Procedure completed
2013/2079(INI) Developing and applying carbon capture and storage technology in Europe. Implementation report 2013
Lead committee dossier: ENVI/7/12253
Legal Basis RoP 052
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | ENVI | DAVIES Chris (ALDE) | GARDINI Elisabetta (PPE), PERELLÓ RODRÍGUEZ Andrés (S&D), EICKHOUT Bas (Verts/ALE), ROSBACH Anna (ECR) |
| Opinion | ITRE | FORD Vicky (ECR) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Subjects
Activites
-
2014/01/14
Results of vote in Parliament
- Results of vote in Parliament
-
T7-0009/2014
summary
The European Parliament adopted by 524 votes to 141 with 25 abstentions a resolution on implementation report 2013: developing and applying carbon capture and storage technology in Europe. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) might be the only means of achieving significant CO2 reductions from industrial sources, yet required investment and industrial-scale demonstration to promote innovation, secure cost reductions, and confirm its environmental safety. The International Energy Agency suggested that CCS was necessary to deliver almost 20 % of the CO2 reductions needed by 2050, and claimed that if CCS is not deployed, an additional 40 % in electricity investment would be needed to prevent a temperature rise in excess of 2°C. In 2007 EU heads of government aspired to have up to 12 CCS demonstration plants in operation by 2015, but as their financial viability depended on there being a high carbon price these ambitions cannot now be realised. The EU is losing its technological lead in CCS and – with only one project still being considered for NER300 funding, and European Energy Programme for Recovery projects having been terminated or suspended – now has no effective policy to promote development of CCS flagship projects. Raising ambitions: Members recognised that CCS deployment has the potential to allow the EU to meet its 2050 low-carbon aspirations at least cost and that it was necessary in particular for decarbonising high CO2 emitting industries. They believed that it might also contribute to the diversity and security of energy supplies while creating employment opportunities. Parliament affirmed the urgent need to develop a range of full-chain CCS flagship projects so as to identify the best and economically most advantageous solutions, and called on the Commission to set goals for the achievement of this objective. It called on the Commission to encourage CCS deployment not only in connection with coal and gas power generation but also in a range of industrial sectors such as chemicals, metallurgy, iron and steel, cement and refineries. Members insisted that the Commission should address the issue of CCS deployment within the 2030 climate and energy framework, and should bring forward proposals for promoting the early construction of CCS flagship projects. Leading role of Member States: Parliament emphasised that, in the absence of a high carbon price, Member States that wish to promote deployment of CCS have the key role to play in providing a transparent revenue stream and such other financial support as may be necessary to secure the construction and operation of flagship projects, while enabling operators who face high first-mover costs to secure a return on their investment. EU regulation and funding: Members called on the Commission to consider creating an EU industrial innovation investment fund to support the development of innovative climate-friendly technologies including CCS flagship projects, other innovative low-carbon technologies, and measures to reduce CO2 emissions from energy-intensive industries and their processes which could be financed from the sale of allowances from the EU ETS. This should not lead to a new demand on the EU budget. Longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from an appropriate CO2 price signal. The Commission should facilitate debate on possible options by carrying out an analysis of systems requiring the purchase of CCS certificates proving the CO2 emissions avoided, through storage or treatment, in proportion to the CO2 embedded within the fossil fuels placed on the market. Guidelines for Member States should be prepared with regard to the various financial and other mechanisms which they could deploy to support and incentivise CCS development, and to access support funds from within the EU budget. Transport and storage sites: Members acknowledged that significant financial savings can be made by establishing CCS clusters of industrial installations served by shared pipelines or other CO2 transport systems. They emphasised that Member States seeking the deployment of CCS may have a direct role to play in ensuring the provision of CCS transport and determining the availability of storage infrastructure They supported EU measures and funding to establish a common definition of a storage site’s character, identify appropriate storage locations across Europe, develop pilot projects, and prepare sites for commercial-scale storage on the territory of supportive Member States. Storage liabilities: Members noted the concern of some potential CCS developers that the requirements and liabilities placed upon them for the geological storage of CO2 in sites approved by Member States were unquantifiable and excessive. Any accidental release of CO2 from a storage site must be prevented and the environmental integrity of the project protected. The Commission should offer guidance regarding the degree to which the details of compliance arrangements should be determined in advance through negotiation between potential operators and the competent authorities of the Member States concerned. Parliament pointed out that the CCS Directive gave Member States wide flexibility to determine the financial security to be provided by CCS operators and the period before which responsibility for a closed storage site was transferred to the competent authority. It suggested that Member States that seek to promote CCS development would have to play a more entrepreneurial role and accept a greater share of the responsibilities than presently understood. It called on the Commission to revise its CCS Directive guidance documents to clarify these points. Members also suggested that the CCS Directive requirement that in the event of CO2 leakage operators must surrender allowances did not take into account the costly remedial efforts required. They feared that this obligation puts a further obstacle in the way of CCS development and called on the Commission to propose a revision in its assessment of the CCS Directive. Capture and storage-ready status: the Commission and Member States to improve communication in order to raise public awareness of CCS. Parliament also asked the Commission to submit a report on the level of CCS which would need to be deployed by certain key dates, for example 2030, in order for CCS to make a significant contribution to 2050 emissions reduction targets. Carbon capture and use: whilst welcoming the various initiatives to make use of CO2 in ways that reduce overall emissions into the atmosphere and create alternative products such as sustainable transport fuels, Members called in particular for the Commission to assess urgently the potential for the secure use of CO2 to enhance oil and gas recovery within the EU.
