan’s current share of global CO2 emissions). Therefore,
it should be noted that figures such as and the numbers of required injection wells derived from the estimates
are derived from the very simplified and uncertain assumption that Japan will maintain exactly the same ratio in
the future global CO2emission mix as it today.

5billion tons at 11 sites, and planned to conduct further surveys of sites not yet studied13. However,
the eleven sites identified were mainly only large marine areas14. Storage will be impossible
without more detailed studies and exploration, as well as the construction of pressurization
infrastructure such as injection wells and CO₂ transport facilities. Due to the magnitude of
uncertainty at each stage leading up to any actual start of carbon storage, it is difficult to view
the above-mentioned potential storage capacity even as estimates. One must admit that they arehighly uncertain numbers.
For an offshore seabed storage site, RITE currently estimates storage costs at 6,900 yen/t-CO₂
for an injection well that can handle 200,000 t-CO₂ per year, and puts the cost at 5,400 yen/t-CO₂
for a facility that can handle 500,000 t-CO₂ annually in 205015.
Table 1. Current cost estimates for CCS
Current cost estimates
Capture16

4,000 yen/t-CO₂

Transport (by ship to offshore site, distance 1,100 km, annual
storage capacity 500,000 t-CO₂)

9,300 yen/t-CO₂

Storage (200,000 t-CO₂ per year, per injection well)

6,900 yen/t-CO₂

Total

20,200 yen/t-CO₂

Source: Prepared by Kiko Network from RITE CCS value chain cost (October 31, 2022)

As for monitoring of CO₂ after it is stored in offshore geological formations, technicaldevelopment is still under way, but it appears to be feasible with continuous year-long monitoring
based on equipment replacement four times a year17. However, systems would have to be put
in place and cost burdens clarified in order to conduct monitoring for a total of 60 years, as
envisioned in estimates by RITE, including 40 years during injection and 20 years after well
decommissioning.
It is also necessary to consider the adverse effects on human populations and the surrounding

13 Ibid. https://www.meti.go.jp/shingikai/energy_environment/ccs_choki_roadmap/pdf/20230310_1.pdf
14 CCS long-Term Roadmap Study Group: Interim Report (May 2022) (in Japanese) https://www.meti.go.jp/
shingikai/energy_environment/ccs_choki_roadmap/pdf/20220527_1.pdf
15 RITE CCS Value Chain Cost (October 31, 2022) (in Japanese) https://www.meti.go.jp/shingikai/energy_
environment/ccs_choki_roadmap/jisshi_kento/pdf/003_04_00.pdf
16 This estimate is based on model plant, and 6,000 Yen/t-CO₂ has been reported as an actual value. cf. R&D andSocial Implementation Plan (January 20, 2022) for “CO₂ Capture Research and Development” project (mainreport).
17 Japan NUS Co., Ltd., National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, and the University ofTokyo, “Environmentally Friendly Monitoring Technology for CCS Demonstration Project” (August 3, 2021) (inJapanese) https://www.env.go.jp/content/900440489.pdf

6environment in the event of leaks of highly concentrated CO₂, whether on land or at sea. It is also
necessary to monitor the effects of long-term storage on the geological formations. Although thegovernment denies any causal relationship between carbon storage and earthquakes, a paper has
also been published stating that further research is needed18. Such risks are difficult to predict,both qualitatively and quantitatively.

