Greenhouse Fight Options Explored

Is There Anything We Can Do?

By LOUISE S. DURHAM
EXPLORER Correspondent

Related Story

AAPG's Division of Environmental Geosciences is offering a technical session on "Approaches to Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions," which will be presented Tuesday morning, June 5, during the annual meeting in Denver.

John Shinn's paper, "Global Warming and the Oil Industry -- A Viable Path Forward?" will be presented at 8:45 a.m.

The session features seven papers, ending with a 10:20 a.m. paper by R. Repetto on "The Clean Development Mechanism: Institutional Breakthrough or Institutional Nightmare?"

t sounds improbable today, but early (1970s) concern about the impact of human activity on the global climate system centered on the prospect of global cooling caused by man-made particles, or aerosols, reflecting away incoming solar radiation.

Green house effect

Attention soon shifted to the possibility of global warming via the ability of so-called "greenhouse" gases, principally carbon dioxide, water vapor and methane, to absorb the infrared radiation the earth transmits to space in order to balance the incoming radiation from the sun.

The issue of global warming soon took on a life of its own.

Over the years, the controversial matter has evolved from one focused primarily on scientific concerns to one currently focused on the selection of mitigation and carbon removal options.

Indeed, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) -- the international voice on the science of global warming -- has shifted its emphasis toward the assessment of potential damages from warming and to selection of appropriate policies and technologies to reduce or capture emissions.

Numerous technology options exist to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to capture and dispose of carbon from the atmosphere and from emission sources. Factors to be considered when selecting mitigation and disposal options include the availability of the particular option, the volume of emissions that can be reduced or offset, the cost and other technical, social and political factors.

"Energy efficiency and expanded use of natural gas appear to hold considerable promise as nearer-term solutions," said John Shinn, project technical manager global change at Chevron Research & Technology Co. "Disposal of CO₂ in underground formations appears promising as a medium-term option.

"Besides adopting technology options within specific businesses, the international process offers other promising response options that expand the possible choices to reduce emissions, such as trading and international project activities."

Wanted: Proven Technologies

Given the international demand to reduce the growth of greenhouse gases, the oil and gas industry is diligently assessing how best to approach this potentially costly and complex issue.

The International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) held a workshop in 1999, where experts from technology assessment and technology development groups met to examine both the process and outputs of mitigation technology assessment programs already conducted.

They concluded no one technology appears capable to provide the entire solution for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but rather the evolution of multiple technologies over time is the way to go.

General guidelines were developed for effective assessment of technology options. These include:

• How soon the option will be available.
• The impact from a given technology.
• Cost.
• Certainty.
• Political and social acceptability.

Existing short- to medium-term greenhouse gas mitigation options can be grouped in a few general categories:

• Energy efficiency.
• Reduced venting and flaring.
• Remote natural gas utilization: e.g. LNG, GTL (gas-to-liquids).
• Fuel switching.
• Methane Capture.
• Land use change: e.g. reforestation, soil management for carbon uptake/reduced carbon release.

Abatement options available today that are applicable worldwide can be as simple as pipeline repair or the controlled ignition of large methane sources.

"The availability of existing proven technologies appears to be a key issue in the choice of options in the near-term," Shinn said. "The challenge is to provide the added incentive for these activities to permit them to compete effectively for investment money, and the value of carbon credits could provide such an incentive."

Three Broad Options

Shinn noted there are three broad options for mid- to longer-term gas mitigation.

However, two of these options -- energy production from non-carbon sources (renewables) and the use of non-hydrocarbon fuels (e.g.hydrogen) -- call for profound change in the global energy system. Implementation could take decades.

The other option is sequestration, or the removal of CO₂ from combustion products or from the atmosphere. Shinn ticked off several advantages of sequestration as a medium- to long-term carbon management approach:

• Allows continued use of a valuable, low-cost hydrocarbon resource.
• Political and commercial value to producer nations and carbon businesses.
• Allows time for renewables cost reductions and breakthroughs.
• Potential co-location of disposal and production sites.

Beyond the technical options, the international process is creating additional response flexibility.

The Kyoto Protocol, if adopted, would allow governments and businesses options to participate in emissions-reducing activity beyond the confines of their national or business activity.

Even if the Protocol is not ultimately adopted, as suggested by the recent Bush administration positioning, it is expected that many of these flexible options developed in the Protocol framework could be retained in some form in future measures.

Clean Development Mechanism

The Kyoto approaches involve two activity categories -- trading and projects.

The Emissions Trading category allows governments or businesses to purchase excess emissions reductions from those who are able to reduce emissions below their Kyoto objectives. This provides incentives for those entities having low-cost emissions reduction opportunities to reduce below their targets.

The "projects" approach involves participation in emission-reducing activities outside one's own borders in order to receive part of the value of the reduction toward one's own reduction obligations.

There are two types of project activity:

• Projects in countries having commitments to reduce (Joint Implementation).
• Projects in developing countries with no Kyoto Protocol reduction commitments (Clean Development Mechanism, or CDM).

Chevron and partners are in the advanced planning stage of a project that may qualify for CDM, known as the West African Gas Pipeline project. The project would utilize otherwise wasted natural gas to provide cleaner energy for development in Western Africa.

Natural gas is flared in the oil-producing regions of Nigeria, and the Chevron program would capture and transport the now-wasted gas to Ghana, Togo and Benin, where it would replace higher emission fuels used in power generation.

Other benefits expected to accrue include improved air quality and health, a more rapid development of electricity and, eventually, increased use of natural gas for home heating and cooking.

"We believe this is the kind of project that should qualify for greenhouse gas credits," Shinn said. "The added value of the credits could help ensure that more projects of this type are selected, allowing companies to play a more active role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions."