U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Fossil Energy • National Energy Technology Laboratory

and determines the optimal approach for CCS. Testing conducted 

at the sites prior to, during, and after injection provides insight 

regarding injectivity, capacity, and containment of CO2 in the 

formations. Determining best practices for each region leads the 

RCSPs to identify regulatory and infrastructure requirements for 

future commercial deployment, making CCS easier and more 

effective. NETL and the RCSPs also make the results of their research 

available. To augment the information-sharing, DOE will post a series 

of lessons learned from the RCSPs’ carbon storage projects over the 

next several weeks. These blog posts will include like topics as site 

characterization; industry partnerships; public outreach and education; 

and monitoring, verification, accounting (MVA), and assessment. 

More information on the RCSPs is available via the NETL website.

“Department of Energy 

R e l e a s e s $ 8 B i l l i o n 

Solicitation for Advanced 

Fossil Energy Projects.”

DOE published a solicitation 

on December 12, 2013, 

making up to $8 billion in loan 

guarantee authority available 

to support innovative advanced fossil energy projects that avoid, reduce, 

or store greenhouse gases (GHGs). The loan guarantees under this new 

solicitation will help provide financing to support new or significantly 

improved advanced fossil energy projects, such as advanced resource 

development, carbon capture, low-carbon power systems, and efficiency 

improvements, which reduce emissions of CO2, methane (CH4), and 

other GHGs. DOE published a draft solicitation on July 9, 2013, which 

opened a 60-day comment period. During this time, DOE listened 

to potential applicants and other stakeholders and incorporated their 

feedback into the solicitation, which includes new provisions intended to 

facilitate applications, ensure quick review, and foster successful publicprivate partnerships. Currently, DOE’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) 

supports a portfolio of more than $30 billion for more than 30 closed 

and committed projects. With the publication of the Advanced Fossil 

Energy Projects solicitation, the Department is accepting applications 

through the LPO web portal at apply.loanprograms.energy.gov, and 

expects to receive the initial applications by the end of February 

2014. A copy of the solicitation, which includes 

application deadlines and eligibility requirements, 

and a fact sheet can be found at lpo.energy.gov. The 

solicitation is part of the Climate Action Plan. The 

loan guarantees are authorized by Title XVII of the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005. From U.S. Department 

of Energy News Release on December 12, 2013. 

January 2014

 What’s Inside?

Announcements

Carbon Storage in the News

Science

Policy

Geology

Technology

Terrestrial

Trading

Recent Publications

Legislative Activity

Subscription Information

Highlights

“Celebrating a Decade of 

Carbon Storage Research 

Through Partnership.” 

For the past decade, the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) 

Office of Fossil Energy’s (FE) 

National Energy Technology 

L a b o r a t o r y ( N E T L ) h a s 

managed a nationwide network 

of partnerships that team government, industry, academia, and nonprofit 

organizations to identify the best approaches for permanently storing 

carbon dioxide (CO2) in deep geologic formations. Research performed 

by the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs) helps 

validate the most suitable technologies and infrastructure needs 

for carbon capture and storage (CCS). Research has resulted in 

lessons learned, with each leading to more effective ways to contain 

and monitor CO2. The RCSPs are intended to address the unique 

characteristics of their respective regions throughout the United States. 

Each RCSP evaluates potential storage sites in its geographic area 
Announcements

Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF) Endorses CCS. 

The CSLF member nations endorsed CCS technologies as a key component of international plans to combat potential climate change. 

The CSLF Ministers believe that the demonstration and global deployment of CCS must be accelerated and they are committed to 

taking individual and collaborative actions. The Ministers’ common goal is to ensure that the conditions are right for completing CCS 

projects currently under construction or in advanced stages of planning. 

Sequestration Training and Education Program (STEP) and World Resources Institute (WRI) Workshop. 

STEP is working with WRI to offer a Financial Assurances Workshop on March 13, 2014, in Washington, D.C., USA. The workshop will 

provide an overview of financial assurance with a focus on the regulations of the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Class VI well 

operator. The workshop includes: financial assurance terms and concepts; discussion of the current financial assurance framework for 

Class VI wells; and discussion of financial assurance requirements by geologic storage phases. Please contact Kathy Atchley (katchley@

illinois.edu) for registration materials.

Meeting Announcement and Call for Papers: International Workshop on Public Education, Training, and Community Outreach 

for Carbon Capture and Storage. 

This workshop is scheduled for July 30-31, 2014, at the National Sequestration Education Center (NSEC) in Decatur, Illinois, USA. The 

technical program features tools and techniques for public education, training, and community outreach on CCS. Workshop attendees 

will tour the commercial-scale CCS project at the Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) facility. Papers are requested related to the following 

topics: (1) Ongoing Programs in CCS Education and Training; (2) Project Developer/Industry Experience in Public Communications; 

(3) Sharing Knowledge/Lessons Learned for Effective CCS Outreach; and/or (4) Advancing CCS Education, Training, and Outreach 

Programs, Key Messages, and FAQs. Abstracts are due by February 14, 2014. The workshop also includes a full day of programming 

for K-12 teachers with interactive lesson plans related to CCS and Science, Technology, and Mathematics (STEM). 

Course at the Wyoming Carbon Capture and Storage Technology Institute (WCTI).

This WCTI course, titled, “Well Construction, Operation, Monitoring and Testing,” is intended to introduce CCS professionals to the 

construction and operating requirements of Class VI wells. In addition, a variety of techniques for monitoring the injected CO2 plume 

in the subsurface and for detecting any potential releases from the well or reservoir will be discussed. The course syllabus is available 

via the link.

12th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies.