- 2014/01/13 Debate in Parliament
-
2013/12/04
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
-
A7-0430/2013
summary
The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety adopted the own-initiative report by Chris DAVIES (ALDE, UK) on implementation report 2013: developing and applying carbon capture and storage technology in Europe. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, exercising its prerogative as an association committee in accordance with Rule 50 of the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, was also consulted for an opinion on the report. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a promising technology that may be the only means of achieving significant CO2 reductions from industrial sources. It is necessary to deliver almost 20 % of the CO2 reductions needed by 2050, and if CCS is not deployed, an additional 40 % in electricity investment will be needed to prevent a temperature rise in excess of 2°C. In 2007 EU heads of government aspired to have up to 12 CCS demonstration plants in operation by 2015, but as their financial viability depended on there being a high carbon price these ambitions cannot now be realised. The EU is losing its technological lead in CCS and – with only one project still being considered for NER300 funding, and European Energy Programme for Recovery projects having been terminated or suspended – now has no effective policy to promote development of CCS flagship projects. Raising ambitions: Members recognised that CCS deployment has the potential to allow the EU to meet its 2050 low‑carbon aspirations at a low cost and that it is necessary in particular for decarbonising high CO2 emitting industries. They affirmed the urgent need to develop a range of full-chain CCS flagship projects so as to identify the best and economically most advantageous solutions. Given the substantial investment required, instruments in addition to the EU emissions trading system (ETS) are needed to foster research and the technical and safe application of CCS. The Commission is called upon to : encourage CCS deployment not only in connection with coal and gas power generation but also in a range of industrial sectors such as chemicals, metallurgy, iron and steel, cement and refineries; address the issue of CCS deployment within the 2030 climate and energy framework, and should bring forward proposals for promoting the early construction of CCS flagship projects; adopt far‑reaching measures to foster international cooperation and to promote the use of technologies for mitigating the effects of climate change. Leading role of Member States: the report recognised that CCS deployment cannot take place without support from Member States and private investors, and that the former have an absolute and sovereign right to encourage or prevent its application. It reminded the Commission that Parliament has called for legislation to require every Member State to produce a 2050 low-carbon strategy and suggested that these national roadmaps should be updated at five-yearly intervals. EU regulation and funding: Members called on the Commission to consider creating an EU industrial innovation investment fund to support the development of innovative climate-friendly technologies including CCS flagship projects, other innovative low-carbon technologies, and measures to reduce CO2 emissions from energy-intensive industries and their processes which could be financed from the sale of allowances from the EU ETS. This should not lead to a new demand on the EU budget. Longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from an appropriate CO2 price signal and any interim financial support required from Member States or the EU would best be derived from the production and import of the fossil fuels mainly responsible for CO2 emissions. The Commission should facilitate debate on possible options by carrying out an analysis of systems requiring the purchase of CCS certificates proving the CO2 emissions avoided, through storage or treatment, in proportion to the CO2 embedded within the fossil fuels placed on the market. Guidelines for Member States should be prepared with regard to the various financial and other mechanisms which they could deploy to support and incentivise CCS development, and to access support funds from within the EU budget. The report suggested that the Commission should consider how use could be made of the EU Coal and Steel Research Fund to support CCS pre-commercial demonstration in these industrial sectors. Transport and storage sites: Members acknowledged that significant financial savings can be made by establishing CCS clusters of industrial installations served by shared pipelines or other CO2 transport systems. They emphasised that Member States seeking the deployment of CCS may have a direct role to play in ensuring the provision of CCS transport and determining the availability of storage infrastructure. They supported EU measures and funding to establish a common definition of a storage site’s character, identify appropriate storage locations across Europe, develop pilot projects, and prepare sites for commercial-scale storage on the territory of supportive Member States. Storage liabilities: Members noted the concern of some potential CCS developers that the requirements and liabilities placed upon them for the geological storage of CO2 in sites approved by Member States are unquantifiable and excessive. Any accidental release of CO2 from a storage site must be prevented and the environmental integrity of the project protected. The Commission should offer guidance regarding the degree to which the details of compliance arrangements should be determined in advance through negotiation between potential operators and the competent authorities of the Member States concerned. The report suggested that the CCS Directive requirement that in the event of CO2 leakage operators must surrender allowances does not take into account the costly remedial efforts required. Members feared that this obligation puts a further obstacle in the way of CCS development and called on the Commission to propose a revision in its assessment of the CCS Directive. Capture and storage-ready status: Members insisted that it is no longer acceptable to invest in power plants or industrial installations likely to emit large quantities of CO2 without regard to how this will be reduced in future. The Commission and the Member States to improve communication in order to raise public awareness of CCS. The report asked the Commission to analyse and submit a report on the level of CCS which would need to be deployed by certain key dates, for example 2030, in order for CCS to make a significant contribution to 2050 emissions reduction targets. Carbon capture and use: whilst welcoming the various initiatives to make use of CO2 in ways that reduce overall emissions into the atmosphere and create alternative products such as sustainable transport fuels, Members called in particular for the Commission to assess urgently the potential for the secure use of CO2 to enhance oil and gas recovery within the EU.
-
A7-0430/2013
summary
-
2013/11/27
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2013/07/04
Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
-
2013/06/10
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0430/2013
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T7-0009/2014
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 203 |
2013/2079(INI)
2013/09/06
ITRE
61 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph A A. whereas Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph B b (new) Bb. whereas climate change can only successfully be combated if specific measures are implemented across the globe;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that CCS can enable Member States to exploit their indigenous, carbon- based energy supplies by offering a
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that CCS can enable Member States to exploit their
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that CCS can enable Member States to exploit their indigenous, carbon- based energy supplies in a demand-
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that CCS can enable Member States to exploit their indigenous, carbon- based energy supplies in a demand- responsive manner, thus also contributing to diversity and security of energy supply and to greenhouse gas emissions reduction;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that CCS
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt far-reaching measures to foster international cooperation and to promote the use of technologies for mitigating the effects of climate change, in order to point expanding economies in the direction of developmental alternatives including, for example, CSC, that are less carbon intensive;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Reminds that fossil fuels will continue to represent most of the energy mix in the decades to come (75% in 2030 according to the IEA), which makes CCS a valuable technology to be explored;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Underlines that the IEA’s Energy Technology Perspectives 2012 points out that the additional investment needs in electricity that are required for a maximum 2 degree rise in global temperatures would increase by a further 40% if CCS is not available;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph A A. whereas Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that failing to include CCS within a long-term energy strategy will on the one hand severely hamper national, Union and global efforts to address climate change but on the other hand maintain energy prices at a competitive level;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Believes that CSC policies and strategies should only be framed on the basis of sound evidence of the positive impact they will have on the environment, on the stability of EU industry, on employment in the EU and on the affordability of energy prices for the public and for industry;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that the EU’s mandatory renewable target
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that the EU’s mandatory renewable target has been undermined by investment in CCS, and calls
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that the EU’s mandatory renewable target has undermined investment in CCS
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that the EU’s mandatory renewable target has undermined investment in CCS, and calls, therefore, for a technology-neutral approach to the Union’s 2030 energy goals, in line with Article 194(2) of the TFEU, in order to create a level playing field and ensure effective competition amongst varying low-carbon energy technologies; observes that these technologies must be competitive and must confer benefit on consumers in the form of a lower energy price;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Believes that supporting initial projects, learning lessons and sharing knowledge are a prerequisite for developing details of longer-term measures to support CCS and will result in reduced costs of CCS deployment; calls, therefore, for continued international collaboration between industry, including innovative SMEs, and institutions in order to ensure that best practices are applied; to this end, believes that instruments for supporting projects at EU level should be strengthened so that they can genuinely stimulate business involvement in collaboration with research centres;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph A A. whereas Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is the only large-scale and demonstrable technology currently available to take carbon
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Believes that supporting initial projects, learning lessons and sharing knowledge
