Geological storage of carbon dioxide ***I

P6_TA(2008)0612

European Parliament legislative resolution of 17 December 2008 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directives 85/337/EEC, 96/61/EC, Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 (COM(2008)0018 — C6-0040/2008 — 2008/0015(COD))

(2010/C 45 E/44)

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (A6-0414/2008),

1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3. Takes note of the statements of the Commission annexed to this resolution;

4. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 17 December 2008 with a view to the adoption of Directive 2009/…/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directive 85/337/EEC, European Parliament and Council Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC, 2008/1/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006

ANNEX

COMMISSION STATEMENTS

Statement by the Commission on latest developments in deployment of CCS technologies

From 2010 the Commission will regularly report on latest developments in deployment of CCS technologies within its activities related to running the network of CCS demonstration projects. This reporting will include information on the progress on the CCS demo plants deployment, progress of CCS technologies development, cost estimates and the development of CO2 transport and storage infrastructure.

Statement by the Commission on draft permit decisions and on draft decisions of transfer pursuant to Articles 10 paragraph 1 and 18 paragraph 2 of the Directive

The Commission will publish all opinions on draft permit decisions pursuant to Article 10 paragraph 1 of the Directive, and on draft decisions of transfer pursuant to Article 18 paragraph 2. The published version of the opinions will, however, display no information whose confidentiality is warranted under the exceptions to public access to information under Regulations (EC) Nos 1049/2001 and (EC) 1367/2006 concerning respectively public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43) and the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies (OJ L 264, 25.9.2006, p. 13).

Statement by the Commission on whether carbon dioxide should be a named substance with suitable thresholds in a revised Seveso-Directive

CO2 is a common substance and currently not classified as dangerous. CO2 transport and storage sites are therefore at the moment not included in Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (Seveso-Directive). On the basis of the Commission's preliminary analysis of the available information, for CO2 transport, both empirical and modelled evidence for pipeline transport would seem to indicate that the risks presented are no higher than for pipeline transport of natural gas. The same would seem to be true for ship transport of CO2 as compared with ship transport of liquefied natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas. The indications are also that the accident hazard posed by a CO2 storage site, whether from rupture at injection or from post-injection leakage, is unlikely to be significant. However, the case for considering CO2 as a named substance under the Seveso-Directive will be considered in more detail when developing the proposed revision of the Directive, scheduled for late 2009/ early 2010. Should the assessment identify a relevant potential accident hazard, the Commission will make proposals to include CO2 as a named substance with suitable thresholds in the revised Seveso-Directive. In that case, the Commission would also propose changes to Annex III to Directive 2004/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage (Environmental Liability Directive) as appropriate to ensure that all Seveso installations handling supercritical CO2 are covered under the Environmental Liability Directive.

Statement by the Commission on mineral sequestration of CO2

Mineral sequestration of CO2 (the fixation of CO2 in the form of inorganic carbonates) is a potential climate abatement technology which could in principle be used by the same categories of industrial installation as can use geological storage of CO2. However, it is at present still in the development stage. In addition to the energy penalty (1) associated with capturing CO2, there is currently a substantial energy penalty associated with the mineral carbonation process itself, which will require to be addressed before commercial implementation can be envisaged. As with geological storage, the controls required to ensure the environmental safety of the technology would also have to be established. These controls are likely to be substantially different from those for geological storage, given the fundamental differences between the technologies. In the light of these considerations, the Commission will follow closely the technical progress with mineral sequestration, with a view to developing an enabling legal framework to allow for environmentally-safe mineral sequestration and its recognition under the Emissions Trading System, when the technology has reached an appropriate state of development. Given the interest in the technology among Member States and the pace of technological change, a first assessment is likely to be appropriate towards 2014, or earlier if circumstances warrant.

(1) ‘Energy penalty’ is the term used to express the fact that a plant applying CO2 capture or mineralisation uses some of its energy for those processes, and so needs more energy than a plant of equivalent output without capture/mineralisation.