GHGT-12 will be held on October 5-9, 2014, in Austin, Texas, USA. This will be the first visit by the conference series to Austin and 

more than 1,600 participants are expected to attend. The event will be hosted by the University of Texas at Austin and the IEA Greenhouse 

Gas R&D Programme (IEAGHG). 

of Alstom, Drax, and BOC) a Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) 

contract for the planned White Rose CCS Project. Also included in 

the contract is the planned development of a CO2 transportation and 

storage network, to be undertaken by National Grid Carbon Limited, 

called the Yorkshire Humber CCS Trunkline. During the FEED study, 

Capture Power and National Grid Carbon will work with the UK 

Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) on the construction 

and operation of the CCS project. Approximately 90 percent of all 

CO2 produced by the proposed 426-MW CCS power plant, located 

near Shelby in North Yorkshire, will be captured and transported 

by pipeline for permanent storage beneath the North Sea seabed. 

From Carbon Power Limited News Release on December 9, 2013.

“UW Researchers Unveil Tool to Aid in Enhanced Oil Recovery.” 

Researchers at the University of Wyoming (UW) and the Enhanced 

Oil Recovery Institute (EORI) have developed a software program to 

help oil operators understand the economic viability of CO2 flooding in

2

Carbon Storage in the News

“ADM Seeks to Expand Carbon Capacity.”

ADM is seeking regulatory approval for the underground storage of 5 

million metric tons of CO2 from the Illinois Basin Decatur Project (IBDP), 

where researchers are monitoring sandstone formations at depths of 

7,000 feet to determine the long-term viability of carbon storage. 

Since CO2 injection began in November 2011 at a pace of approximately 

1,000 tons per month, ADM has stored 685,000 tons of CO2. The 

Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS) and the Midwest Geological 

Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), one of DOE’s RCSPs, are 

tracking the carbon storage results. From The State Journal-Register

on December 19, 2013.

“Capture Power Welcomes FEED Contract Award.”

The UK Government awarded Capture Power Limited (a consortium
3

Carbon Storage in the News

(Continued)

their legacy fields. Available for download as an Excel-based 

spreadsheet tool, CO2ScopeTM can assist with estimating the economic 

feasibility of using CO2 as an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) method 

by allowing operators to quickly scope various economic scenarios 

for CO2 injection. UW researchers estimate that implementing EOR 

operations in Wyoming could increase production by 0.7 billion to 1 

billion barrels of oil from already-developed reservoirs. Based on the 

average oil price of $70 per barrel, 1 billion barrels of incremental oil 

produced in Wyoming with EOR would generate approximately $8 to 

$9 billion in ad valorem and severance taxes for Wyoming state and 

county governments. Click here for more information on CO2Scope. 

From University of Wyoming News Release on December 20, 2013.

“Air Products and SIRE Sign Liquid CO2 Agreement for Iowa 

Facility.”

Air Products and Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy, LLC (SIRE) 

signed an agreement for the production of liquid CO2. Under the 

agreement, Air Products will build a facility with the capability 

to capture 400 tons per day (tpd) of liquid CO2 at SIRE’s ethanol 

production facility in Council Bluffs, Iowa. Air Products will market 

food- and beverage-grade liquid CO2 from the new plant, which is 

expected to begin production in early 2014. From Air Products News 

Release on December 17, 2013. 

Science

“Global Warming Impacts Bats: New 

Study Says Climate Change Hurts Bat 

Communities.” 

According to a study conducted by 

researchers from the Max Planck Institute in Germany, potential 

climate change could be altering some bat species’ ability to hunt 

using sound. Published in the “Royal Society Interface,” the study 

found that change(s) in air temperatures could impact bats’ abilities to 

navigate and hunt prey in the dark (known as echolocation). Naturally 

nocturnal, bats fly in the dark by releasing ultrasonic sounds that 

bounce back to them after hitting an object. Factors such as humidity, 

wind, and heat can alter the sound waves, causing them to lose volume 

and clarity. According to the study, certain bat species living in 

temperate regions may face more challenges than bats living in tropical 

regions. From International Business Times on December 12, 2013.

“Climate Change is Scaring the Fish Due 

to Acidified Oceans, Study Says.” 

Potential increases of atmospheric CO2

that lead to ocean acidification could be 

making rockfish more anxious, according to 

a study conducted at Edmonton’s MacEwan

University. Previous research of ocean acidification’s effect on reefdwelling fish was expanded upon by studying fish that live in areas that 

experience more upwelling currents, such as the juvenile rockfish, a 

common species along the Pacific coast. Researchers placed one group 

of fish in a tank with normal sea water, and another group of fish in a 

tank with sea water levels of acidification expected in approximately 

100 years; both tanks were also divided into black and white areas. 

The researchers found that fish swam freely between the two areas 

in the normal tank, but tended to huddle in the dark area in the acidic 

tank. According to the study, the acidic water stimulated activity in 

a part of the fish’s neural system that caused it to struggle to restore 

electrochemical balance, creating anxiety, and leading them to be more 

fearful. From The Globe and Mail on December 11, 2013.

Policy

“EPA Rule Provides a Clear Pathway for Using Carbon Capture 

and Sequestration Technologies.”

On December 19, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) issued a final rule that helps create a consistent national 

framework to ensure the safe, effective deployment of CCS 

technologies. The new rule clarifies that CO2 captured from emission 

sources, injected underground via UIC Class VI wells approved for 

the purpose of geologic storage under the Safe Drinking Water Act 

(SDWA), and meeting certain other conditions, will be excluded from 

EPA’s hazardous waste regulations. EPA also clarifies that CO2 injected 

underground via UIC Class II wells for EOR is not expected to be a 

waste management activity. EPA added that the management of CO2

under the specified conditions does not present a substantial risk to 

human health or the environment. The final rule is available online.

“[Wyoming] to Regulate Greenhouse Gases.” 

