Perspective

Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment

of carbon capture and storage
M Bui1,2,† and D Danaci3,†
1
Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, SW7 1NE, UK
2
Centre for Process Systems Engineering, Imperial College London, SW7 2AZ, UK
3
Barrer Centre, Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London,
SW7 2AZ, UK
E-mail: m.bui@imperial.ac.uk
E-mail: d.danaci@imperial.ac.uk

Abstract. There is uncertainty around whether current supply chains are able to
cater for the increase in demand which will arise from carbon capture and storage
(CCS) deployment. In order to meet the IPCC 2 °C target, 2800 – 4500 CCS plants
of 1.7 Mtpa capacity need to be commissioned between 2030 and 2060. This study
identifies the bottlenecks in the deployment of different CCS technologies by evaluating
technology readiness level (TRL), commercial readiness index (CRI) and the supply
chain readiness index (SCRI). Given the time required to establish supply chains, an
under-developed supply chain will cause us to fall short of our climate change mitigation
targets. Of the issues identified, we believe most process equipment related issues do
not disqualify the deployment of a specific technology. Technologies with inefficiencies
or low capacity can be addressed with multiple unit operations. However, reliance on
specialised materials will limit deployment. Large-scale deployment of CCS is possible
with currently available technology. We wish to highlight that increasing supply chain
capacity should be a high priority, and advanced planning is required.

Keywords: Carbon capture and storage (CCS), supply chain, TRL, negative emissions,
CCS deployment, commercial readiness
†
Authors contributed equally to this work
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 2

1. The need to accelerate CCS deployment

In order to achieve climate change mitigation targets such as those stipulated by the
IPCC [1], a significant reduction in CO2 emissions is required. Integrated assessment
models (IAMs) indicate that significant deployment of CCS technologies will almost
certainly be required to limit global warming below 2 °C.
The 2 degrees scenario requires a cumulative reduction of 142 to 227 Gt of CO2
by 2060 via CCS [2]. Existing CCS projects in operation globally currently sequester
31.7 MtCO2 per year [3]. There is a significant discrepancy between what is currently
deployed and what is actually required. In order to meet this target, 2800 – 4500 CCS
plants of 1.7 Mtpa capacity will need to be constructed between 2030 and 2060.‡ This
estimate is in line with other published values [4].§ The design to operation of a CCS
project can take between three to six years. As we gain experience, this process could
become more efficient. Therefore, the construction of first batch of CCS projects must
begin by 2027 in order to begin operation by 2030. Any delays in the supply chain or
construction will require a proportionally higher number of plants to be built, putting
strain on the system.
Carbon capture and storage is recognised as a key technology for the
decarbonisation of the industrial sector, and can also provide negative CO2 emissions
[6, 7]. The removal of CO2 from the atmosphere is important as it provide a mechanism
to offset emissions from hard-to-reach sectors, e.g., aviation, and agriculture.
In the power sector, the two technologies that potentially compete with CCS are
nuclear, and renewables, as both provide zero operational CO2 emissions. More recently,
nuclear faces challenges in terms of social acceptance, limited flexibility, and higher costs.
Consequently, the projected deployment of nuclear power is low, providing only 1% of
the cumulative CO2 emissions reduction. In contrast, the 2 degrees scenario estimates
that renewables will provide an additional 275 to 316 Gt of cumulative CO2 emissions
reduction by 2060 [2]. Although renewable energy technologies have a near-zero marginal
cost, the deployment of renewables is not going to negate the need for CCS. The high
penetration of intermittent renewables, such as wind, and solar power, requires thermal
power plants with CCS to balance the load on the electricity grid [8, 9, 10].
The majority of the focus around scalability of CCS technologies is concerned with
progressing along the technology readiness level (TRL) or commercial readiness index
(CRI). However, these do not identify the true bottlenecks in achieving large-scale CCS
deployment. The TRL represents the development and scale state of a technology, and
CRI reflects the progress towards widespread deployment [11].
In the context of large-scale CCS deployment, it is unclear whether current
equipment supply chains are capable of accommodating existing demand and additional
‡ The average CO2 capture capacity of all existing large-scale CCS projects is 1.68 Mtpa.
§ For reference, 27 plants of varying nature and capacity were commissioned worldwide in 2019 – sum
of new plants reported in each monthly issue of Chemical Engineering [5], excluding expansions and
announcements.
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 3

