As the European Commission gears up for the next Industrial Carbon Management Forum in October, the focus on CO₂ infrastructure, including multimodal transport of CO₂, is growing. The Forum’s Working Group on CO₂ Infrastructure, co-chaired by Bellona Europa, is supporting the implementation of the Industrial Carbon Management Strategy with input on transport and storage infrastructure aspects, such as network planning, specifically looking at interactions with the electricity, natural gas and hydrogen sectors, as well as with ports, recognising their key role as intermediaries in the Carbon Capture Storage (CCS) value chain.

In January 2024, the Carbon Capture and Storage Association (CCSA) and the Zero Emissions Platform (ZEP) published the report Achieving a European market for CO₂ transport by ship. This document was further discussed in a webinar featuring co-chairs of the committee that wrote the report, Ian Phillips from Energy Transition Advisory and Haije Stigter of Carbon Collectors, and moderated by Michał Wendołowski from Bellona Europa.

Considering the important momentum and context for CCS infrastructure development, we are publishing an interview we held with the authors of the above-mentioned report on CO₂ transport by ship. Their insights highlight the indispensable role of CO₂ transport by ship and provide strategic recommendations on necessary actions for ports to play their role decarbonising hard-to-abate industries faster. 

Why do we need CO₂ transport by ship? 

Ian Phillips – Some emitters are just too far from potential storage locations to make a pipeline viable (e.g. emitters in Finland or Germany). A pipeline is a significant investment, requiring a long-term commitment of enough CO₂ to fill the pipeline before proceeding – and in the early years of CCS this isn’t likely to be achieved. The current European market for CO₂, mainly for the beverage industry and greenhouses, is estimated around 3 million tonnes per annum. We need to bring it to a completely different scale – likely shipping 50-100 million tonnes per annum by 2040. 

Haije Stigter – All transport modalities will need to be considered for CC(U)S projects, and ultimately the choice for (a combination of) the transport modality will depend on the location of the emitter, the distance to planned or existing infrastructure, the environmental impact of the solution, the distance to the storage location or destination, and volumes to be transported.

What are your key findings of the report that you as the authors would like policymakers at EU and national level to take into consideration? 

Ian Phillips – Shipping is a key part of the CCS supply chain that has largely been neglected by regulators. Shippers have designs and a willingness to invest in vessels – but need 15-20 years time charters to justify the investment, so we need long-term support for “end-to-end” CCS projects. 

Haije Stigter – Projects need to be developed in synchronicity with emitters, transporters and storage locations. We see that transport and storage solutions are lagging behind the capture projects. Policy makers should stimulate and orchestrate the required multi-modal infrastructure to store permanently the captured CO₂ in a safe and effective way. There is currenty a tendency to favor pipelines as the preferred solution, whereas shipping can often be a competitive and more flexible alternative, with less impact on marine nature and creating more local jobs. It is also important to recognise that the “one size does not fit all” over-regulation or over standardisation should be avoided. 

What does the expected development of maritime CO₂ shipping mean for ports?  

Ian Phillips – We see the need for technical specification requirements for CO₂ infrastructure development, including the systems to gather and collect CO₂ – either through pipeline infrastructure around a port, from road or rail transhipment. Additionally, large volume storage of liquified CO₂ at low, medium or high pressure, depending on the ships, prior to loading into ships, will be necessary at the port territories. Lastly, another large volume storage of liquified CO₂ (low or medium pressure depending on the ships) will be necessary for off-loading prior to injection.  

Haije Stigter – Terminals will need to be designed or modified to receive and temporarily store liquid CO₂ amongst other products such as hydrogen, ammonia, bio-methanol, e-SAF, other synthetic fuel derived from renewable energy, etc. In addition to pipeline, road or rail transhipment, port facilities will also be required for the direct transfer of CO₂ from (inland) ships to (offshore) ships. 

Is CO₂ infrastructure in ports a viable and long-term investment or rather a short-term, transitional solution?  

Ian Phillips – Initial contracts are likely to span 15-20 years, corresponding to the life of carbon capture project, so CO₂ transportation infrastructure at the ports will be required for at least that duration. 

Haije Stigter – Investments in CCS is a “no-regret” investment, considering the long-term need for CCS solutions to reach climate goals, by decarbonising heavy industries. In addition, CO₂ infrastructure will be required to meet growing demand for CCU. Even after achieving net-zero, CCS will continue to play an important role for a certain period, as “negative emissions” are needed to offset residual CO₂ from very hard-to-abate sources. This will allow to reduce CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere and support a negative emission scenario for hard-to-abate industries and agriculture, including biomass fermentation and gasification. 

What would be required for ports to enable CO₂ shipping? 

Ian Phillips – Onshore storage, vessel loading capability, health and safety assessment, as, although CO₂ is not explosive, new short-term hazards such as local freezing and asphyxia do exist. 

Haije Stigter – “Standardised” loading and offloading facilities, protocol, procedures and safety precautions for the various recognised transport conditions.  

Do you see CO₂ business as complimentary to other new services related to alternative fuels or will they compete for ports’ space and attention? How can we ensure that ports see value in getting involved in the CCS value chain? 

Ian Phillips – Ports are in business to make money – and CO₂ shipping will likely be a very large-scale operation – so business reasons can motivate ports to get involved. 