On December 23, 2013, the U.S. EPA handed over authority for GHG 

permitting in Wyoming to the Wyoming Department of Environmental 

Quality (DEQ). A DEQ official said that the department will add CH4

and CO2 to the list of reviewed emissions in the state. The GHG rule, 

which was finalized in 2010, applies to large emitters. From Wyoming 

Public Media on December 30, 2013.

“South City Moves Forward with Climate Action Plan.” 

According to city officials, South San Francisco’s Climate Action Plan 

(CAP), currently in its final draft form, includes an approach to reduce 

GHG emissions, adapt to potential climate change, and support similar 

statewide efforts. The CAP includes a 15 percent reduction target by 

2020 and identifies the three methods for achieving the reduction target 

as statewide reduction efforts, existing local programs, and energy 

efficiency and conservation. These three methods combine for 63 percent 

of the total goal. From San Francisco Examiner on December 27, 2013.

“Engaging the public with low-carbon energy technologies: Results 

from a Scottish large group process.” 

The following is the Abstract of this article: “This paper presents the results 
4

carbonate rock and sandstone. It is indicated that elastic wave velocities 

change more significantly as there is greater difference for bulk modulus 

between the injected CO2 and the existing media in pore spaces. With 

the wave velocity and density variation ranges estimated from the rock 

sample study, the sensitivity of surface wave velocity was examined by 

perturbing parameters of the CO2 storage layer in two layered reservoir 

models. It is found that the surface waves are more sensitive to the 

changes of shear wave velocity and thickness of CO2 storage layer; 

but they are less sensitive to density and compressional wave velocity 

variations. The fundamental mode of Rayleigh waves is most sensitive 

to the physical parameter perturbation of the CO2 storage layer for the 

carbonate case. However, high frequency modes were observed to be 

more active for shear wave velocity and thickness variation scenarios in 

the sandstone reservoir simulations. The simulations demonstrate that 

the monitoring feasibility increases as the CO2 reservoir layer becomes 

thicker and the bury depth goes shallower. However, with the geological 

setting parameters found in existing CCS projects, it is concluded to 

be a challenge to detect abnormalities in a CO2 storage reservoir by 

comparing the shift of shear wave velocity profiles that are derived 

from analysis of surface wave response data. It is, therefore, proposed 

to consider other microtremor attributes during the development of CO2

monitoring techniques based on passive measurement of microseismicity, 

which is explored by some researchers.” Xuehang Song, Kaoshan 

Dai, Gen Chen, Yongdong Pan, and Zheng Zhong, International 

Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. (Subscription may be required.)

“Sensitivity of Joule-Thomson cooling to impure CO2 injection in 

depleted gas reservoirs.” 

The following is the Abstract of this article: “Depleted hydrocarbon 

reservoirs are key targets for geological storage of CO2. It is well known 

that Joule–Thomson cooling can potentially occur in reservoirs during 

CO2 injection. In this paper [the authors] investigate the impact of the 

presence of other gases (impurities) in the injected CO2 stream on Joule–

Thomson cooling. A coupled heat and mass transport model is presented 

that accurately accounts for the pressure-, temperature-, and gascompositional influences on the thermo-physical transport properties 

such as density, viscosity, specific heat capacity and Joule–Thomson 

coefficient. With this model it is shown that impurities affect both the 

spatial extent of the zone around the well bore in which Joule–Thomson 

cooling is induced and the magnitude of the cooling. [Sulfur dioxide 

(SO2)] expands the zone of cooling, [oxygen (O2), nitrogen (N2)], 

and CH4 contract this zone, and [hydrogen sulfide (H2S)] has a small 

influence on the spatial extent of cooling. These relative [behaviors] 

are primarily controlled by the impact of the impurities on the specific 

heat capacity of the gas mixtures. The influence of impurities on the 

magnitude of cooling also depends on the operational conditions of gas 

injection. Enhanced cooling is caused by O2, N2, and CH4 in combination 

with constant pressure injection, while for constant rate injection cooling 

enhancement is minimal or absent. Presence of SO2 strongly suppresses 

Joule–Thomson cooling at low injection temperatures. Apart from 

the Joule–Thomson coefficient, the density of the gas mixture plays 

an important role in controlling these thermal responses. The thermal 

risks associated with impure gas injection appear small. Enhanced 

cooling >5 K requires high-pressure, low-temperature injection in a 

low permeability reservoir and presence of O2, N2, and/or CH4 in the 

injectate. Co-injection of SO2 has clear beneficial thermal consequences 

for low-temperature injection, by suppressing Joule–Thomson cooling, 

Policy (Continued)

of a large group process conducted in Edinburgh, Scotland investigating 

public perceptions of climate change and low-carbon energy 

technologies, specifically CCS. The quantitative and qualitative results 

reported show that the participants were broadly supportive of efforts 

to reduce [CO2] emissions, and that there is an expressed preference 

for renewable energy technologies to be employed to achieve this. CCS 

was considered in detail during the research due to its climate mitigation 

potential; results show that the workshop participants were cautious 

about its deployment. The paper discusses a number of interrelated 

factors which appear to influence perceptions of CCS; factors such 

as the perceived costs and benefits of the technology, and people’s 

personal values and trust in others all impacted upon participants’ 

attitudes towards the technology. The paper thus argues for the need 

to provide the public with broad-based, balanced and trustworthy 

information when discussing CCS, and to take seriously the full range 

of factors that influence public perceptions of low-carbon technologies.” 

Rhys Howell, Simon Shackley, Leslie Mabon, Peta Ashworth, and 

Talia Jeanneret, Energy Policy. (Subscription may be required.)

“Not Under Our Back Yards? A case study of social acceptance of 

the Northern Netherlands CCS initiative.” 