demand arising from CCS. Therefore, we aim to identify any bottlenecks in the
deployment of different CCS technologies. We evaluate a comprehensive list of
technologies in terms of the three metrics, the two mentioned above, and the supply
chain readiness index (SCRI). This will then enable us to highlight key areas, which
require specific attention and further development. There are a range of technological
alternatives which have their own relative merits and demerits. It is not our intention
to promote or discount any one of them, but rather to identify issues which may limit
the large-scale deployment of these technologies in the recommended time frame.

2. Evaluating CCS deployment potential

2.1. Technology and commercial readiness (TRL/CRI)

A Technology Readiness Assessment is an approach used to evaluate technologies in
terms of their “readiness” for commercial operation and deployment. The technology
readiness levels (TRL) are a nine-point scaling system used to qualitatively evaluate the
maturity level of a technology. The TRL system provides a means of tracking the status
of technologies during their progression through different stages of the R&D timeline
[12]. The TRL scale advises what resources may be required in order to achieve the
next stage of development (i.e., what needs to be improved to reduce technical risk and
make it ready for use).
An important consideration is that TRLs are context specific. A technology may
be mature in one application, however, may not be ready for use in other plants
where process conditions differ significantly. Furthermore, TRLs are associated with
individual technologies, and do not suggest that multiple technologies are capable of
being integrated together.
Of the nine levels, TRL 3, 6, and 7 represent important development milestones
for a technology. By achieving TRL 3, a technology has demonstrated proof of concept
in a laboratory; further progress is reliant on further research funding. Commercial
interest will be required to reach TRL 6 for both pilot plant siting, and construction
support. Furthermore, this is the stage where technical issues will likely arise. However,
advancement of successful pilot plant projects will require continued commercial
support. Finally, the progression beyond demonstration scale (TRL 7) to commercial
scale (TRL 9) is limited by financial support, and commercial interest.
Commercial readiness index comprises of two parts, a CRI status summary level and
the detailed indicators. The status summary level is solely based on current evidence
in the market. The detailed indicators have no influence on the final score but offer
additional granularity when assessing a project [11].
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 4

In this work, we report the CRI status summary level, hereon referred to as CRI,
which ranges from one to six:
(i) Hypothetical commercial proposition (minimum TRL 2) – proven technology;
(ii) Commercial trial (minimum TRL 8) – first-of-a-kind project;
(iii) Commercial scale up (beyond TRL 9) – driven by technology proponents;
(iv) Multiple commercial applications – widespread adoption by public companies;
(v) Market competition driving widespread deployment – commoditisation of key
components;
(vi) “Bankable” grade asset class – essentially a risk free investment.
Much like the TRL, we have evaluated the CRI in the context of CCS. For instance,
there are multiple installations of amine absorption, and hydrogen production from
syngas worldwide for industrial applications. However, they do not contribute to the
market status of these technologies for CCS.
Some capture technologies have achieved TRL 8 or 9 with high CRI. These
include absorption, for both post- and pre-combustion capture, and adsorption for pre-
combustion capture (Table 1). Direct air capture (DAC) is in a unique position. It
has been able to reach a TRL of 7 (and CRI of 2) due to significant financial support
from government bodies, which has resulted in “perceived maturity”; although there
are still many aspects that require further development. Thus, it is still to early to pick
a “winning” DAC technology as there many implementations of DAC that have not yet
been explored.
Overall CO2 transport technologies have achieved maximum TRL and high CRI
with many being commercially available. CO2 storage options such as CO2 -EOR and
saline aquifers have also reached TRL 9. The only CCS technology that has achieved
maximum CRI is CO2 -EOR.