2. Implementation of CCS overseas, and related problems
According to the Global CCS Institute (GCCSI), as of September 2022, there were 196
commercial-scale CCS projects at the construction and development stages, up 44% from theprevious year’s tally19. Of these, only 36 projects, about one-fifth of the total, were in the electric
power sector (including combined projects, two with hydrogen production and one with oil
refining). Of the 36 projects, one is under construction, 12 are under development, and 23 at earlyphases of development20.
Currently, the Boundary Dam Power Station in Canada is the only CCS project in the power
sector worldwide that is actually operating. SaskPower, which manages the project, states that it
captured about 4.8 million tons of CO₂ from the start of operations in autumn 2014 until the endof September 202221. However, the project has not been able to stably capture CO₂ due to longterm shutdown as a result of equipment malfunctions and other problems, and the Renewable
Energy Institute (REI) estimates the actual CO₂ capture rate over seven years at only 60%22.
The Japanese government has designated the promotion of overseas CCS projects as one
concrete action to improve the CCS business environment, and is focusing particularly on the
promotion of CCS in the Asian region. On May 24, 2021, Minister of Economy, Trade andIndustry Hiroshi Kajiyama announced the new Asia Energy Transition Initiative (AETI), aimed atsimultaneously achieving sustainable economic growth and carbon neutrality in Asia23. On June
22 that year he also announced the launch of the Asia CCUS Network as an international platform
for industry, academia, and government to lay the groundwork and share expertise for CCUS

18
19
20
21
22
23

Sano ey al. (2020) Groundwater Anomaly Related to CCS-CO2 Injection and the 2018 Hokkaido Eastern Iburi
Earthquake in Japan. Front. Earth Sci. 8:611010. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2020.611010
Global Status of CCS 2022 https://status22.globalccsinstitute.com/2022-status-report/global-status-of-ccs/
Global Status of CCS 2022 Appendices 6.2 2022 Facilities List https://status22.globalccsinstitute.com/2022status-report/appendices/
SaskPower BD3 Status Update: Q3 2022 https://www.saskpower.com/about-us/our-company/blog/2022/bd3status-update-q3-2022
Japan Renewable Energy Institute, “CCS Thermal Power Policy: Bottlenecks and Risks,” April 2022 (in Japanese)
https://www.renewable-ei.org/activities/reports/20220414.php
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. “Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Kajiyama newly announces
the Asia Energy Transition Initiative (AETI)” (May 28, 2021) (in Japanese) https://www.meti.go.jp/pre
ss/2021/05/20210528007/20210528007.html

7

utilization throughout Asia24.
The first problem with the overseas implementation of CCS based on these initiatives is thatmost of the overseas CCS projects currently at the construction or development stage are aimed
at recovering CO2 emitted from fossil fuel production processes such as natural gas refining. As aresult, they could actually promote fossil fuel production.
Second, they would mean that besides Japan continuing to rely on fossil fuels imported fromoverseas, it would also depend on foreign countries to deal with CO2.
Third, deploying CCS in Southeast Asia and Oceania would mean further entrenching the use offossil fuels in these regions. Southeast Asia has high potential for renewable energy, such as hydro,
wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal. The International Energy Agency’s Stated Policies Scenario(STEPS) estimates that the share of renewable energy in local power generation capacity willaccount for about 40% in 2050, up from about 25% today. Meanwhile, its Sustainable Development
Scenario (SDS) projects renewable energy at 85%, although additional effort will be required to getthere. At any rate, in either scenario, the percentage of CCS accounts for only a few percent of theregion’s generation capacity in 2050 (indicated as just a portion of the salmon pink area in the redcircle in Fig. 2 below)25. The future of CCS in this region is undeniably very limited.
Fig. 2 Changes in generation capacity under the published policy scenario and thesustainable development scenario (2020 - 2050)

Source: IEA, Southeast Asia Energy Outlook 2022.
24

Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry: “Asia CCUS Network launched” (June 22, 2021) (in Japanese) https://www.meti.go.jp/press/2021/06/20210622005/20210622005.html
25 The salmon pink band showing “Other low emissions” in Fig. 2 includes nuclear, CCUS and other forms ofrenewables, but the combined total is only a few percent of the total. https://www.iea.org/reports/southeast-asiaenergy-outlook-2022