The following is the Abstract of this article: “[The authors] analyze the 

decision-making process of the abandonment of a CCS initiative in the 

Northern-Netherlands. [The authors] investigate the social acceptance 

of the Northern-Netherlands CCS initiative using the results from 

a survey among the key stakeholders. [The authors] find that local 

opposition can only be held partially responsible for the abandonment 

of the CCS project. This result differs from the broadly accepted notion 

‘no local public acceptance, no CCS.’ [The authors’] study finds that 

the views from key stakeholders regarding the prospects of the CCS 

initiative were conflicting and this played a role in abandoning the 

initiative. [The authors] conclude that the way in which responsibilities 

between key stakeholders were arranged has had a dominant impact 

on the level of acceptance. [The authors] recommend that future 

policy and policy instruments for subsurface activities, like CCS, 

should be designed in accordance with the object, subject and intersubject dimension of the decision-making process. In addition there 

should be a strategic framework, which accounts for the interaction 

between social-political, market and community acceptance.” 

Herman W.A. van Os, Rien Herber, and Bert Scholtens, Renewable 

and Sustainable Energy Reviews. (Subscription may be required.) 

Geology

“Sensitivity study of surface waves for CO2 storage monitoring.”

The following is the Abstract of this article: “CCS is a potential 

technology to reduce [GHG] emission. Suitable techniques are 

essential for site characterization as well as CO2 injection and storage 

monitoring. A surface wave seismic method was explored in this study to 

investigate its feasibility for this purpose. Elastic wave responses of CO2

flooded rock were first investigated numerically in two types of rocks,
Geology (Continued)

and may therefore be of special interest to help bring down the costs of 

CO2 [storage] in depleted gas reservoirs.” Zaman Ziabakhsh-Ganji 

and Henk Kooi, Applied Energy. (Subscription may be required.)

“Basin-scale modeling of CO2 storage using models of varying 

complexity.”

The following is the Abstract of this article: “Geological carbon storage 

can significantly contribute to climate-change mitigation only if it is 

deployed at a large scale. This means that injection scenarios must occur, 

and be analyzed, at the basin scale. Various mathematical models of 

different complexity may be used to assess the fate of injected CO2 and/

or resident brine. These models span the range from multi-dimensional, 

multi-phase numerical simulators to simple single-phase analytical 

solutions. In this study, [the authors] consider a range of models, all 

based on vertically integrated governing equations, to predict the basinscale pressure response to specific injection scenarios. The Canadian 

section of the mid-continent Basal [Formation] is used as a test site to 

compare the different modeling approaches. The model domain 

covers an area of approximately 811,000 km2, and the total injection 

rate is 63 Mt/yr, corresponding to [nine] locations where large point 

sources have been identified. Predicted areas of critical pressure 

exceedance are used as a comparison metric among the different 

modeling approaches. Comparison of the results shows that singlephase numerical models may be good enough to predict the 

pressure response over a large [formation]; however, a simple 

superposition of semi-analytical or analytical solutions is not 

sufficiently accurate because spatial variability of formation 

properties plays an important role in the problem, and these 

variations are not captured properly with simple superposition. [The 

authors] consider two different injection scenarios: injection at the 

source locations and injection at locations with more suitable 

[formation] properties. Results indicate that in formations with 

significant spatial variability of properties, strong variations in 

injectivity among the different source locations can be expected, 

leading to the need to transport the captured CO2to suitable 

injection locations, thereby necessitating development of a 

pipeline network.” Xinwo Huang, Karl W. Bandilla, Michael A. 

Celia, and Stefan Bachu, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas 

Control. (Subscription may be required.)

Technology

“Carbon dioxide injection for enhanced gas recovery and storage 

(reservoir simulation).” 

The following is the Abstract of this article: “[Carbon dioxide] 

injection for EOR had been broadly investigated both physically and 

economically. The concept for enhanced gas recovery (EGR) is a new 

area under discussion that had not been studied as comprehensively 

as EOR. In this paper, the ‘Tempest’ simulation software was used to 

create a three-dimensional reservoir model. The simulation studies 

were investigated under different case scenarios by using experimental 

data produced by Clean Gas Technology Australia (CGTA). The main 

purpose of this study is to illustrate the potential of enhanced natural gas

5

recovery and CO2 storage by re-injecting CO2 production from the 

natural gas reservoir. The simulation results outlined what factors 

are [favorable] for the CO2-EGR and storage as a function of CO2

breakthrough in terms of optimal timing of CO2 injection and different 

injection rates. After [analyzing] the results for each case scenario, it 

had been concluded that CO2 injection can be applied to increase natural 

gas recovery simultaneously [storing] a large amount of the injected 

CO2 for this particular gas reservoir. In addition, various CO2 costs 

involved in the CO2-EGR and storage were investigated to determine 

whether this technique is feasible in terms of the CO2 content in the 

production as a preparation stage to achieve the economic analysis for 

the model.” Chawarwan Khan, Robert Amin, and Gary Madden, 

Egyptian Journal of Petroleum. (Subscription may be required.)

“Economic analysis of a supercritical coal-fired CHP plant 

integrated with an absorption carbon capture installation.”

The following is the Abstract of this article: “Energy investments in 

Poland are currently focused on supercritical coal-fired unit technology. 

It is likely, that in the future, these units are to be integrated with 

CCS installations, which enable a significant reduction of [GHG] 

emissions into the atmosphere. A significant share of the energy 

market in Poland is constituted by coal-fired combined heat and power 

(CHP) plants. The integration of these units with CCS installation can 

be economically inefficient. However, the lack of such integration 

enhances the investment risk due to the possibility of appearing on 

the market in the near future high prices of emission allowances. The 

aforementioned factors and additional favorable conditions for the 

development of cogeneration can cause one to consider investing in 

large supercritical CHP plants. This paper presents the results of an 

economic analysis aimed at comparing three cases of CHP plants, one 

without an integrated CCS installation and two with such installations. 

