{ "id": "R44902", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "R", "number": "R44902", "active": true, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov, EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "title": "Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in the United States", "retrieved": "2022-10-28T04:03:13.900210", "id": "R44902_12_2022-10-05", "formats": [ { "filename": "files/2022-10-05_R44902_57118fb8bef74f88da883d210dacdd0662ed0399.pdf", "format": "PDF", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44902/12", "sha1": "57118fb8bef74f88da883d210dacdd0662ed0399" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2022-10-05_R44902_57118fb8bef74f88da883d210dacdd0662ed0399.html" } ], "date": "2022-10-05", "summary": null, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "typeId": "R", "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R44902", "type": "CRS Report" }, { "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "title": "Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in the United States", "retrieved": "2022-10-28T04:03:10.590307", "id": "R44902_10_2021-10-18", "formats": [ { "filename": "files/2021-10-18_R44902_ddad9b755633e06141f1394803aae3b5ffcf6415.pdf", "format": "PDF", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44902/10", "sha1": "ddad9b755633e06141f1394803aae3b5ffcf6415" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2021-10-18_R44902_ddad9b755633e06141f1394803aae3b5ffcf6415.html" } ], "date": "2021-10-18", "summary": null, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "typeId": "R", "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R44902", "type": "CRS Report" }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 583902, "date": "2018-08-09", "retrieved": "2018-08-23T13:11:35.406492", "title": "Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in the United States", "summary": "Carbon capture and sequestration (or storage)\u2014known as CCS\u2014is a process that involves capturing man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) at its source and storing it permanently underground. (CCS is sometimes referred to as CCUS\u2014carbon capture, utilization, and storage.) CCS could reduce the amount of CO2\u2014an important greenhouse gas\u2014emitted to the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels at power plants and other large industrial facilities. The concept of carbon utilization has gained interest within Congress and in the private sector as a means for capturing CO2 and converting it into potentially commercially viable products, such as chemicals, fuels, cements, and plastics, thereby reducing emissions to the atmosphere and helping offset the cost of CO2 capture. Direct air capture is also an emerging technology, with the promise to remove atmospheric CO2 directly and reduce its concentration.\nThe U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has funded research and development (R&D) of aspects of CCS since 1997 within its Fossil Energy Research and Development (FER&D) portfolio. Since FY2010, Congress has provided more than $5 billion total in appropriations for DOE CCS-related activities. The Trump Administration proposed to reduce FER&D funding substantially in its FY2018 and FY2019 budget requests, but Congress has not agreed to the proposed reductions. In FY2018, Congress increased funding for DOE FER&D by nearly $59 million (9%) compared to FY2017, and the House- and Senate-passed appropriations bills for FY2019 would match or increase the appropriated amount compared to what Congress enacted for FY2018 ($727 million). \nThe Petra Nova plant in Texas is the only U.S. fossil-fueled power plant currently generating electricity and capturing CO2 in large quantities (over 1 million tons per year). Globally, the Boundary Dam plant in Canada is the only other large-scale fossil-fueled power plant with CCS. Both facilities retrofitted post-combustion capture technology to units of existing plants, and both offset a portion of the cost of CCS by selling captured CO2 for the purpose of enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Some CCS proponents point to the expanded Section 45Q of the Internal Revenue Code tax credits for CO2 capture and sequestration or its use as a tertiary injectant for EOR or natural gas production that were enacted as part of P.L. 115-123 as a significant step toward incentivizing more development of large-scale CCS deployment like Petra Nova and Boundary Dam.\nA number of bills introduced in the 115th Congress potentially would affect CCS in the United States. Several bills or provisions of bills address the Section 45Q tax credits (S. 1535, S. 1663, S. 2256, H.R. 1892, H.R. 2010, H.R. 3761, H.R. 4857). H.R. 1892, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, enacted into law as P.L. 115-123, amended Section 45Q and increased the amount of the tax credit from $20 to $50 per ton of CO2 for permanent sequestration, increased it from $10 to $35 for EOR purposes, and effectively removed the 75 million ton cap on the total amount of CO2 injected underground, among other changes. Some proponents suggest that enactment of this provision could be a \u201cgame changer\u201d for CCS, leading to more widespread adoption of the technology, although others question whether the increased incentives are large enough to affect CCS deployment.\nOther bills address a suite of measures to advance CCS. Several would provide additional financial incentives, such as tax-exempt private activity bonds, and provisions that would enable eligibility of master limited partnerships for CCS infrastructure projects (S. 843, S. 2005, H.R. 2011, and H.R. 4118). One bill (S. 2602) could help advance CCS by making CCS infrastructure projects eligible under the FAST Act (42 U.S.C. 4370m(6)). Other bills (S. 2803, S. 2997, H.R. 2296, H.R. 5745) would support increased R&D for CCS, carbon utilization technologies, and direct air capture of CO2. One bill (H.R. 4096) would authorize a $5 million prize to promote advances in CCS technology research and development.