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Believes that supporting initial projects, learning lessons and sharing knowledge are a prerequisite for developing details of longer-term measures to support CCS and will result in reduced costs of CCS deployment; calls, therefore, for continued international collaboration between industry, including innovative SMEs, and institutions in order to ensure that best practices are applied; recalls, at the same time, the challenges of the different stages of R&D and in bringing new technologies to the markets;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Believes that supporting initial projects, learning lessons and sharing knowledge are a prerequisite for developing details of longer-term measures to support CCS/CCU and
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls for closer cooperation with the United States and Canada in the form of an exchange of expertise and good practices in the light of CCS activities undertaken in the context of the US- Canada Clean Energy Dialogue;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to address the main barriers to the de
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to address the main barriers to the deployment of CCS, such as the granting of permits and funding, the establishment of a CCS skills base and the development and testing of technologies for effective capture, transport and storage; believes that support should also be provided for the development of commercial technologies using carbon dioxide, which could in future offer a strong market incentive for investment in CCS installations;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to address the main regulatory, financial and social barriers to the deployment of CCS, such as the granting of permits and funding, the establishment of a CCS skills base and the development and testing of technologies for effective capture, transport and storage and stresses the need for better communication on the use of this technology;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that no incentives and policy measures should target
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Believes that
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph B B. whereas in the power sector there are alternatives to fossil fuels, in several industrial sectors – such as the chemical, steel, refinery and cement industries –
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Believes that in order to render CCS economically viable and environmentally sustainable, carbon capture and storage demonstration projects should aim at developing site-related strategies for carbon capture and usage (CCU) to achieve a self-contained CO2 cycle, and calls on the Commission and Member States to foster research and technical development activities in corresponding technology field;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that the
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that the low carbon price
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that the low carbon price delivered through the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), and subsequent revenues generated from the sale of allowances under the New Entrants’ Reserve of the ETS (NER300), has failed to deliver an attractive business case for early long-term private sector investment in CCS; calls therefore for urgent agreement on the structural reform of the ETS;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. While the debate on long-term structural reform of the ETS continues, calls on the Commission and Member States to come forward with complementary policy measures t
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. While the debate on long-term structural reform of the ETS continues,
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. While the debate on long-term structural reform of the ETS continues, calls on the Commission and Member States to come forward with complementary policy measures and a more flexible financial model that will deliver the first operational CCS projects in the EU by 2020;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that no support
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph B B. whereas in the power sector there are several viable alternatives to fossil fuels, whereas in several industrial sectors – such as the chemical, steel, refinery and cement industries – deep emission reductions can only be achieved
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that support at EU level should
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that support at EU level should, inter alia, be continued through
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to raise public awareness
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to raise public awareness of
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Believes that a decisive shift in public perception of the technology is needed and that public acceptance of onshore CO2 storage must be obtained before any attempts to make deployment of CCS mandatory; believes that the Commission should launch an EU campaign to provide information on the most important aspects of CCS, focusing on transport infrastructure and the underground storage process;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Asks the Commission to analyse and submit a report on the level of CCS that would need to be deployed by certain key dates, i.e. 2030, in order for CCS to make a significant contribution to 2050 emission reduction targets;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Believes that, in accordance with sustainable development principles, we should support not only carbon capture and storage, but also research and innovation with regard to the use of CO2;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph B B. whereas in the power sector there are alternatives to fossil fuels, in several industrial sectors – such as the chemical, steel, refinery and cement industries – deep emission reductions can only be achieved through CCS; the development of industrial CCS is therefore a priority;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Calls on Member States to ensure they have a deeper understanding of the potential for CCS in industrial applications, using emissions, technology and cost projections so that industrial CCS is given prominence in short and medium term policy decisions;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 11 c (new) 11c. Recognises that planning is a Member State competence and calls on the Commission, as well as Member States and local governments, to more widely and consistently map CCS opportunities in high emitting industrial sites, which will significantly aide infrastructure and storage decisions; believes that these sites could form hubs and benefit from shared infrastructure opportunities;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph B a (new) Ba. whereas the future of coal in Europe should be based on a stable development strategy, given that coal remains vital to the EU economy; whereas the challenge for the EU’s post-2030 energy mix is to provide opportunities for steady economic growth while maintaining the Member States’ energy security and the rapid development of new energy technologies, including coal technologies;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph B a (new) Ba. whereas the policies adopted in the field of combating climate change have not had the expected effect and, in many cases, have led to the relocation of industry within the EU and to an increase in electricity prices, thereby contributing to a reduction in the competitiveness of the European economy and to poverty among the European public;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph B a (new) Ba. whereas the large-scale introduction of carbon capture will yet further increase the price of energy and will make European industry more uncompetitive unless this technology is introduced worldwide;
source: PE-516.964
2013/10/09
ENVI
142 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 a (new) - having regard to the Council decision concerning the approval on behalf of the European Community, of the Amendments of Annex II and Annex III to the Convention for the protection of the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention) in relation to the storage of carbon dioxide streams in geological formations 2009/0071(CNS)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas with current levels of use of fossil fuels and future projections for this, CCS would seem to be essential to achieving the target of keeping the rise in global temperatures below 2°C;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Calls on the Commission to clarify whether there are circumstances in which it will permit the cross-border transfer of CO2 for sequestration during the period prior to ratification of the necessary revisions of the Treaty of London;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Recognises the concern of potential CCS developers that the requirements of the CCS Directive appear one-sided, may require private companies to accept excessive liability for CO2 storage despite their work being approved by a Member State's competent authority, and could pose a significant deterrent to investment, also recognises however the sovereign right of the individual Member States to decide to discontinue the use of CCS if they should wish to do so;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Recognises
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Recognises the concern of potential CCS developers that the requirements
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Recognises the concern of potential CCS developers that the requirements of the CCS Directive appear one-sided, may require private companies to accept excessive and unquantifiable liability for CO2 storage despite their work being approved by a Member State's competent authority, and could pose a significant deterrent to investment;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Mentions again the rules on responsibility for storage of CO2 laid down in the CCS Directive and the obligations incumbent upon holders of a storage permit;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B b (new) Bb. Whereas the low carbon roadmap produced by the European Cement Association in 2013 suggests that the sector could achieve an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2050 with the deployment of CCS, but that in its absence the maximum that could be achieved would be 32%;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Points out that the rules on responsibility for storage of CO2 laid down in the CCS Directive ought not to have a dissuasive effect on investments;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Fully accepts that any accidental release of CO2 from a storage site must be prevented, but believes th
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Fully accepts that any accidental release of CO2 from a storage site and any other adverse environmental impacts must be prevented, but believes that Member States must share the liability once they have authorised a storage site and approved the conditions for its use; insists that the details of such liability should be a matter for negotiation between potential operators and the competent authority;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Fully accepts that any accidental release of CO2 from a storage site must be prevented
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Fully accepts that any accidental release of CO2 from a storage site must be prevented
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13.
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas developments in carbon capture and storage should not in any way be to the detriment of achieving the EU's mandatory renewables development target;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that the CCS Directive
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that the
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Calls on the Commission to revise its CCS Directive guidance documents to clarify these points;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Suggests that the CCS Directive requirement that in the event of CO2 leakage operators must surrender allowances does not take into account the costly remedial efforts required; fears that this obligation puts a further obstacle in the way of CCS development; calls on the Commission to
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15.