The same steam cycle structure for all variants was adopted. The cases 

of integrated CHP plants differ from each other in the manner in which 

they recover heat. For the evaluation of the respective solutions, the 

break-even price of electricity and avoided emission cost were used.” 

Lukasz Bartela, Anna Skorek-Osikowska, and Janusz Kotowicz, 

Energy. (Subscription may be required.)

“Numerical assessment of CO2 geological [storage] in sloping and 

layered heterogeneous formations: A case study from Taiwan.”

The following is the Abstract of this article: “[CO2] geological [storage] 

(CGS) has been recognized as one of the potential solutions for reducing 

anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The Changhua Coastal Industrial 

Park (CCIP) in central Taiwan has been preliminarily evaluated as a 

potential site for CGS. The CCIP site possesses sloping and layered 

heterogeneous formations with stagnant groundwater flow. Previous 

geophysical investigations of seismic reflection survey have found no 

significant faults near this site. Prior to the actual application of CGS 

in the field, it is important to carry out numerical simulations to predict 

the short- and long-term evolution of injected CO2 into deep geological 

formations. In this study, the TOUGHREACT/ECO2N simulator is 

employed in order to conduct comprehensive CGS assessments at the 

CCIP site. Field scale CGS simulations are utilized to capture the details 

of the physical features, such as the displacement of saline brine by the 

injection of CO2, buoyancy/gravity convection, and salt precipitation 

due to pore water dry-out, in the vicinity of the CO2 injection well. 

Simulation results show that (1) the migration of CO2 plume did not 
6

Technology (Continued)

penetrate the low permeability formation at 500 years, (2) formation 

tilting caused a slightly asymmetric CO2 plume oriented toward the 

up-tilt direction, and (3) the amount of solubility and residual gas 

trapping accounted for 26.8 [percent] and 19.0 [percent], respectively, 

of injected CO2 by weight at 500 years.” Rui-Tang Sung, Min-Hsu Li, 

Jia-Jyun Dong, Andrew Tien-Shun Lin, Shu-Kun Hsu, Chien-Ying 

Wang, and Chien-Nan Yang, International Journal of Greenhouse 

Gas Control. (Subscription may be required.)

Terrestrial

“Impact of total organic carbon (in sediments) and dissolved 

organic carbon (in overlying water column) on Hg [storage] by 

coastal sediments from the central east coast of India.” 

The following is the Abstract of this article: “Total organic carbon (TOC) 

(in sediment) and dissolved organic matter (DOM) (in water column) 

play important roles in controlling the mercury [storage] process by the 

sediments from the central east coast of India. This toxic metal prefers to 

associate with finer size particles (silt and clay) of sediments. Increasing 

concentrations of DOM in overlying water column may increase 

complexation/reduction processes of Hg2+ within the water column 

and decrease the process of Hg [storage] by sediments. However, high 

concentrations of DOM in water column may increase Hg [storage] 

process by sediments.” Parthasarathi Chakraborty, Brijmohan 

Sharma, P.V. Raghunath Babu, Koffi Marcellin Yao, and Saranya 

Jaychandran, Marine Pollution Bulletin. (Subscription may be required.)

“Managing wheat stubble as an effective approach to [store] soil 

carbon in a semi-arid environment: Spatial modelling.”

The following is the Abstract of this article: “Attention to farm 

management practices that enhance soil organic carbon (SOC) stock 

is increasing because of the latter’s importance of soil fertility, crop 

production and the global carbon cycle. [Storing] atmospheric CO2 as 

SOC has potential feedback to climate change. Spatial modelling of 

the effects of wheat stubble incorporation by tillage on SOC storage 

was studied in a semi-arid rainfed wheat cropping system, using the 

Agricultural Production Systems Simulator (APSIM). The model was 

validated against a long-term (1979–2004) experiment and yielded 

a Ratio of Performance to Deviation (RPD) of 1.6 and R2 of 0.63, 

indicating a moderate accuracy in predicting SOC turnover. In the 

Liverpool Plains and the southern slopes of NSW, SOC at top 30 cm 

layer is in a higher range of 40–50 t ha−1, while from the southern west 

plains to the northern plains extending to the New England tablelands, 

SOC is in a lower range of 25–35 t ha−1. It is notable that SOC in the 

central slopes is also in the lower range of 25–35 t ha−1. There is large 

simulated variation to changes in SOC from stubble management under 

the current climate that ranges from 0 to –200 kg ha−1 year−1 when 

100 [percent] of the wheat stubble is removed. When 100 [percent] of 

the wheat stubble is 100 [percent] incorporated, the changes in SOC 

become positive, from 0 to 200 kg ha−1 year−1. The SOC change patterns 

associated with the rates of wheat stubble incorporation are similar 

under a projected future climate. However, as future temperatures 

rise, less SOC will be [stored]. For example, under the 100 [percent] 

removal of wheat stubble, the averaged SOC is decreased by 126 ± 

40 kg ha−1 yr−1 under the current climate, while under the 18 GCM 

projected climate (2049–2098), the reduction is 135 ± 15 kg ha−1 yr−1. 