2.2. Supply chain readiness index (SCRI)

Although CRI provides a useful indication of the current status in the market, it is
not of high enough resolution to identify the key constraints of achieving widespread
deployment. Therefore, a tool that complements TRL and CRI is required, as a single
tool in isolation is not a sufficient assessment. Although not explicitly accounted for,
it would be impossible to achieve a CRI above four if supply chain and manufacturing
issues exist. In addition to concerns around policy and regulation, critical evaluation
of the manufacturing and supply chain status is necessary to fulfil the required demand
(estimated 2800 – 4500 CCS plants by 2060). One such tool that evaluates this in
more detail is the SCRI, which assists in the development of a supply chain to support
large-scale deployment of a product/technology.
First proposed by Tucker and Paxton (2010) [13] and further refined by Matopoulos
(2017) [14, 15], the supply chain readiness level ranges from one to ten. This considers
R&D and planning, development, and volume production of a product. The framework
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 5

is quite comprehensive, covering many characteristics of the supply chain from raw
materials to legislation and corporate social responsibilities.
Much of the information required to evaluate the supply chain readiness level is not
publicly available. Therefore, we have opted for a more generic assessment which we
call the supply chain readiness index (SCRI).
The SCRI ranges from none (–) to fully established for high volume productionk
(XXXXX):
• Supply chain requirements have not been identified (–)
• Basic supply chain requirements identified (X)
• Supply chain capabilities have been assessed (XX)
• Supply chain proven to support prototype (XXX)
• Supply chain can support low volume production (XXXX)
• Supply chain can support high volume production (XXXXX)
The supply chain readiness level was designed to evaluate supply chains for a
single product. In this study, we are applying the SCRI to a process technology, which
ultimately encompasses all sub-components required. For example, in the case of amine
absorption for post-combustion capture, this would include components such as the
columns, pumps, heat exchangers, and consumables.

2.3. Technology evaluation

Table 1 shows the results from our analysis of the three indices. Some technologies have
received comparatively higher SCRI, e.g., amine-based absorption, adsorption for pre-
combustion capture, pipeline transport, and geological CO2 storage. On the other hand,
novel technologies such as next generation absorbents, and adsorbents, dense inorganic
membranes, and direct air capture, received a lower SCRI due to the fact that there
is no large-scale prototype of these technologies for CCS applications. Therefore, the
development of capture technology supply chains is paramount in order to deploy CCS.
In addition to R&D efforts, further investment is required to encourage the establishment
of production facilities and accompanying logistics.

k Number required to meet annual demand.

Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 6

Technology TRL CRI SCRI

Post-combustion capture
Amine absorption in power & industry 9 3 XXX
Biphasic solvents 6 1 X
Adsorption with commercially available adsorbents 7 1 X
Adsorption with next-generation adsorbents 3 1 –
e.g. MOFs
Absorption using next-generation absorbents 3 1 –
e.g. ionic liquids, water-lean solvents, amino acids
Pre-combustion capture
Syngas processing via liquid absorption 9 3 X
Integrated gasification combined cycle with absorption 7 1 X
Adsorption using commercially available adsorbents 8 3 XXX
Polymeric membranes 6 1 –
Low temperature (c.a. -60 °C) separations 7 2 X
Sorption-enhanced reforming or water-gas shift 5 1 –
Clathrates 3 1 –
Oxy-combustion capture
Oxy-combustion coal-fired power plant 7 2 X
Oxy-combustion gas turbine (water cycle) 4 1 –
Next generation processes for CCS
Dense inorganic membranes for H2 separation 6 1 –
Dense inorganic membranes for CO2 separation 3 1 –
Chemical looping combustion 6 1 –
Calcium carbonate looping 6 1 X
Electrochemical separations 4 1 –
Negative emissions technologies
Bioenergy with CCS - post-combustion capture 6 1 X
Bioenergy with CCS - industry 9 4 XXX
e.g. bioethanol production
Direct air capture - adsorption based 7 2 –
Direct air capture - absorption-calcium looping hybrids 7 2 –
Direct air capture - absorption based 5 1 –
CO2 transport
CO2 compression 9 4 X
Onshore pipelines 9 4 XXX
Offshore pipelines 9 4 XXX
Ships 7 2 X
Trucks 9 3 X
CO2 storage
CO2 -Enhanced oil recovery 9 6 XXX
Saline aquifers 9 2 XXX
Depleted oil & gas fields 7 2 XXX
CO2 -Enhanced gas recovery 7 1 XXX
Mineral storage 3 1 X
Ocean storage 2 1 –
Industrial applications
Polymeric membranes for natural gas sweetening 9 4 XXX
Cement 7 2 XXX
e.g. Calix flash calcination