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Suggests that the
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Suggests that the requirement of the CCS Directive
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B c (new) Bc. whereas development of carbon capture and storage should be regarded as a strategy that is complementary to development of renewables in the transition to a low carbon economy;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Insists that it is no longer acceptable to invest in power plants or industrial installations likely to emit large quantities of CO2 without regard to how this will be reduced in the future;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Insists that it is no longer acceptable to invest in power plants
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Calls on the Commission to study the possibility of setting emissions standards for future fossil fuel power plants;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Notes that Member States are permitted to evaluate in different ways the provisions of the
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to propose that it be a condition of construction that adequate preparation for
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to propose that it be a condition of construction that adequate preparation for CCS implementation is made for all new fossil fuel power plants and high-emission industrial installations above an agreed size, except in the case of electricity demand peak shavers or when a Member State has complied with a
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the various initiatives to make use of CO2 in ways that reduce overall emissions into the atmosphere; calls in particular for the Commission urgently to assess the potential for the use of CO2 to enhance oil and gas recovery within the EU and underlines the need to focus on the long term security of the projects;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas in 2007 EU heads of government aspired to have up to 12 CCS demonstration plants in operation by 2015, but
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the various initiatives to make use of CO2 in ways that reduce overall emissions into the atmosphere; calls in particular for the Commission urgently to assess the potential for the use of CO2 to enhance oil and gas recovery within the EU; calls on the Commission to develop research into photosynthesis;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the various initiatives to make use of CO2 in ways that reduce
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the various initiatives to make use of CO2 in ways that reduce overall emissions into the atmosphere; calls in particular for the Commission
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas development of this technology should not serve as an incentive to increase the share of fossil fuel power plants;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas the general public should always receive a full and clear picture of CCS advantages and possible threats before any projects are developed at commercial scale;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that CCS deployment
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that CCS deployment is needed for the EU to meet its
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that CCS deployment is needed for the EU to meet its 2050 low- carbon aspirations at least cost; affirms the urgent need to develop a range of full- chain CCS flagship projects so as to identify the best and economically most advantageous solutions; appreciates that instruments in addition to the EU ETS are needed to drive forward their development, bearing in mind that the existing technical solutions entail substantial investment;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a pro
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that CCS deployment in some energy intensive industrial sectors is needed for the EU to meet its 2050 low- carbon aspirations at least cost; affirms the urgent need to develop
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that CCS deployment is needed for the EU to meet its 2050 low- carbon aspirations at least cost; affirms the urgent need to develop a range of full- chain CCS flagship projects; appreciates that instruments in addition to the EU ETS are needed to drive forward their development; believes that, for their development, other instruments need to be found which can foster research and technical development in the CCS technology field;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that CCS deployment is needed for the EU to meet its 2050 low- carbon aspirations at least cost; recalls that the Commission's 2050 Low-Carbon Economy Roadmap highlights CCS as an indispensable tool for the decarbonisation of industries such as steel and cement that lack other means of achieving the objective; affirms the urgent need to develop a range of full-
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that CCS deployment is needed for the EU to meet its 2050 low- carbon aspirations at least cost; recalls that the Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050 describes CCS as a necessary instrument for ‘decarbonising’ high CO2 emitting industries; affirms the urgent need to develop a range of full-
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Believes that although CCS might offer part of the solution to reaching the goals for limiting greenhouse gas emissions, it would be even better if the Member States could reach these goals without the use of CCS;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Emphasises the importance of deploying CCS in certain industrial processes such as metallurgy, iron and steel, and the cement industry where it can profitably contribute to radical reductions in industrial emissions in the medium term;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses the need to ensure equal treatment of the different kinds of low-carbon technology, as this is indispensable for the development of geological sequestration of carbon dioxide;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission to propose a 202
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission to propose
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Insists that ambitious proposals for the development and commercial deployment of CCS should be included within the 2030 climate and energy framework, both to ensure policy coherence and to inform investors that electricity generating plants using unabated fossil fuels risk becoming stranded assets;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2а. Notes the need for effective communication with partner countries outside the EU about the scope for developing CCS systems in such a way as to generate fair and mutually advantageous trade;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Emphasises the need for the Commission to come forward with proposals for promoting the deployment of CCS technology to reduce CO2 emissions from industrial sectors such as steel, cement and petrochemicals;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 d (new) 2d. Believes that the Steel Action Plan should make specific reference to the need to develop CCS flagship projects within this sector;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 e (new) 2e. Suggests that the Commission should assess the quantities of CO2 currently being separated and vented from industrial plants and gas rigs with a view to making the capture and sequestration of this a priority;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 f (new) 2f. Reminds the Commission that it has identified CCS as a tool that is essential to the achievement of a competitive low carbon economy at lowest cost; emphasises the need for the Commission to start acting with new vigour, improved coordination, and single purpose to promote CCS development and overcome the obstacles that hold this back;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) is a proven technology that can significantly reduce CO2 emissions from industrial sources and fossil fuel power plants but requires
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Recognises that CCS development cannot take place without support from Member States and private sector investment; regrets that application of the technology has been encouraged by so few, but underlines that it is up to the individual Member States if they want to allow or encourage CCS;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Recognises that CCS development cannot take place without support from the EU and Member States; regrets that application of the technology has been encouraged by so few;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Recognises that CCS development
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3a (new) 3a. Accepts that a number of Member States have indicated that they do not expect CCS to play a role in meeting their emission reduction objectives, but stresses that this should not deter initiatives being taken to develop the technology elsewhere in the EU.