In contrast, when 100 [percent] wheat stubble is incorporated into the 

soil, the averaged SOC is increased by 100 ± 34 kg ha−1 yr−1 under 

the current climate, while under the 18 GCM projected climate, the 

averaged SOC is increased by 80 ± 23 kg ha−1 yr−1. To maintain the 

current level of SOC in the south-western wheat growing region (lower 

rainfall) of the state 20–40 [percent] wheat stubble is required to be 

incorporated into soil, compared to that in the north-eastern area (high 

rainfall), where the rate is about 40–60 [percent]. Across the actual 

wheat growing area in NSW, the decreased SOC with the 100 [percent] 

removal of wheat stubble results in 3.90 ± 1.23 Mt CO2 emissions per 

year under the current climate. Under the 18 GCM projected climate, 

the mean emission per year is 4.06 ± 0.50 Mt CO2 if 100 [percent] wheat 

stubble is removed from field. In contrast, when 100 [percent] wheat 

stubble is incorporated into soil, the amount of increased SOC will 

reduce the atmospheric CO2 emissions by 3.29 ± 1.11 Mt yr−1 under the 

current climate or by the mean of 2.68 ± 0.77 Mt yr−1 under the GCM 

projected climate. There is a clear trend to theoretically decrease CO2

emissions with the increased incorporation of wheat stubble.” De Li 

Liu, Muhuddin R. Anwar, Garry O’Leary, and Mark K. Conyers, 

Geoderma. (Subscription may be required.)

Trading

“RGGI States Make Major Cuts to Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

from Power Plants.”

The states participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative 

(RGGI) announced that the 2014 RGGI cap is 91 million tons, 

representing a 45 percent reduction to the RGGI CO2 cap. The RGGI 

cap will decline 2.5 percent each year from 2015 to 2020. This would 

result in a projected 50 percent decrease from 2005 levels of power 

plant CO2 emissions in the RGGI states by 2020. The first CO2

allowance auction under the new cap (23rd RGGI auction) will take 

place on March 5, 2014. The RGGI states also announced the first of 

the interim adjustments to the RGGI cap to help account for the 

private bank of allowances held by market participants before the 

new cap was implemented. The RGGI states also included two 

interim adjustments to the RGGI cap to account for banked 

allowances. From RGGI News Release on January 13, 2014.

“Guangdong Launches World’s Second Largest Carbon Market.” 

China’s Guangdong province launched a carbon trading scheme, 

with carbon allowances selling at approximately $9.58. According to 

analysts, the first auction saw 28 companies buy 3 million metric tons 

of allowances for $9.58 per metric ton. On the first day of exchange, 

approximately 120,000 metric tons of allowances were sold, each 

priced in the range of $9.84 to $10. More than 200 companies from 

the power, cement, iron, and steel sectors are required to participate 

in Guangdong’s pilot project, which is part of a wider pilot being 

rolled out across China over the next two years. Shanghai and Beijing 

began carbon trading in November 2013; other schemes are expected 
7

Recent Publications

“Policy instruments for large-scale CCS.” 

The following is from the Executive Summary of this document: “This report analyses possible policy instruments for the [realization] of 

large-scale deployment of CCS for all large emissions sources, both in industry and power generation. Seven instruments are assessed: [1] 

Government funding; [2] Investment funding via market mechanisms (as NER300); [3] Carbon tax; [4] Emission-trading systems (ETS); 

[5] Feed-in tariffs; [6] Certificate systems (portfolio standard); [7] Emission performance standards (EPS). In order to ensure large-scale 

deployment of CCS, ZERO considers a mix of instruments indispensable: at the core, an instrument giving sufficient incentive to make business 

cases for CCS viable and trigger investments in deployment and innovation. For industry to embark on large-scale investments, a long-term 

predictable framework is needed. The best policy instruments for scaling up CCS deployment to emerge from this analysis are a CCS certificate 

system combined with an appropriate EPS. The certificate system finances the cost for CCS deployment through a cost-sharing model, while 

the EPS sets a clear regulation, stopping investments in high-emission conventional solutions. General CCS instruments are preferable to

Trading (Continued)

to follow in 2014 in Tianjin, Chongqing, and the province of 

Hubei. According to China’s National Development and Reform 

Commission, Guangdong’s carbon trading scheme will allow the 

province to meet an emissions intensity reduction target of 19.5 percent 

from 2010 to 2015. From BusinessGreen on December 23, 2013.

“Introducing carbon taxes in South Africa.” 

The following is the Abstract of this article: “South Africa is considering 

introducing a carbon tax to reduce [GHG] emissions. Following a 

discussion of the motivations for considering a carbon tax, [the authors] 

evaluate potential impacts using a dynamic economy wide model 

linked to an energy sector model including a detailed evaluation of 

border carbon adjustments. Results indicate that a phased-in carbon 

tax of US$30 per ton of CO2 can achieve national emissions reductions 

targets set for 2025. Relative to a baseline with free disposal of CO2, 

constant world prices and no change in trading partner behavior, the 

preferred tax scenario reduces national welfare and employment by 

about 1.2 and 0.6 percent, respectively. However, if trading partners 

unilaterally impose a carbon consumption tax on South African exports, 

then welfare/employment losses exceed those from a domestic carbon 

tax. South Africa can lessen welfare/employment losses by introducing 

its own border carbon adjustments. The mode for recycling carbon tax 

revenues strongly influences distributional outcomes, with tradeoffs 

between growth and equity.” Theresa Altona, Channing Arndtb, Rob 

Daviesa, Faaiqa Hartleya, Konstantin Makrelova, James Thurlowc, 

and Dumebi Ubogua, Applied Energy. (Subscription may be required.)

“Carbon tariffs and cooperative outcomes.”