Haije Stigter – There will be a need for CCS for decades to come, particularly in hard-to-abate industries, including chemicals, lime, waste to energy, cement, pulp and paper, and in industries that can supply CO₂ to enable the negative emissions. In addition there will be a growing need for biogenic CO₂ as feedstock for alternative fuels, such as eSAF, for CO₂ transport to be part of the e-fuel supply chain. 

What are the main barriers for ports? How can they be addressed? 

Ian Phillips – Lack of certainty over volumes and timing inhibits investment. Therefore, early projects with full funding will be critical, likely requiring government to take on the “stranded asset” risk. 

Haije Stigter – Ports are already congested and real estate is at a prime, however the transition should see a reduction in fossil (-related business), which should allow space to be freed up for new activities, such as those related to CC(U)S. 

Is there a need for stricter standardisation to synchronise technical parameters (the level of CO₂ pressure as example) for CO₂ intermediate storage and shipment? What are the benefits and disadvantages of it? 

Ian Phillips – As with liquid petroleum gas (LPG) shipping, two shipping conditions could emerge (low and medium pressure). Ports can initially accommodate to either of the two.  

Haije Stigter – To determine the shipping condition (including high pressure in addition to low and medium pressure) we need to consider the full value chain on a project-by-project basis, evaluating the technical and economic advantages and disadvantages of each, as described in the ZEP report (see above). Even where CO₂ is delivered to a port or terminal in dense phase, it makes more sense to transport it under high-pressure conditions as it offers cost benefits and additional flexibility that can improve the business case for many CCS projects, and is easier (requires less energy) to liquify. Delivering at high pressure conditions could in addition simplify the entry into a pipeline due to increased pressure. 

Do you think ports need additional incentives to develop CO₂ shipping terminals? 

Ian Phillips – Governments’ approach is generally to subsidise emitters – who then buy services along the value chain – and the T&S operator. A port can fall between these two mechanisms – and I see two likely scenarios. The port may enter into a normal commercial arrangement to handle the CO₂ from a very small number of emitters (one or perhaps two) .
Where the port is likely to act as an aggregator of CO₂ from multiple emitters, it is likely that the local and/or regional government may support the port, as no individual emitter can justify the entire port infrastructure costs up front. 

Haije Stigter – A port’s development and its role in CCS is only effective when it can collect and aggregate volumes from emitters in the port and its hinterland, or when it is connected to a CO₂ disposal infrastructure. Ports need to position themselves as solution providers. Regulated tariffs for ports, terminal and pipeline operators for CCS services could be beneficial. 

Construction of new CO₂ terminals – are we going to see them in existing ports, or will new stand-alone terminals be built outside of existing ports? 

Ian Phillips – Both – existing ports are often industrial hubs, where CCS is needed, such as in Rotterdam and Antwerp. However, new facilities at remote emitter sites are also needed.  

Haije Stigter – Stand-alone terminals are more likely where they are part of the storage solution, as in Northern Lights. Otherwise, terminals will primarily fulfil the role as aggregators of either gathering CO₂ from smaller emitters in the hinterland of a port or receiving CO₂ as a commodity/feedstock for sustainable industries. 

What is your take-away message to port authorities in Europe?  

Ian Phillips – A huge new business is emerging – so stay informed locally and be prepared for significant investment as soon as the ink is dry on projects requiring shipping. 

Haije Stigter – Facilitate and accelerate the required infrastructure for CCS, be actively involved in the dialogue around CO₂ quality and commingling of streams, including managing conditions for which no common specifications exist, appreciate and accept the merits of the different transport conditions, collaborate with other port authorities to create fall back options if certain facilities are full or not available. Be prepared to undertake some processing, because CO₂ arriving by pipeline from a multiple emitter/multi-take off network won’t always have a suitable composition for shipping. 

Bellona Europa’s key takeaways

• The transport of CO₂ by ship has been largely overlooked by regulators, but it is crucial for achieving future climate goals.  

• To support the necessary scale-up of CO₂ transport by ship in Europe (estimated at 50-100 million tonnes annually by 2040), there is a need for de-risking and certainty in long-term infrastructure planning, including the development of specialised CO₂ transport ships and infrastructure at ports. Policymakers can play a pivotal role in addressing this challenge by creating a supportive regulatory framework, as well as adequate and targeted funding for CO₂ infrastructure operators, including ports. 

• Investing in CO₂ infrastructure within ports is considered a no-regret decision, as it will be essential for enabling significant reductions and removals of CO₂ emissions over the coming decades. This is not only an opportunity for climate action but also a chance to seize new business opportunities. 

• Technical specifications for multimodal CO₂ infrastructure, along with health and safety guidelines, are necessary to ensure that the system is robust and reliable.  

• Ports have the opportunity to position themselves as proactive solution providers in this emerging field. By facilitating and accelerating the deployment of CO₂ infrastructure, ports can collaborate with each other to set industry standards and contribute significantly to the global decarbonisation efforts.

Read Bellona Europa’s recommendations on Industrial Decarbonisation, including CO₂ infrastructure, here. 

Check out the Ports2Decarb project page here, and the Ports2Decarb Linkedin account here.