2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2013.06.721
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Carbon Capture and Storage and the London Protocol: Recent Efforts to Enable Transboundary CO2 Transfer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To allow CO 2 injection in the ocean underground, under international maritime law, changes have been made in the Oslo-Paris Convention (covering the North-Eastern Atlantic), but the amendment to the London Protocol (which is part of the Oslo-Paris Convention and would allow cross-border transportation of CO 2 with the aim of offshore geological storage in a broader geographical realm) must still enter into force. Despite proposals for how to resolve the lack of agreement on the London Protocol Amendment (112), it is unlikely to happen soon for various political and practical reasons (107,110). Figure 5 provides a timeline since the 1990s of milestones in the policy developments of CCS worldwide and in the most active countries.…”
Section: Legal Developments Regulating Co 2 Storagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…To allow CO 2 injection in the ocean underground, under international maritime law, changes have been made in the Oslo-Paris Convention (covering the North-Eastern Atlantic), but the amendment to the London Protocol (which is part of the Oslo-Paris Convention and would allow cross-border transportation of CO 2 with the aim of offshore geological storage in a broader geographical realm) must still enter into force. Despite proposals for how to resolve the lack of agreement on the London Protocol Amendment (112), it is unlikely to happen soon for various political and practical reasons (107,110). Figure 5 provides a timeline since the 1990s of milestones in the policy developments of CCS worldwide and in the most active countries.…”
Section: Legal Developments Regulating Co 2 Storagementioning
confidence: 99%
“…commitments would alleviate this uncertainty (Mikunda et al, 2011b transport designated for sub-seabed storage, but requires ratification of two-third of the contracting parties (28 out of 42) to enter into force (Mikunda et al, 2011b;Warren, 2012). To date, only the UK and Norway have ratified the amendment, and it is unlikely that two-third of the parties will have ratified the amendment in the near term for a number of reasons, amongst others because CCS has a low priority for several contracting parties (Garrett and McCoy, 2013 In Portugal, several provincial regions and municipalities crossed by a potential pipeline route have to give positive feedback on the project proposal, which is a very time consuming process (interview 2). Applying for permits in an early stage and labelling pipeline ventures as public interest projects can avoid delay of the project.…”
Section: Barriersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…). Several legal solutions were proposed by an IEA working paper(IEA, 2011) to facilitate transboundary CO 2 transport based on the international rules of treaty interpretation Garrett and McCoy (2013). considered that a provisional application of the Article 6 amendment would be the fastest and most straightforward solution.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%