\nThere is broad agreement that costs for CCS would need to decrease before the technologies could be deployed commercially across the nation. The issue of greater CCS deployment is fundamental to the underlying reason CCS is deemed important by a range of proponents: to reduce CO2 emissions (or reduce the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere) and to help mitigate against human-induced climate change.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44902", "sha1": "1d967c3ffdaee6d4d1348fa6dad4a91debb8f35c", "filename": "files/20180809_R44902_1d967c3ffdaee6d4d1348fa6dad4a91debb8f35c.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/2.png": "files/20180809_R44902_images_c564756a76157f06efb479142a6d23d19077f351.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/3.png": "files/20180809_R44902_images_a8868c3fcb9cbb1ef31778a3fc46a70610bc6680.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180809_R44902_images_4efdec1eee0482fdf32ca0b692fc114311fb59ca.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/4.png": "files/20180809_R44902_images_0ef5d81faad923bbf7ce67a4c2304cc93451a5de.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180809_R44902_images_8b3d50ef1904b2f4283237dfde1901768a3bbb99.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44902", "sha1": "906e921038a5710b61e66ed000074a72d34890a7", "filename": "files/20180809_R44902_906e921038a5710b61e66ed000074a72d34890a7.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4812, "name": "Fossil Energy" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 575429, "date": "2017-11-14", "retrieved": "2017-11-28T14:41:52.654578", "title": "Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in the United States", "summary": "Carbon capture and sequestration (or storage)\u2014known as CCS\u2014is a process that involves capturing man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) at its source and storing it permanently underground. (CCS is sometimes referred to as CCUS\u2014carbon capture, utilization, and storage.) CCS could reduce the amount of CO2\u2014an important greenhouse gas\u2014emitted to the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels at power plants and other large industrial facilities.\nGlobally, two fossil-fueled power plants currently generate electricity and capture CO2 in large quantities: the Boundary Dam plant in Canada and the Petra Nova plant in Texas. Both plants retrofitted post-combustion capture technology to units of existing plants. A third fossil-fueled electricity-generating operation, the Kemper County Energy Facility in Mississippi, was scheduled to begin CCS operations by now, but cost overruns and delays in construction and operations led to the suspension of the plant\u2019s CCS component on June 28, 2017. \nEach of the power plants using CCS systems may be referred to as a demonstration project, or a nearly first-of-its-kind venture using technologies developed at a pilot scale ramped up to commercial scale. Such projects move through many phases, from the initial research and development (R&D) phase through the final commercial deployment phase. It is not unusual for projects in the demonstration phase of this process to experience higher-than-anticipated costs, delays, and other challenges. Several other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-supported demonstration projects, such as FutureGen, the AEP Mountaineer project, and the Hydrogen Energy California Project, among others, faced challenges that led to their cancellation or suspension. Given the mixed success of large CCS projects in the United States, the economic viability of, and the commercial interest in, such projects remains uncertain.\nThe U.S. Department of Energy has long supported R&D on CCS within its Fossil Energy Research and Development (FER&D) portfolio. The Trump Administration proposed to cut FER&D funding substantially in its FY2018 budget request. The Trump Administration\u2019s proposal differs from the policy trends of the previous two Administrations, which supported R&D on CCS and emphasized the development of large-scale demonstration projects to evaluate how CCS might be deployed commercially. Some in Congress have signaled continued support for DOE\u2019s R&D efforts with respect to CCS. The House Energy and Water Development appropriations draft legislation would support CCS R&D at a level comparable to that in FY2017, for example ($635 million versus $668 million enacted for FY2017). The Senate version of the bill would fund FER&D at $573 million in FY2018, $95 million less than in FY2017 but $293 million more than the Administration request. In addition, some Members of Congress have continued to introduce legislation in the 115th Congress intended to advance CCS. These bills include H.R. 2010, H.R. 2011, H.R. 2296, S. 843, S. 1068, S. 1535, and S. 1663. Two of these bills, S. 1663 and S. 1068, were offered as amendments to tax reform legislation (the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act) under consideration in the Senate Finance Committee.\nThe Obama Administration commissioned a CCS task force, which concluded in 2010 that the largest barrier to long-term demonstration and deployment of CCS technology is the absence of a federal policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The task force further concluded that widespread deployment of CCS would occur only if the technology is commercially available at economically competitive prices. None of those factors appear to be in place currently, which may indicate that demonstration and deployment of industrial-scale CCS will be delayed compared to earlier projections, pending future policy, technological, and economic developments.