The following is the Abstract of this article: “In the absence of an 

international environmental agreement (IEA) on climate change, a 

country may be reluctant to unilaterally implement environmental 

actions, as this may lead to the relocation of firms to other, lax-onpollution countries. To avoid this problem, while still taking care of 

the environment, a country may impose a carbon tariff that adjusts for 

the differences between its own carbon tax and the other country’s 

tax. [The authors] consider two countries with a representative firm in 

each one, and characterize and contrast the equilibrium strategies and 

outcomes in three scenarios. In the first (benchmark) scenario, in a first 

stage the regulators in the two countries determine the carbon taxes noncooperatively, and in a second stage, the firms compete à la Cournot. In 

the second scenario, the regulators cooperate in determining the carbon 

taxes, while the firms still play a non-cooperative Cournot game. In the 

third scenario, [the authors] add another player, e.g., the World Trade 

Organization, which announced a border tax in a prior stage; the game 

is then played as in the first scenario. [The authors’] two major results 

are (i) a border-tax adjustment (BTA) mimics quite well the cooperative 

solution in setting the carbon taxes as in scenario two. This means that 

a BTA may be a way around the lack of enthusiasm for an IEA. (ii) 

All of [the authors’] simulations show that a partial correction of the 

difference in taxes is sufficient to maximize total welfare. In short, the 

conclusion is that a BTA may be used as a credible threat to achieve 

an outcome that is close to the cooperative outcome.” Terry Eyland 

and Georges Zaccour, Energy Policy. (Subscription may be required.)

“When to invest in carbon capture and storage technology: A 

mathematical model.” 

The following is the Abstract of this article: “[The authors] present two 

models of the optimal investment decision in carbon capture and storage 

technology (CCS)-one where the carbon price is deterministic (based 

on the newly introduced carbon floor price in Great Britain) and one 

where the carbon price is stochastic (based on the [European Union’s 

Emission Trading Scheme (ETS)] permit price in the rest of Europe). 

A novel feature of this work is that in both models investment costs are 

time dependent which adds an extra dimension to the decision problem. 

[The authors’] deterministic model allows for quite general dependence 

on carbon price and consideration of time to build and simple calculus 

techniques determine the optimal time to invest. [The authors] then 

[analyze] the effect of carbon price volatility on the optimal investment 

decision by solving a Bellman equation with an infinite planning 

horizon. [The authors] find that increasing the carbon price volatility 

increases the critical investment threshold and that adoption of this 

technology is not optimal at current prices, in agreement with other 

works. However reducing carbon price volatility by switching from 

carbon permits to taxes or by introducing a carbon floor as in Great 

Britain would accelerate the adoption of carbon abatement technologies 

such as CCS.” D.M. Walsh, K. O’Sullivan, W.T. Lee, and M.T. 

Devine, Energy Economics. (Subscription may be required.)
8

Recent Publications (Continued)

sector-specific instruments, covering emissions beyond power production to give competition for reduced CCS cost across all 

sectors. And policy instruments for the whole CCS chain are preferable to separate instruments for each part of the chain in the long 

term perspective. Serving as a basis for the analysis, a thorough assessment of existing CCS policy worldwide as well as qualitative 

interviews with stakeholders have been conducted. The assessment of today’s CCS policy shows that a combination of instruments 

has been used for large-scale CCS projects today, with public funding, investment support and tax credits for CO2 used for EOR being 

the most important. The most successful policy for building CCS has been in the [United States] and Canada, where an EPS has been 

important part of the policy mix to trigger CCS. The need for CCS will vary depending on country and region. A sincere CCS policy 

must take renewable energy developments into account. In power markets, shares of variable renewable energy are increasing fast. CCS 

must therefore adjust to changing dynamics in the power sector. Even in a scenario where renewables are taking over totally in power 

generation, there are industry sectors where CCS is the only available mitigation solution today, such as production of cement, steel, 

ammonia, hydrogen and in natural gas cleaning. CCS may also be necessary on bioenergy production, producing negative emissions.”

“Carbon Capture and Storage: Designing the Legal and Regulatory Framework for New Zealand.” 

The following is from the Executive Summary of this document: “CCS is a method of reducing emissions of CO2 in order to reduce 

the effects of human activity on the global climate. At thermal power stations and industrial plants where large amounts of CO2 are 

generated, various capture technologies can separate CO2 from other gases that will be discharged to the atmosphere and compress it. It 

can then be transported by pipeline to a location where it can be injected deep underground (at least 800 meters) for permanent storage 

or sequestration. Several different types of geological formation can provide effective CCS storage, allowing CO2 to be injected in 

sufficient quantity and containing it permanently under impermeable [caprock] formations. CCS brings together technologies that are 

well understood, and a number of large CCS operations have been operating in different countries for some time. Although CCS will be 

a new activity in New Zealand, there is a great deal of experience with it elsewhere. Work in New Zealand has identified a number of 

possible sources of CO2 that would justify CCS operations. Some of them are coal and natural gas fired power stations, although New 

Zealand has less fossil-fuel electricity generation than many countries. Other sources are industrial activities such as gas processing, 

oil refining, cement making and steel making. Suitable geological formations for CCS injection and storage have also been identified.”

“CO2 Storage Atlas: Barents Sea.”

The following is from the Preface of this document: “The CO2 Storage Atlas of the Barents Sea has been prepared by the Norwegian 

Petroleum Directorate, at the request of the Ministry of Petroleum and Energy. The studied areas are located in opened parts of the 

Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). The main objectives have been to identify the safe and effective areas for long-term storage of CO2

and to avoid possible negative interference with ongoing and future petroleum activity. [The authors] have also built on the knowledge 

[they] have from the petroleum industry and from the two CO2 storage projects on NCS (Sleipner and Snøhvit). This study is based on 

detailed work on all relevant geological formations, discoveries and hydrocarbon fields in the Barents Sea. The work is based on several 

studies as well, as data from more than 40 years of petroleum activity on the [NCS]. [Nine] geological formations have been assessed, 

and grouped into saline [formations]. The [formations] were evaluated with regard to reservoir quality and presence of relevant sealing 

formations. Those [formations] that may have a relevant storage potential in terms of depth, capacity and injectivity have been considered. 

