Planning Scotland's Seas: 2013 - The Scottish Marine Protected Area Project – Developing the Evidence Base tor Impact Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal Final Report

C.5. Carbon Capture and Storage

C.5.1 Introduction

This appendix provides an overview of existing and potential future activity for the carbon capture and storage (CCS) sector in Scottish waters and outlines the methods used to assess the impacts of potential MPAs on this sector.

C.5.2 Sector Definition

CCS is a carbon abatement technology that will enable fossil fuels to be used with substantially reduced CO ₂ emissions. CCS combines three distinct processes: capturing the CO ₂ from power stations and other industrial sources, transporting it (usually via pipelines) to storage points, then injection of the CO ₂ into deep geological formations ( e.g. deep saline formations or depleted Oil and Gas fields) for long term storage.

C.5.3 Overview of Existing Activity

Information sources used in the assessment are listed in Table C5.1.

Table C5.1. Carbon capture and storage information sources

Scale	Information Available	Date	Source
Scotland	Potential CO2 storage sites, transport options between sources and storage sites (ship and pipeline)	2009	Scottish Centre for Carbon Storage (2009)
Scotland	Refined estimate of CO2 storage capacity in North East Region, estimates of timelines to CCS deployment and employment estimates	2011	Scottish Centre for Carbon Storage (2011)
Scotland	Potential transport options and possible European CCS Network	2010	Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise (2010)
Scotland	Potential CO2 storage sites	2011	Baxter et al (2011)
UK	Aquifers (polygon)		BGS
UK	Large dome structures in the Bunter Sandstone Formation (polygon)		BGS / DECC
UK	Location of likely reservoirs		CCSA (NB was not possible to obtain for S coast work)
UK	Proximity of the UK's largest industrial emitters to least cost storage capacity	2012	DECC, 2012. CCS Roadmap
UK	Technical, economic, financial and social uncertainties facing CCS, potential role in UK power sector to 2030	2012	UK ERC, 2012

C5.3.1 Location and intensity of activity

A study into the opportunities for CO ₂ storage around Scotland (Scottish Centre for Carbon Storage (SCCS), 2009) showed that within the Scottish Renewable Energy Zone ^[31] , Scotland has an extremely large CO ₂ storage resource. Out of the 204 hydrocarbon fields and 80 saline aquifers identified within the study area, 29 hydrocarbon fields and 10 saline aquifers were identified as having apparent potential for CO ₂ storage, all of which lie in offshore waters within the Central and Northern North Sea (see Figure C5). Further assessment of these sites showed that four gas condensate fields (Brae North, Brae East, Britannia and Bruce Fields), one gas field (Frigg Field) and one oil field (Brent Field) present the most obvious opportunities as stores, with CO ₂ storage capacities of between 300-1,000Mt. The report noted that the three high pressure high temperature (HPHT) gas condensate fields (Franklin, Elgin and Shearwater fields) are likely to be too expensive to develop as stores in the short term. Fourteen oil fields, including the Brent Oil Field, were identified as having potential for CO ₂ storage in conjunction with enhanced oil recovery. The remaining seven oil fields offer large storage capacities but reservoir pressure may present obstacles to their use for CO ₂ storage. Out of the 80 saline aquifers identified within the study, ten were identified as meeting both geotechnical and storage capacity requirements (all of which lie within offshore waters in the Central and Northern North Sea Figure C5) with a total potential CO ₂ capacity in the range 4,600-46,000 Mt. The study concluded that these resources could easily accommodate the industrial CO ₂ emissions from Scotland for the next 200 years, with likely sufficient storage to allow import of CO ₂ from North East England, equating to over 25% of future UK large industry and power CO ₂ output. Pipelines were assessed as the best option for the secure and continuous transport of CO ₂ from different sources to collection hubs onshore and then to offshore storage hubs for local distribution to storage sites. In 2011, a study showed that the storage capacity of one of the saline aquifers identified in the 2009 study (the Captain Sandstone beneath the Moray Firth) was estimated to be over 360 Mt of CO ₂, with the potential for an additional 1200 Mt storage capacity with significant investment (SCCS, 2011). This equated to about 15-100 years of CO ₂ output from Scotland's existing industrial sources.