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44902", "sha1": "a4532072fdd320cf486345717df1b96ce84f5f68", "filename": "files/20171114_R44902_a4532072fdd320cf486345717df1b96ce84f5f68.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/1.png": "files/20171114_R44902_images_b55283e77d910321e41d320429baca3fee84512b.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/0.png": "files/20171114_R44902_images_4c861dfb7b0c1a620dfd2f498268e7f5fd8ae13d.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44902", "sha1": "00f455086c499fd82f295ff58896331913d4a5a0", "filename": "files/20171114_R44902_00f455086c499fd82f295ff58896331913d4a5a0.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4812, "name": "Fossil Energy" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 462935, "date": "2017-07-28", "retrieved": "2017-08-22T13:43:06.787084", "title": "Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in the United States", "summary": "Carbon capture and sequestration (or storage)\u2014known as CCS\u2014is a process that involves capturing man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) at its source and storing it permanently underground. (CCS is sometimes referred to as CCUS\u2014carbon capture, utilization, and storage.) CCS could reduce the amount of CO2\u2014an important greenhouse gas\u2014emitted to the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels at power plants and other large industrial facilities.\nGlobally, two fossil-fueled power plants currently generate electricity and capture CO2 in large quantities: the Boundary Dam plant in Canada and the Petra Nova plant in Texas. Both plants retrofitted post-combustion capture technology to units of existing plants. A third fossil-fueled electricity-generating operation, the Kemper County Energy Facility in Mississippi, was scheduled to begin CCS operations by now, but cost overruns and delays in construction and operations led to the suspension of the plant\u2019s CCS component on June 28, 2017. \nEach of the power plants using CCS systems may be referred to as a demonstration project, or a nearly first-of-its-kind venture using technologies developed at a pilot scale ramped up to commercial scale. Such projects move through many phases, from the initial research and development (R&D) phase through the final commercial deployment phase. It is not unusual for projects in the demonstration phase of this process to experience higher-than-anticipated costs, delays, and other challenges. Several other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-supported demonstration projects, such as FutureGen, the AEP Mountaineer project, and the Hydrogen Energy California Project, among others, faced challenges that led to their cancellation or suspension. Given the mixed success of large CCS projects in the United States, the economic viability of, and the commercial interest in, such projects remains uncertain.\nThe U.S. Department of Energy has long supported R&D on CCS within its Fossil Energy Research and Development (FER&D) portfolio. The Trump Administration proposed to cut FER&D funding substantially in its FY2018 budget request. The Trump Administration\u2019s proposal differs from the policy trends of the previous two Administrations, which supported R&D on CCS and emphasized the development of large-scale demonstration projects to evaluate how CCS might be deployed commercially. Some in Congress have signaled continued support for DOE\u2019s R&D efforts with respect to CCS. The House Energy and Water Development appropriations draft legislation would support CCS R&D at a level comparable to that in FY2017, for example ($635 million versus $668 enacted for FY2017). The Senate version of the bill would fund FER&D at $573 million in FY2018, $95 million less than FY2017 but $293 million more than the Administration request. In addition, some Members of Congress have continued to introduce legislation in the 115th Congress intended to advance CCS. These bills include H.R. 2010, H.R. 2011, H.R. 2296, S. 843, S. 1068, and S. 1535.\nThe Obama Administration commissioned a CCS task force, which concluded in 2010 that the largest barrier to long-term demonstration and deployment of CCS technology is the absence of a federal policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The task force further concluded that widespread deployment of CCS would occur only if the technology is commercially available at economically competitive prices. None of those factors appear to be in place currently, which may indicate that demonstration and deployment of industrial-scale CCS will be delayed compared to earlier projections, pending future policy, technological, and economic developments.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44902", "sha1": "bbcf349c8ae19f58477eb15f650ceec9b67480a8", "filename": "files/20170728_R44902_bbcf349c8ae19f58477eb15f650ceec9b67480a8.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/1.png": "files/20170728_R44902_images_b55283e77d910321e41d320429baca3fee84512b.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44902_files&id=/0.png": "files/20170728_R44902_images_4c861dfb7b0c1a620dfd2f498268e7f5fd8ae13d.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44902", "sha1": "26a2034375a9782dfa10bf7bc327faf57da72e7d", "filename": "files/20170728_R44902_26a2034375a9782dfa10bf7bc327faf57da72e7d.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4812, "name": "Fossil Energy" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4842, "name": "Climate Change" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Energy Policy", "Environmental Policy" ] }