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes the decision by certain Member States not to include CCS in their emissions reduction strategies, but points out that this ought not to prevent it being developed by those Member States which consider this technology to be valid and effective in the transition to a low carbon economy provided it can be deployed in a way that is safe for the environment.
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the Commission to propose that Member States should be required to prepare and publish national low carbon roadmaps prior to the UNFCCC conference in 2015;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises that Member States, in case they decide to make use of CCS technology, hav
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises that Member States wishing to carry out CCS projects on their territory need to have the key role in providing a transparent revenue stream, such as feed-in tariffs, to support the construction and operation of flagship projects while enabling operators to secure a return on their investment, and in introducing regulatory requirements such as guarantees that first-mover CCS power plants provide baseload electricity generation;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises that Member States have the key role in providing
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas in many Member States there is public opposition to CCS deployment and therefore promoting energy savings and increasing the share of renewables are better ways to decarbonise the power sector;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises that Member States have the key role in providing a transparent revenue stream
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises that Member States have the key role in providing a transparent revenue stream, such as feed-in tariffs, to support the construction and operation of flagship projects while enabling operators to secure a return on their investment, and in introducing regulatory requirements such as guarantees that first-mover CCS power plants provide baseload electricity generation, without thereby adversely affecting the electricity price for end- users;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises that Member States have the key role in providing a transparent revenue stream, and incentives such as feed-in
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Suggests that the Commission should prepare guidance for Member States to highlight the very wide range of financial and other mechanisms that could be deployed to support and incentivise CCS development;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Emphasises that the current low carbon price does not enable CCS operators to secure a return on their investment, and that measures are needed to improve the ETS; calls on the Commission to make proposals before the end of this year for structural measures to strengthen the ETS by increasing the linear reduction factor and cancelling surplus allowances;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to propose creating an EU Industrial Innovation Fund from the sale of 600m allowances from the EU ETS to support the development of CCS flagship projects, other innovative low-carbon technologies, and measures to reduce CO2 emissions from energy- intensive industries, but underlines that it is important that the creation of such a fund does not lead to an increase in the overall EU budget;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A b (new) Ab. whereas CCS is not necessary to decarbonise the power sector while industrial sectors like steel and cement have more limited potential to reduce CO2 emissions without the application of CCS;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to propose creating an EU Industrial Innovation Fund from the sale of 600m allowances from the EU ETS to support the development of
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to propose a mechanism for securing the early construction on CCS flagship projects for industrial sectors.
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Considers that CCS projects are likely to take longer to enter into operation than renewables projects and therefore calls on the Commission to work collaboratively with Member States and industry to support CCS projects through the EEPR and NER300 programmes allowing them to reach Final Investment Decisions and enter into operation;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Recognises that in framing the parameters for the use of such a fund account should be taken of lessons learnt from the limitations and inflexibility of the existing NER300 funding mechanism;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6а. Emphasises the need for regulatory regimes that will protect the competitiveness of the companies investing in CSS projects;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from the production and import of the fossil fuels responsible for the release of CO2; calls on the Commission to propose the introduction from 2020 of a system requiring the purchase of either CCS certificates proving the storage of CO2 in proportion to that embedded within their products, or another form, excluding the purchase of emissions quotas, of compensating for the CO2 emissions;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from the production and import of the fossil fuels responsible for the release of CO2; calls on
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A c (new) Ac. whereas, especially in times of austerity, public money should be spent wisely and directed to those climate- friendly technologies that are safe and sustainable, and have public support;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from the production and import of the fossil fuels responsible for the release of CO2; calls on the Commission to propose the introduction from 2020 of a system requiring the purchase of CCS certificates proving the storage or treatment of CO2 in proportion to that embedded within their products;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that, in the future, longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from the production and import of the fossil fuels responsible for the release of CO2;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from the production and import of the fossil fuels mainly responsible for
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 – introductory part 7. Believes that longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from the production and import of the fossil fuels responsible for the release of CO2;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Believes that longer-term CCS support should be derived principally from the production
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Requests the Commission to prepare guidance for Member States with regard to various financial and other mechanisms they could deploy to support CCS development.
