Communication, Project Planning and Management for Carbon Capture and Storage Projects: an International Comparison
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Communication, project planning and management for carbon capture and storage projects: An international comparison Energy Transformed Flagship Peta Ashworth, Judith Bradbury, C.F.J. (Ynke) Feenstra, Sallie Greenberg, Gretchen Hund, Thomas Mikunda and Sarah Wade EP 104273 Prepared for Sarah Clarke, Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Communication, project planning and management for carbon capture and storage projects: Enquiries should be addressed to: Peta Ashworth Tel: + 61 7 3327 4145 Disclaimer CSIRO advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general statements and observations based on social scientifi c research and should not be regarded as advice. The reader must not rely or act on that information without seeking prior expert professional, scientifi c and technical advice as appropriate and must consider their particular circumstances. To the extent permitted by law, and subject to the terms of the funding agreement pursuant to which this report was prepared, CSIRO (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability arising from use of this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it. The views expressed herein are not necessarily the views of the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Ltd, and the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Ltd does not accept responsibility for any information or advice contained therein. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the Global CCS Institute (GCCSI) through CSIRO. Neither the Battelle Memorial Institute, nor the Illinois State Geological Survey – University of Illinois, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specifi c commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favouring by the institutions mentioned herein or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or refl ect those of GCCSI, CSIRO, the United States Government or any agency thereof. PNWD-4196 2 An international comparison CONTENTS 1 Introduction and overview 4 1.1 Approach 4 1.2 The case studies 5 2 Project planning and management 6 2.1 Alignment of governments and project developers 6 2.2 Integrated communication experts from the outset 6 2.3 Extent factors related to social context included 6 2.4 Degree of fl exibility in framing the project? 7 2.5 Degree of fl exibility in adjusting the project implementation strategy? 7 3 Communication, stakeholder engagement and outreach 8 3.1 Timing – engage early 8 3.2 Know your community 8 3.3 Identifying local benefi ts 8 3.4 Information – what to communicate 8 3.5 Information – how to communicate 9 3.6 Sources of information 10 3.7 Unique factor – competition 10 4 Summary comparison of case studies 10 References 29 Appendix 1 Barendrecht Project – The Netherlands A 30 Appendix 2 Carson Project – United States of America A 75 Appendix 3 FutureGen Project – United States of America A 105 Appendix 4 Otway Project – Australia A 141 Appendix 5 ZeroGen Project – Australia A 180 Tables Table 1 Project characteristics 5 Table 2 Overview of evaluation factors 11 Table 3 Summary comparison between cases 12 Table 4 Detailed review for each case 14 3 Communication, project planning and management for carbon capture and storage projects: 1 Introduction and overview 1.1 Approach This report provides an overview of the fi ndings that have emerged from an international study comparing public communication and outreach practices associated with large scale carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) projects. The study focused on a direct comparison between fi ve case studies of specifi c CCS projects and their associated communication and outreach activities. The fi ve case studies were: • Barendrecht Project – The Netherlands • Carson Project – United States of America • FutureGen Project – United States of America • Otway Project – Australia • ZeroGen Project – Australia While there are key lessons around what constitutes best practice in communications and outreach, these alone are not suffi cient to ensure successful CCS project deployment. The fi ndings suggest that a project’s ability to adjust its planning and management to its social context is more likely to ensure a positive outcome for all involved in the project. A fundamental conclusion is that communication should not be seen as an add-on to the project. Successful projects integrate communication and outreach as a critical component of the project from the beginning. Additionally, there are many interpretations of the terms ‘communication’, ‘stakeholder engagement’ and ‘outreach’ depending on the cultural backgrounds and prior experiences of the reader. Too often communication in the context of projects can be interpreted as public relations. And in some countries, stakeholder engagement and outreach are considered as one-way messaging of information to the community, general public and other stakeholders. In this report, the researchers stress the importance of communication, engagement and outreach being considered as an active two-way dialogic approach to working with stakeholders internal and external to the project, including the community and general public. This overview document presents the case studies and then elaborates on the notions of adaptive project management and two-way communication and engagement based on an assessment of the case studies. It is hoped that these fi ndings will assist project developers to go beyond ‘best practice’ communication and outreach to contribute to more successful outcomes for the commercial deployment of CCS projects. Finally, the report presents a summary of the fi ndings of the fi ve case studies. The summary comparison included in this paper is based on a set of evaluation factors the authors have drawn from the case studies. The evaluation factors have been rated using a traffi c light system: red – factor was not addressed, amber – there is an opportunity to address the factor, and green – factor was addressed. The evaluation factors may be a useful guide to help future projects assess the social context for proposed projects and develop effective communication and outreach programs. The researchers strongly recommend that this report is read in conjunction with the case studies because of the richness they provide as background to the issue of communication, stakeholder engagement and outreach. In addition, a toolkit of suggested activities has been developed to assist projects and appropriate references are made to this document in the report. The research was sponsored by the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute (GCCSI) and was conducted by international researchers from the following research institutions: Commonwealth Scientifi c and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia; Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN), Netherlands; Illinois State Geological Survey, University of Illinois, USA; Pacifi c Northwest National Laboratory, operated by Battelle for the US Department of Energy, USA; and AJW Inc., USA. 4 Table 1 Project Characteristics 1Project Table The projects have technical and geological diversity as summarised 1. in Table TheCase1.2 Studies Barendrecht Carson FutureGen1 ZeroGen Otway Overview Demonstration project to store First-of-a kind 500 MW 275 MW model integrated Commercial scale, First Australian CO2 from existing hydrogen hydrogen power plant, using gasifi cation combined cycle 530 MW IGCC with CCS demonstration project of production plant in nearby petroleum by-product from (IGCC) power plant storing geological storage of CO2 expended gas fi elds, largely nearby refi neries and CO2 90% of CO2 located at Barendrecht storage in nearby oilfi elds Location Rotterdam harbour area, Los Angeles Basin, Mattoon, Illinois, USA Central Highlands region, Victoria, south- West Netherlands California, USA Queensland Australia west Australia Funding Privately funded largely by Shell, Privately funded, largely by BP, Government-industry State government funding Public/private funding with signifi cant grant award by with signifi cant tax credits partnership government Planned ~10 million tonnes would be ~5.5 million tons per year ~one million metric 3 mega-tonnes per annum 65,000 tonnes CO2 over an volume CO2 stored over the project lifetime tons (~0.9 million metric 18-month period; Phase 2 is injection tonnes) CO2 per annum 10,000 tonnes per annum Captured hydrogen plant Captured power plant IGCC power plant Extracted from CO2 source IGCC power plant emissions emissions existing gas well Timing Grant awarded 2007; Announced 2006; planned Created 2005; site selection Beginning 2006, expected Began discussions 2004; planned start 2012 start late 2011 / early 2012 announced June 2006 to take 11 years from injection started April 2008 conception to completion An international comparison Site Private industry selection, Private industry selection, based Competitive process using Queensland Government Geological variability/ selection supplemented by grant award, on commercial advantage of extensive siting criteria backed initiative, investigating site characterisation process based on need for CO2 proximity