Carbon Neutral Baltic Sea Region by 2050: Myth or Reality?

12 Pages Posted: 2 Apr 2021

See all articles by Alla Shogenova

Alla Shogenova

Tallinn University of Technology, Department of Geology

Nicklas Nordback

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Daniel Sopher

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Kazbulat Shogenov

Tallinn University of Technology, Department of Geology (TalTech DG)

Auli Niemi

Uppsala University

Christopher Juhlin

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Saulius Sliaupa

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Monika Ivandic

Uppsala University

Adam Wojcicki

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Jüri Ivask

Tallinn University of Technology (TUT) - Department of Geology

Lukasz Klimkowski

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Stanisław Nagy

AGH University of Science and Technology

Date Written: April 1, 2021

Abstract

There is a large theoretical capacity to store CO2 in the Palaeozoic sedimentary succession of the Baltic Basin (BB). The most prospective areas for CO2 storage within the BB border several countries such as Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia, and include large saline aquifers and oil and gas fields. In recent years, a significant amount of research has been completed in fields related to CCUS in some of the Baltic Sea Region (BSR) countries.

The main drivers for implementation of CCUS technology in the BSR are (1) a need to decrease the high CO2 emissions of the region; (2) obligations taken under the Paris Climate Agreement and national strategies up to 2050; (3) European requirements for low-carbon and circular economy; (4) the fact that the BSR has a large potential storage capacity; (5) London Protocol (LP) Parties in October 2019 adopted a resolution to allow provisional application of an amendment to article 6 of the LP to allow sub-seabed geological formations for CO2 storage projects to be shared across national borders; (6) offshore CO2 storage is demonstrated under the North Sea; (7) a well developed natural gas pipeline system exists that can be combined with the a potential CO2 transportation network; (8) good research capacity demonstrated by institutions within the BSR; (9) CO2 injection has been already evaluated experimentally for EOR by oil companies in Lithuania and Russia with positive results. The main barriers for implementation of CCS technology in the BSR are: (1) limitations and bans within the national CCS regulations; (2) not all BSR countries are parties of the LP; (3) amendment to Article 6 of the London Protocol is implemented only by four BSR countries; (4) absence of a CO2 storage atlas of the BSR; (5) public communication and acceptance of CO2 storage options are low in most of the BSR countries; (6) relatively high costs of CCS projects; (7) low or absent national support of CCS research and pilot projects; (8) low public awareness and limited education options for CCS; (9) onshore CO2 storage in saline aquifers is not well established in Europe and not permitted in the BSR.

Among positive developments in the BSR are 1) Fortum's plans to develop pilot CO2 capture plants in Sweden, Lithuania and Poland; 2) Willingness has been expressed by the government of Denmark to ratify an amendment to article 6 of the LP and to implement CCS offshore; 3) Several pilot CGS projects have been proposed in the report produced by the CGS Baltic seed project [1]. Among negative developments is a misunderstanding of the role of the EEAP (CO2 tax) in reaching carbon-free targets and banning of any CO2 injection in Lithuania since 2020.

Keywords: Baltic Basin, CCUS, CO2 emissions, CCS Regulations, London Protocol, CO2-EOR

Suggested Citation

Shogenova, Alla and Nordback, Nicklas and Sopher, Daniel and Shogenov, Kazbulat and Niemi, Auli and Juhlin, Christopher and Sliaupa, Saulius Sliaupa and Ivandic, Monika and Wojcicki, Adam and Ivask, Jüri and Klimkowski, Lukasz and Nagy, Stanisław, Carbon Neutral Baltic Sea Region by 2050: Myth or Reality? (April 1, 2021). Proceedings of the 15th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference 15-18 March 2021, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3817722 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3817722

Alla Shogenova (Contact Author)

Tallinn University of Technology, Department of Geology ( email )

Ehitajate tee 5
Tallinn, 19086
Estonia
+372 56644668 (Phone)

Nicklas Nordback

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Daniel Sopher

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Kazbulat Shogenov

Tallinn University of Technology, Department of Geology (TalTech DG) ( email )

Ehitajate tee 5
Tallinn, 19086
Estonia
+3725589001 (Phone)

Auli Niemi

Uppsala University ( email )

Box 513
Uppsala, 751 20
Sweden

Christopher Juhlin

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Saulius Sliaupa Sliaupa

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Monika Ivandic

Uppsala University ( email )

Box 513
Uppsala, 751 20
Sweden

Adam Wojcicki

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Jüri Ivask

Tallinn University of Technology (TUT) - Department of Geology

Ehitajate tee 5
Tallinn, 19086
Estonia

Lukasz Klimkowski

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Stanisław Nagy

AGH University of Science and Technology ( email )

30 Mickiewicza Av.
Kraków, 30-059
Poland

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
47
Abstract Views
186
PlumX Metrics