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Notes the decision of the European
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Notes the decision of the European Investment Bank to prohibit lending for construction of coal power plants that will emit more than 550g CO2/kWh; emphasises that
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the International Energy Agency predicts an increase in the use of fossil fuels globally over the next 20 years, and believes that CCS is necessary to deliver almost 20% of the CO2 reductions
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Notes the decision of the European
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Notes the decision of the European Investment Bank to prohibit lending for construction of coal power plants that will emit more than 550g CO2/kWh; emphasises that without enough financial
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Notes the decision of the European Investment Bank to prohibit lending for construction of coal power plants that will emit more than 550g CO2/kWh; emphasises that without financial support to develop effective CCS, the introduction of
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Suggests that the Commission should consider how use might be made of the EU Coal and Steel Research Fund to support CCS pre-commercial demonstration in these industrial sectors;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Considers the development of CCS demonstration projects to be largely dependent on the financial instruments available, including those connected with the auctioning of CO2 allowances; calls for an increasing proportion of the revenue from such auctions to be allocated to the development of CCS;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Calls on the Commission to propose that structural funds should be available in the next programming period from 2020 to support Member States' deployment of CCS.
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 c (new) 8c. Appreciates the encouragement given by the Norwegian government to CCS projects within the EU and expresses the wish that in negotiating the next programming period a request be made for funding support for CCS flagship projects;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 d (new) 8d. Requests that the Commission assess the benefits of adopting and developing the Ciuden CCS pilot project in Spain, which has received some €100 million support funding from EU sources, as a European test facility for capture technologies and inland CO2 storage;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 e (new) 8e. Calls on the Commission to propose measures intended to ensure that financial support for CCS is provided on a basis comparative to that for other low carbon technologies in relation to the avoidance of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Acknowledges that significant financial savings can be made by prioritising CCS clusters of industrial installations served by shared pipelines; suggests that plant operators cannot be expected to take into account the future requirements of other installations, so trunk pipelines that may eventually carry CO2 from numerous sources should often be developed through public-private sector partnerships; emphasises that Member States have a direct role to play in ensuring the provision
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. Whereas CCS is the only technology able to provide deep CO2 cuts from major industrial sectors including steel, cement, and chemicals and oil refineries, and in combination with the use of biomass for electricity generation has the potential to promote a net reduction in CO2 emissions;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Acknowledges that significant financial savings can be made by prioritising CCS clusters of industrial installations served by shared pipelines;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Acknowledges that significant financial savings can be made by prioritising CCS clusters of industrial installations served by
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Acknowledges that
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Acknowledges that significant financial savings can be made by
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Calls on the Commission to review the CCS Directive to ensure it is not unduly discouraging investment in storage site development;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Notes claims that a North Sea hub could provide storage for 100m tonnes of CO2 pa by 2030 and 500m tonnes pa by 2050; supports the use of EU funds to establish a common definition of a storage site's character, identify the geological potential of storage locations across Europe, develop pilot projects and prepare sites for commercial-scale storage in the Member States that decide to allow CCS on their territory;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls on the Commission to propose a North Sea energy infrastructure initiative to both promote the most effective use of the storage potential of sites currently being used for hydrocarbon extraction, and to enhance oil and gas recovery from existing and future pipelines; recognises the urgent need for such action as potential storage sites and infrastructure will be lost as oil and gas production comes to an end;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Calls on the Commission to promote
source: PE-521.464
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2015-01-07Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| procedure/subject/2 |
Old
3.70.03 Climate change, ozoneNew
3.70.03 Climate change, ozone layer |
2014-11-09Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|