In March 2013, the Peterhead CCS Project was chosen as one of two CCS demonstration projects to progress to the next stage of the Government's CCS Commercialisation Competition funding. The project will transport CO ₂ captured from Peterhead Power station by pipeline approximately 100km offshore to the Goldeneye platform, where it will be injected into the depleted Goldeneye gas reservoir for long-term storage. The project is expected to capture in the region of 1 Mt of CO ₂ per annum during a 10-year demonstration phase. The development will largely use existing pipeline infrastructure running offshore to the Goldeneye Field.

C5.3.2 Economic value and employment

This sector is currently in its infancy and there is currently no CO ₂ storage in place. Therefore no information is available on the current economic value or employment.

C5.3.3 Future trends

The Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise (2010) stated that the emerging CCS-based industry in Scotland could support up to an estimated 10,000 new jobs in the next 15-20 years. A more recent study (SCCS, 2011) stated that an appropriately skilled and trained workforce, in addition to that already engaged in the engineering and offshore industries, will be an essential component of the new CCS industry in the UK and estimated that CCS could create 13,000 jobs in Scotland (and 14,000 elsewhere in the UK) by 2020 and increase in the following years (SCCS, 2011). This study also estimated that the UK plc share of the worldwide CCS business is potentially worth over £10 billion per year from around 2025, with the added value in the UK worth between £5-9.5 billion per year (SCCS, 2011).

CCS on fossil fuel power generation may have an important role in helping to meet Scotland's climate change targets of an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050. The Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise (2010) state that in order to make significant progress towards Scotland's climate change targets the electricity generation sector needs to be decarbonised by 2030. To meet this target Scotland must have one or more demonstrator projects operational by 2015 to ensure that CCS is available on a commercial scale from 2020 and be widespread in the sector by 2030 (including the retrofitting of CCS to existing plants). However, challenges to this emerging sector include demonstrating that CCS is economically and technically feasible, that CCS is permanent (proposed sites must be investigated and evaluated to demonstrate they are suitable for secure storage of CO ₂ for thousands of years) and whether the technology can be developed within a timescale that enables utilisation of the existing Oil and Gas infrastructure (platforms and pipelines) before decommissioning occurs (Baxter et al, 2011). Potential storage sites may increase as further hydrocarbon fields or saline aquifers suitable for CO ₂ storage may yet be discovered (SCCS, 2009).

C.5.4 Assumptions on Future Activity

Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Development International (undated) set out a series of possible scenarios for the future development of CCS in Scotland up to 2040. The scenarios assume that by 2020, the only CCS development in Scottish waters will be between St Fergus and the Goldeneye platform, using existing infrastructure. By 2030, it is assumed that possible additional development may occur with possible new pipelines constructed between Cockenzie and Peterhead and from the Tees to the Goldeneye platform, although an alternative option would be to transport the CO ₂ by ship ( Figure C5).

For the purpose of this assessment, it is assumed that both of the two new pipelines are constructed, with licences obtained in 2026 with both pipelines becoming operational in 2030.

C.5.5 Potential Interactions with MPA Features

Impacts on MPA features associated with carbon capture and storage are likely to be similar to those associated with oil and gas exploration and production. Although additional impacts are not yet known due to the lack of CCS activity in UK waters, they include potential ocean acidification associated with the release of carbon dioxide ( JNCC & NE, 2011).

C.5.6 Assumptions on Management Measures for Scenarios

It is assumed that the impact of CCS activities on MPA features will be managed through the existing marine licensing framework. Two scenarios ('lower' and 'upper') have been developed to capture the possible costs of potential MPAs to the CCS sector. These include a range of possible management measures, as detailed requirements will need to be based on site-specific factors.