Table 1. Evaluation of CCS technologies based on TRL, CRI and SCRI.

Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 7

3. Discussion

3.1. Special considerations: Equipment

We recognise that the scale-up of any product/technology will require an increase in
manufacturing capacity. However, there are special considerations in addition to scale-
up in some cases and we discuss these below.

3.1.1. Fluid transport equipment Currently, the lead time for large gas compressors,
greater than 10 MW, is easily 6 to 18 months. This is due to the complexity of
their manufacture, attributed to tight design tolerances and delays in obtaining case
castings. Furthermore, CO2 compressors currently have small production volumes, and
experience similarly long lead times. Considering that bottlenecks exist with current
demand, compressors require particular attention in meeting future demand. Although
the manufacturing process is well understood, advancements from the aerospace industry
seen in turbine manufacture such as composite and metal 3D printing may trickle down,
expediting compressor manufacture.
Turbo-expanders are required in low temperature separation processes such as
ASUs. Akin to compressors, turbo-expanders experience the same issues, therefore,
the same measures could be applied.
An issue faced in deploying vacuum-based adsorption technologies (e.g., VSA,
TVSA), such as post-combustion capture, and DAC, is that vacuum pumps of sufficiently
large capacity do not exist. This necessitates significant parallelisation (e.g., 50–100
pumps for a 1 Mtpa post-combustion capture plant). This adds significant cost and
land requirements. However, land limitations prevent the installation of a high number
of equipment items, which is a key barrier for the deployment of adsorption technologies
for these applications. Thus, focus should be placed on developing vacuum pumps of
larger capacity.

3.1.2. Heat transfer equipment Heat exchangers currently experience long lead times
due to their heavily labour intensive manufacturing process. Advances in metal 3D
printing and other additive manufacturing processes could expedite production into the
future. To date, reasonable progress has been made, however, further improvement
could be helpful in terms of material selection and properties, maximum size of print,
and surface finish. Such advanced manufacturing methods could also lead to more
efficient and compact heat exchanger designs [16, 17, 18].

3.1.3. Steam-based energy generation With coal power plants in decline, the
manufacturing rate of large steam turbines and boilers may decline, which may lead to
loss of manufacturing capacity. The re-establishment of which, will take time. Biomass-
and coal-fired power plants with CCS potentially offer an opportunity to maintain these
industries.
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 8

3.1.4. Gas contactors Technologies such as electrochemical separation are in the early
stages of development (TRL 4). Much like electrochemical hydrogen generation, the
capacity of electrochemical cells are quite small (i.e., in the order of cm3 per minute)
[19, 20]. Therefore, in order to process significant volumes of gas, focus is needed on
increasing throughput of these cells, i.e., m3 per minute.
The two currently available archetypes of DAC include absorption- and adsorption-
based systems. A key requirement for DAC systems is a low pressure drop in the
contactor. This is necessary as vast volumes of air must be processed in order to
capture a meaningful amount of CO2 . For absorption-based technologies, this achieved
by a cross-flow column design. This is where the gas flow is perpendicular to the down-
flowing liquid. However, the fundamental mechanism of this design are still under
investigation, also the design and construction standards have not been developed.
As a result, ideal operating conditions are still to be established. Adsorption-based
systems aim to tackle the pressure drop issue by replacing conventional packed beds
with monolithic contactors, which are a generally established concept. However, the
TVSA variant is more complex and large scale production may be challenging due to
the requirement of maintaining vacuum conditions. These design issues may hinder the
deployment of DAC due to its inability to compete with other technologies.

3.1.5. Packaged plant Some CCS technologies require the delivery of packaged plants,
generally cryogenic systems. Air separation units (ASUs), required for oxy-combustion,
and low temperature separation plants (including gas processing units) both rely on
compressors, heat exchangers and turbo-expanders. Each of which, have their own
supply issues previously described. Currently, an ASU has a typical lead time of
approximately two years. Deployment of the aforementioned technologies will further
impose strain on the supply of these products.

3.1.6. CO2 transport Although pipelines are a well established technology, they pose
a major bottleneck for large scale CCS deployment. Strategic planning of pipeline
networks is required, including issues around infrastructure ownership and regulatory
permission.
The transport of CO2 by truck is an established technology, however, the volumes
of CO2 that can be transported are inadequate for large scale CCS. The transport of
CO2 via ship has greater potential. Small scale transport ships exist (up to 10,000
m3 capacity), which has currently been sufficient for the food and beverage industry.
CCS will likely require a capacity of up to 100,000 m3 of CO2 , which has not yet been
demonstrated [21].

3.1.7. CO2 storage The permanent geological storage of CO2 has been demonstrated
at large scale (up to 1 Mtpa). A number of suitable storage sites have been identified
and characterised worldwide. Countries without local geological storage potential that
choose to deploy CCS will need to make appropriate arrangements, which will require
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 9

international agreements. A major hurdle regarding geological CO2 storage is to develop

understanding of the liability associated with abandoning a CO2 storage site, i.e., “cut-
and-cap” procedures.
There is some interest in ocean storage of CO2 . There is need to develop
an understanding of CO2 containment and plume migration which, given strict
environmental regulations, technology demonstration is not possible. This limits the
storage options for countries without access to geological storage.

3.2. Special considerations: Materials and consumables

Most process equipment related issues do not disqualify the deployment of a specific
technology. For example, inefficiencies or low capacity can be addressed with multiple
unit operations. However, technologies that depend on specialised materials that are
limited in supply, or difficult to manufacture at scale, will have deployment constraints.
The availability of materials, consumables, and feedstock also needs consideration, we
have identified some which warrant further discussion.

3.2.1. Absorbents The supply of conventional amines such as monoethanolamine

(MEA), methyl diethanolamine (MDEA), and 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP),
can meet current demand. The manufacturing process is well established and there is
extensive experience. However, there are few large-scale commercial suppliers. This
may lead to bottlenecks or monopolisation of the market at the projected scales.
Manufacturing relies on alkyl oxides and ammonia; these chemicals require ASU, and
hydrogen, both of which we have identified possible bottlenecks for. The production of
alkyl oxides such as ethylene oxide, and propylene oxide require silver-based catalysts.
We address the issues associated with catalysts based on metals in limited supply below.
New generation absorbents such as ionic liquids, mixed salts, and biphasic systems
have been the centre of materials development in the absorption community. However,
production of new generation absorbents is essentially non-existent. For example the
production of novel ionic liquids has progressed from the grams to kilogram scale over
the last decade. Related to this, issues associated with large-scale production are yet to
be identified.

3.2.2. Adsorbents Aside from the scale-up of existing production, significant issues are
not foreseen in the supply of conventional solid adsorbents (i.e., zeolites, activated
carbons, and silicas and aluminas). Adsorbents such as metal-organic frameworks
(MOFs), functionalised porous materials, and nanomaterials, are receiving significant
research interest. However, the large scale production (i.e., 1 tonne per batch per day) of
materials that show promise is at least a decade away. Also, it is not understood whether
every novel adsorbent can be scaled up while maintaining laboratory scale properties.
In the case of DAC, good adsorbent performance should not be the only
consideration for adsorbent selection. The manufacturability will determine the
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 10

capability for large scale deployment. Those based on existing commercialised products
(e.g., macroporous polymer resin supported amines, and cordierite/alumina monolith
supported amines) are available and can be scaled-up. However, proposed adsorbents
that have challenging manufacturing processes (e.g., nanofibrillated cellulose supported
amine) have very low yields and may impose a supply chain bottleneck.

