No abstract

CO2 utilisation technologies-also called carbon dioxide utilisation (CDU) and carbon capture and utilisation (CCU)-convert CO2 via physical, chemical, or biological processes into carbon-based products. CO2 utilisation technologies are viewed as a means of helping to address climate change and broadening the raw material base for commodities that can be sold to generate economic revenue. However, while technical research and development into the feasibility of CO2 utilisation options are accelerating rapidly; at present, there has been limited research into the social acceptance of the technology and CO2-derived products. This review article outlines and explores three key dimensions of social acceptance (i.e., socio-political, market, and community acceptance) pertaining to innovation within CO2 utilisation. The article highlights the importance of considering issues of social acceptance as an aspect of the research, development, demonstration, and deployment process for CO2 utilisation and explores how key stakeholders operating on each dimension might affect the innovation pathways, investment, and siting decisions relating to CO2 utilisation facilities and CO2-derived products. Beyond providing a state-of-the-art review of current research into the social acceptance of CO2 utilisation, this article also outlines an agenda for future research in the field.

The use of carbon dioxide as a feedstock for a broad range of products can help mitigate the effects of climate change through long‐term removal of carbon or as part of a circular carbon economy. Research on capture and conversion technologies has intensified in recent years, and the interest in deploying these technologies is growing fast. However, sound understanding of the environmental and economic impacts of these technologies is required to drive fast deployment and avoid unintended consequences. Life cycle assessments (LCAs) and techno‐economic assessments (TEAs) are useful tools to quantify environmental and economic metrics; however, these tools can be very flexible in how they are applied, with the potential to produce significantly different results depending on how the boundaries and assumptions are defined. Built on ISO standards for generic LCAs, several guidance documents have emerged recently from the Global CO2 Initiative, the National Energy Technology Laboratory, and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory that further define assessment specifications for carbon capture and utilization. Overall agreement in the approaches is noted with differences largely based on the intended use cases. However, further guidance is needed for assessments of early‐stage technologies, reporting details, and reporting for policymakers and nontechnical decision‐makers.

Carbon Dioxide Utilisation (CDU) technologies convert Carbon Dioxide (CO2) into carbon-based products. CDU technologies are viewed as a means of helping to address climate change while creating commodities that can be sold to generate financial revenue. While technical research and development into CDU options is accelerating, at present there has been little research into public acceptance of the technology. The current study presents the findings of a series of 28 exploratory interviews conducted with lay people in the United Kingdom and Germany. The results show that awareness of CDU is currently very low in both countries but that there is tentative support for the concept. This support is, however, caveated by considerations of the techno-economic feasibility of the technology and the societal consequences that might result from investment. While the thematic content of discussions was similar in both countries, where appropriate any notable differences are outlined and discussed. In addition to providing fresh insight into the emerging nature of public perceptions and acceptance of CDU, it is reasoned that the findings of this research could help to benefit the design of communication materials intended to engage lay-publics in debate about the nature and purpose of CDU technologies

The implementation of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is indispensable for building a sustainable and just future for all humans and our planet. The SDGs are global goals. However, their implementation equally calls for action by a variety of actors in government, business, and civil society. Thus, policy making as well as industrial innovation efforts need to be designed to facilitate rather than hinder the implementation of the SDGs. Consequently, it is necessary to ensure that the possible environmental, economic, and societal impacts of technological innovations aiming for public support and funding in research, development, and market implementation are aligned with the respective objectives of the SDGs. Carbon capture and utilization (CCU) applications are an example of such innovations. By capturing and utilizing CO 2 , they are intended to have positive impacts on economy, society, and environment. Next to industries' own efforts to advance such technologies, CCU is currently funded by governments in several countries, and such funding is likely to increase. Therefore, an assessment of the compatibility of CCU technologies with the SDGs is as much necessary as it is overdue. Hence, this paper elucidates on how CCU might contribute to or hinder the delivery of the SDGs. By comparing CCUs against the SDGs, it can be concluded that, under certain conditions, they might deliver contributions to several SDGs. The main contributions are expected within the context of energy transition processes, and in societal advancements that are linked to technological progress. For eight out of the seventeen SDGs, positive and indirect negative effects can be predicted. Therefore, the development and implementation of CCU aligned with the SDGs poses a challenge for policy makers when designing frameworks and funding schemes. Specific risks need to be monitored and considered in policy making. This paper therefore argues that the SDGs should be used as a framework for assessing potential societal effects of CCU technologies. The findings demonstrate that such an approach is necessary in order to identify and enhance the positive (and avoid indirect negative) effects that CCU technologies might have on people, prosperity and planet.

No abstract

global-co2-initiative-at-the-university-of-michigan-publishesvaluable-toolkit-to-assess-co2-utilization-technology/. 2 In the text we also refer to this document as "TEA and LCA Guidelines v.1", to differentiate it from the next versions currently under preparation (i.e., v.1.1).

Carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technologies aim to use carbon dioxide (CO2), either captured from industrial point sources or from the atmosphere, instead of fossil carbon in the production of a variety of valuable goods. CCU has the potential to contribute to emission reductions and to lower raw material consumption as well to foster transitional processes toward a circular economy. To enable societies to take full advantage of this potential, policy support is needed in overcoming current barriers and fostering CCU implementation as a feasible option for the industry. Based on a literature and online investigation, this paper identifies and compares the current policy mixes for CCU in the US and the EU, focusing on policy strategies and existing and proposed policy instruments. The analysis shows that US strategy documents, with very few exceptions, do not mention CCU specifically in the context of the country's 2030 or 2050 climate targets. In the EU, in contrast, the future role of CCU is clearly linked to achieving climate-neutrality by 2050. The main policy instruments to incentivize the implementation of CCU in the US are tax credits (45Q). Moreover, funding exists for research and development efforts. In the EU, many reform proposals are currently underway that could benefit CCU technologies. At present, policy support, for instance through the Renewable Energy Directive, mainly aims at renewable fuels of non-biological origin while in other areas CCU support remains at odds with principles such as “energy efficiency first”. The EU does, however, have a broad range of funding opportunities available for research, development and demonstration projects. The paper uses the cross-regional comparison of policy mixes to formulate policy recommendations to improve policy mixes for CCU. A clearer strategic commitment to CCU, its incorporation into green public procurement guidelines, incorporating CCU across different funding schemes for sustainable energy transition, and ambitious new targets for renewable electricity and green hydrogen, for instance, could help develop the policy mixes further to provide a supportive framework for CCU.