The intermediate ('best') estimate for each site has been based on SNH/ JNCC current views on management options and judgements made by the study team. The assumptions do not pre-judge any future site-specific licensing decisions. After MPA designation, the management of activities in MPAs will be decided on a site-by-site basis and may differ from the assumptions in this assessment.

Management measures applied under the lower and upper scenarios are detailed below. Specific management measure assumptions for each scenario (including the intermediate scenario) are defined in the MPA Site Reports (Table 4, Appendix E).

Lower Scenario

• Additional costs will be incurred for new pipeline licence applications in assessing potential impacts to MPA features within 1km of proposed pipeline route;
• Mitigation measures may be required for non- OSPAR/BAP features ranging from:
  ˉ No additional mitigation required beyond existing good practice; and
  ˉ Re-routeing of pipeline to avoid highly sensitive MPA features.

Upper Scenario

• Additional costs will be incurred for new site licence applications in assessing potential impacts to all MPA features within 1km of proposed pipeline route;
• Additional survey costs will be incurred to inform new licence applications;
• Additional post-licence monitoring of any MPA features within 500m of pipeline; and
• Mitigation measures may be required for some OSPAR/BAP features ^[33] for which adequate protection is not currently achieved and all non- OSPAR/BAP features ranging from:
  ˉ Seasonal controls on new pipeline laying to minimise impacts to highly sensitive MPA features; and
  ˉ Re-routeing of pipeline to avoid moderately and highly sensitive MPA features.

C.5.7 Assessment Methods

Additional Licensing Costs

Where required, it is assumed that the additional costs will be as follows:

• Additional assessment costs - £10k per licence application (based on equivalent cost for cables cited in Annex H6 of Finding Sanctuary et al, 2012); and
• Additional survey costs - £5k per km for length of pipeline route within MPA (based on ABPmer, 2011).

Additional Post Licensing Costs

Where required, it is assumed that additional costs will be incurred as follows:

• Additional monitoring costs £5k per km for MPA features within 500m of pipeline, three years post construction ( ABPmer, 2011).

Mitigation Measures

Where required, it is assumed that the following additional costs may be incurred:

• Seasonal controls on new pipeline laying to minimise impacts to highly sensitive MPA features - site specific assessment; and
• Displacement of pipelines (£1m per km length of displacement; based on Annex H11 of Finding Sanctuary et al, 2012).

Cost of Uncertainty and Delays

The designation of NC MPAs has the potential to increase the time taken to determine licence and permit applications and to negatively affect investor confidence. It has not been possible to quantify these potential impacts.

C.5.8 Limitations

• The number and location of CCS pipelines and installations that may be constructed during the assessment period is unknown; and
• The requirements for management measures are uncertain.

C.5.9 References

Baxter, J.M., Boyd, I.L., Cox, M., Donald, A.E., Malcolm, S.J., Miles, H., Miller, B., Moffat, C.F., (Editors), 2011. Scotland's Marine Atlas: Information for the national marine plan. Marine Scotland, Edinburgh.

Finding Sanctuary, Irish Seas Conservation Zones, Net Gain and Balanced Seas, 2012. Impact

Assessment materials in support of the Regional Marine Conservation Zone Projects' Recommendations. Annex H6 Cables.

Finding Sanctuary, Irish Seas Conservation Zones, Net Gain and Balanced Seas, 2012. Impact

Assessment materials in support of the Regional Marine Conservation Zone Projects' Recommendations. Annex H11 Oil, Gas and Carbon Capture and Storage.

JNCC and NE, 2011. General advice on assessing potential impacts of and mitigation for human activities on MCZ features, using existing regulation and legislation. Advice from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and Natural England to the Regional MCZ Projects. June 2011. 107pp.

Scottish Centre for Carbon Storage (SCCS), 2009. Opportunities for CO2 storage around Scotland: An integrated strategic research study. Report for the Scottish Government. April, 2009.

Scottish Centre for Carbon Storage (SCCS), 2011. Progressing Scotland's CO2 storage opportunities. Report for the Scottish Government. March, 2011.

Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise, 2010. Carbon Capture and Storage - A Roadmap for Scotland. March 2010.