3.2.3. Nickel-based catalysts (for reforming processes) Iron-based catalysts for water-
gas shift reactions are unlikely to experience significant issues with an increase in demand
aside from general production scale-up. However, nickel-based catalysts for reforming
may come across issues in the long term. Global demand for nickel has been growing
due to increased interest in electric vehicles and grid-scale energy storage, which rely on
lithium chemistry batteries. Modern chemistries such as lithium nickel cobalt aluminium
oxide (“NCA” or LiNiCoAlO2 ) and lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (“NMC”
or LiNix Mny Coz O2 ) contain an appreciable mass of nickel (25–50% of the electrodes).
Nickel production has been relative stable recently, resulting in depletion of reserves and
a corresponding increase in price. Current reforming catalysts, such as those used to
produce syngas from hydrocarbons contain significant amounts of nickel.
In addition to nickel, catalysts from some vendors also contain lanthanum and
significant amounts of zirconium; both of which have demonstrated unstable supply
trends in the past. Given these are finite resources, the recovery and recycling of metals
from spent catalyst should be be considered. This currently takes place in a limited
number of cases for precious metal catalysts, however, there is opportunity to expand
to other metals.

3.2.4. Dense inorganic membranes The production scale-up of polymers for

commercial polymeric membranes will unlikely experience any issues. Dense inorganic
membranes such as those proposed for pre-combustion capture consist of a metal film on
a ceramic support. One of the more promising alloys for this application is palladium-
silver. These membranes are currently used to provide ultra-high purity hydrogen for
laboratory and semiconductor applications, which are small throughput applications.
Large capacity units have not been demonstrated.
These membranes are very sensitive to sulphur and unsaturated hydrocarbon
impurities which hinder the diffusivity of hydrogen, and can also cause premature failure
of the membrane. Consequently, contaminated feed streams will need pre-treatment.
Palladium experiences similar issues with resource limitations as nickel. The
process technology to recovery and recycle palladium exists for catalysts, and it may be
worthwhile to investigate whether the same approach could be used for these membranes.

3.2.5. Metal oxides Promising metal oxides for chemical looping processes involve
alloys of cobalt, copper, manganese, or nickel. There is currently little concern regarding
the supply of manganese, which is mainly used as an alloying element in steel. However,
more than half of global cobalt supply is currently from the Democratic Republic of
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 11

Congo (DRC). The DRC also has the largest cobalt reserves by far [22]. With global
demand increasing due to lithium chemistry batteries, reliance on a nation with social
and political instability could risk disruption to supply.
There is currently little research on the regeneration or recycling of chemical looping
adsorbents, efforts could be directed toward this to possibly alleviate these issues and
increase overall sustainability.
In the case of calcium looping, good performance has typically been observed with
refined/synthesised CaCO3 . Aside from increased cost, it would be advantageous from
a complexity standpoint if natural limestone could be used. There has been research
into this, however, a clear solution is yet to be determined.

3.2.6. Electrodes, electrolyte, and cells There are a variety of proposed electrochemical
separation technologies based on range of operating principles. The three main
categories are molten carbonate fuel cells (MCFCs), electrolytic cells with porous
electrodes and membrane separators, and electrochemically-mediated separations. The
molten carbonate technologies are required to operate in highly corrosive environments
which limit the lifespan of the cells to approximately 5 years. Nickel and lithium
feature heavily in the construction and operation of these cells and thus may expose
the technology to the aforementioned issues surrounding these materials. Given the
short lifespan of the cells, investigation should also be carried out in to the recyclability
or refurbishment of the cells to reduce waste. In terms of the electrolytic style cells, the
electrodes are typically based on nickel, platinum, palladium, or ruthenium. A proposed
electrochemically-mediated separation opts for an ionic liquid as the electrolyte; as
addressed for new generation absorbents, the large scale production of these is still
unclear at this stage.