8

3. Conclusions(1) The perils of estimating required storage amounts
The government estimates that the amount of CCS storage required by Japan by 2050 will be
between 120 and 240 million tons per year, and these figures are the basis for the government’s
consideration of CCS-related projects. However, these figures are derived from highly simplified
and uncertain assumptions, as mentioned above. They are not figures that should be used as apremise for projects that are expected to cost in the range of 100 billion to 100 trillion yen innational public funds in the future.
(2) Unpredictable implementation
As shown in this stage-by-stage review of problems, there are factors at every stage that would
shake anyone’s confidence in the reliability of implementation of CCS. Even in previous cases
overseas, major problems have hindered stable operations. At present, Japan needs to reduce
CO2 emissions as quickly as possible, with a view to achieving net zero by 2050. To this end,
more emphasis should be placed on energy-saving measures based on more robust and proventechnologies and the spread of renewable energy.
(3) Economics
According to RITE’s estimates for CCS, the cost of storing 1 million to 3 million t-CO2 per year
is about 410 billion to 1.13 trillion yen for emissions from coal combustion, and about 720 billion
yen to 2.0 trillion yen for emissions from LNG combustion. Based on annual storage of 120 to 240
million and capture of 1 million tons of CO2 (coal-fired gas approx. 410 billion yen, LNG-firedgas 720 billion yen) in line with current government estimates, by simple calculation, enormous
costs would be incurred over the 60-year operation and post-decommissioning management
period, at about 49.2 to 98.4 trillion yen in the case of emissions from coal-fired combustion, andabout 86.4 to 172.8 trillion yen in the case of LNG combustion.
RITE estimates, on which the government mainly bases its cost reviews of CCS projects, do
not include items that clearly increase costs related to capture, transport, and storage, while they
contain unrealistic assumptions and many conditions that suppress the cost estimates26. There is26

For example, no costs related to land related compensation, etc., are taken into account; contingency costs thatare generally budgeted into development projects that don’t yet have a track record (about 35% of all costs for
capture, transport, and storage) are not considered; the improbable number of just one offshore platform is
calculated as being required for the expected injection volumes and the corresponding number of injection wells;
the accuracy of estimates of monitoring costs is low; and costs of transporting CO₂ by ship, which would be
expected in many cases of CCS in Japan, are not included in the study9

a great possibility that when CCS projects are actually implemented, final costs will exceed theestimates.
No CCS cost reduction targets have been achieved to date since CCS initiatives began in the
1980s. Based on the premise that CCS projects for fossil fuel thermal power generation cannot
become economically viable, plans should be devised to phase out those power plants that are thesources of emissions.
(4) Hindering decarbonization in Southeast Asia
Currently, Japan is actively trying to promote CCS in Southeast Asia, but as mentioned above,
the region has huge potential for renewable energy. In addition, CCS has very little to contributein the power generation sector, and in fact the implementation of CCS might end up being used tofurther promote fossil fuel resource developments such as through enhanced oil recovery (EOR).
Instead of CCS, Japan should focus on contributing to options that directly support the transition
to renewable energy, such as investing to improve regional power grids.
(5) In closing
Because there are currently so many problems and issues with CCS, the implementation of CCS
projects should be limited only to those industrial sectors where decarbonization is most difficult.
G7 countries, including Japan, are committed to decarbonizing the electricity sector by 2035 and,with a view to achieving national reduction targets (known as NDCs) by 2030 and transitioning
the electricity sector to net zero, they have agreed to implement a concrete and timely phase-outof domestic ‘unabated’ coal-fired power plants27. It is clear that under the current circumstances,
CCS can only make a very limited contribution to Japan’s achievement of these targets in
those time periods. In addition, the Japanese government is currently planning to promote CCS
overseas, especially in Southeast Asia, even though it has become clear that CCS can only make alimited contribution to decarbonization in that region as well. Currently, the government is trying
to complete the formulation of a long-term roadmap with high hopes placed on CCS, but a changeof course is needed in such flawed policies as soon as possible.

272022 G7 Leaders’ Communiqué https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/100364051.pdf

Published by Kiko Network
Main Author: Hiromitsu Miyajiri
July 2023 (revised Japanese) July 2023 (revised English)*
Web: https://www.kikonet.org
Tel: 81-3-3263-9210
Fax: 81-03-3263-9463
Email: tokyo@kikonet.org

10*Note: This report is updated based on the “Final
Report: CCS long-term roadmap study group”
by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry(METI), issued in March 2023.