Structural maps and thickness maps of the geological formations are presented in the atlas, and were used to calculate pore volumes. 

Several structural closures have been identified and some of them were further assessed. A study of the CO2 storage potential in relevant 

dry-drilled structures and mapped structures in the area is provided. [Carbon dioxide] storage in [EOR] projects is also discussed and a new 

study of CO2 for EOR and CO2 injected in residual oil zones has been outlined. The methodology applied for estimating storage capacity 

is based on previous assessments, but the storage efficiency factor has been assessed individually for each [formation] based on simplified 

reservoir simulation cases. The assessed [formations] have been ranked according to guidelines developed for the CO2 Storage Atlas of 

the Norwegian part of the North Sea (2011). This atlas is based on data from seismic, exploration and production wells, together with 

production data. The data base is essential for the evaluation and documentation of geological storage prospectivity. [The authors] hope 

that this study will fulfill the objective of providing useful information for future exploration for CO2 storage sites. [The authors] have not 

attempted to assess the uncertainty range for storage capacities in this atlas, but [the authors] have made an effort to document the methods 

and main assumptions. The assessments described in this atlas will be accompanied by a [geographical information system (GIS)] database.”
9

Legislative Activity

“Carbon Capture and Storage and the London Protocol: Recent 

Efforts to Enable Transboundary CO2 Transfer.”

The following is the Abstract of this article: “In the absence of new 

energy policies or supply constraints, the International Energy Agency 

(IEA) estimates that energy-related CO2 emissions in 2050 will be 

twice 2007 levels. However, the ETP 2012 2DG Scenario provides 

a technically achievable, low-cost strategy to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions to a level consistent with a 2°C temperature increase. Under 

the 2DG Scenario, CCS would contribute just under one-fifth of total 

emissions reductions by 2050. To enable CCS to contribute at the 

levels in the 2DG Scenario, rapid growth in the number CCS projects 

is needed between today and 2020, and then the number of projects 

must grow steadily through 2050. As well as being a major financial, 

technical and logistical challenge, this is a significant regulatory 

challenge. Legal obstacles associated with global CCS deployment 

must be removed today including the prohibition on transboundary 

CO2 transfer under the 1996 Protocol to the Convention on 

the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and 

Other Matter, 1972 (London Protocol). This paper reviews recent 

international actions to remove this prohibition; undertakes a legal 

analysis to identify possible options available to contracting parties 

under international law to allow transborder movement, pending 

entry into force of a formal, 2009 amendment enabling cross-border 

transportation of CO2; and makes clear recommendations on the 

next best approach. It then looks at efforts undertaken by contracting 

parties and other organizations in 2011 and 2012 to update the 2007 

Specific Guidelines for Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Streams for 

Disposal into Sub-seabed Geological Formations (2007 CO2 Storage 

Guidelines) in light of the 2009 amendment.” Justine Garrett and 

Sean McCoy, Energy Procedia. (Subscription may be required.)
10

About NETL’s Carbon Storage Newsletter

Compiled by the National Energy Technology Laboratory, this 

newsletter is a monthly summary of public and private sector 

carbon storage news from around the world. The article titles 

are links to the full text for those who would like to read more.

National Energy Technology Laboratory

The National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), part of DOE’s 

national laboratory system, is owned and operated by the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE). NETL supports DOE’s mission to 

advance the national, economic, and energy security of the United States. 

626 Cochrans Mill Road

P.O. Box 10940

Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0940

3610 Collins Ferry Road

P.O. B ox 880

Morgantown, WV 26507-0880

13131 Dairy Ashford Road, Suite 225

Sugar Land, TX 77478

420 L Street, Suite 305

Anchorage, AK 99501

1450 Queen Avenue SW

Albany, OR 97321-2198

Contacts

Traci Rodosta

304-285-1345

traci.rodosta@netl.doe.gov

Dawn M. Deel

304-285-4133

dawn.deel@netl.doe.gov

Disclaimer

This Newsletter was prepared under contract for the United States Department of Energy’s 

National Energy Technology Laboratory. Neither the United States Government nor any 

agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or 

assumes any legal liability for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, 

apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe 

privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, 

or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily 

constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States 

Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein 

do not necessarily reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

About DOE’s Carbon Storage Program

The Carbon Storage Program is implemented by the U.S. Department of 

Energy’s Office of Fossil Energy and managed by the National Energy 

Technology Laboratory. The program is developing technologies to 

capture, separate, and store CO2 in order to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions without adversely influencing energy use or hindering 

economic growth. NETL envisions having a technology portfolio of 

safe, cost-effective, carbon dioxide capture, transport, and storage 

technologies that will be available for commercial deployment.

The Carbon Storage Program Overview webpage provides detailed 

information of the program’s structure as well as links to the webpages 

that summarize the program’s key elements.

Carbon Storage Program Resources

The U.S. Department of Energy’s 2012 United States Carbon Utilization 

and Storage Atlas (Atlas IV) shows that the United States has at least 

2,400 billion metric tons of potential carbon dioxide storage resource 

in saline formations, oil and gas reservoirs, and unmineable coal. 

Data from Atlas IV is available via the National Carbon Sequestration 

Database and Geographic Information System (NATCARB), which is a 

geographic information system-based tool developed to provide a view 

of carbon capture and storage potential.

Newsletters, program fact sheets, best practices manuals, roadmaps, 

educational resources, presentations, and more are available via the 

Carbon Storage Reference Shelf.

Get answers to your carbon capture and storage questions at NETL’s 

Frequently Asked Questions webpage.

There are several ways to join the conversation and connect with NETL’s 

Carbon Storage Program:

NETL RSS Feed

NETL on Facebook

NETL on Twitter

NETL on LinkedIn

NETL on YouTube