3.2.7. Biomass The main types of biomass for bioenergy include lignocellulosic woody
biomass (e.g., pine, eucalyptus, willow), lignocellulosic crops (e.g., perennial grasses,
agricultural residues, crops for oil, sugar or starch), and waste biomass such as wet
manure or municipal solid waste (MSW). The use of primary biomass sources (i.e.,
dedicated crops) for bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) raises concerns
about sustainability due to the potential competition with other land uses and the need
for fertilisation and irrigation [23, 24, 25]. Secondary sources of biomass (e.g., waste
and residues) are potentially more environmentally sustainable, and economical [26, 27].
The biomass supply chain consists of production, harvesting/collection, processing, and
transport steps. Each biomass feedstock pathway will be distinct in terms of energy
needs, carbon footprint, land requirements, and cost. Furthermore, each biomass
feedstock type will differ in terms of chemical composition, and physical properties.
Thus, it will be important to consider each case specifically when determining the
sustainability, and suitability of different biomass feedstocks.
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 12

4. Concluding remarks

This paper focused on the technical aspects of CCS deployment, obviously there are
social, and political factors which are outside the scope of this work. A CCS system
is a combination of multiple projects, a capture source, transport network, and storage
sites. Coordinated planning is required to ensure that all three individual projects are
commissioned by the target operation date. In order to accomplish this at the required
scale, appropriate supply chains are necessary. Non-CCS customers will likely be able
to afford to pay a premium for prioritised delivery, adding delay to the deployment
of a CCS project. Therefore, sufficient expansion of supply chain capacity is needed
to meet future increases in demand. However, the development of supply chains can
take many years to establish. The decision to deploy CCS must occur in the near-term
future (i.e., 5 years) in order to provide sufficient time for supply chain development. An
under-developed supply chain will cause us to fall short of our climate change mitigation
targets.
The default response would be to increase capacity at existing manufacturing
centres. Although feasible, it may be advantageous to consider the development of
local supply chains for the purposes of CCS. Local supply chains may offer increased
reliability as they have a higher degree of insulation from international instabilities.
Furthermore, there are also opportunities for job creation or retention, as well as the
potential for lower supply chain emissions. Socio-economic analyses would be required
to quantify the value-added from local job creation, relative to potential deployment
cost increases. This can also help identify socially equitable pathways for deployment.
As CCS is for the benefit of the climate, the carbon debt of the project should be
a key consideration. Thus, the supply chain emissions of materials and equipment
should be accounted for. This would require reliable life cycle assessments by the
vendors, i.e., environmental impact of extraction and conversion of raw material, and
the manufacturing process of that product. The source of material will impact the
overall carbon balance, e.g., petrochemical-based polymer compared to biomass-derived
polymer. Furthermore, decommissioning, including the process of waste disposal, should
be considered. Currently, vendors are not required to report this information. A
system needs to be developed, and implemented. However, the international nature
of supply chains presents challenges in consistency. Bodies such as the International
Organization for Standardization (ISO) could have an important role in the development
of a standardised framework, which could then be employed by various jurisdictions in
their regulations, and legislation.
Addressing the problems identified here will be helpful, however not absolutely
necessary. The key factor to facilitate large-scale CCS deployment is to increase
manufacturing capacity. With proportional increase in manufacturing capacity, we
foresee large-scale CCS deployment to be possible, even with currently available
technology.
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 13

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge funding from the Research Councils UK
(RCUK) under grants EP/M001369/1 (MESMERISE-CCS), EP/M015351/1 (Opening
New Fuels for UK Generation), EP/N024567/1 (CCSInSupply), NE/P019900/1 (GGR
Opt) and EP/P026214/1 (UKCCSRC 2017).

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author contributions

Conceptualization, M.B. and D.D.; methodology, M.B. and D.D.; formal analysis,
M.B. and D.D; writing—original draft preparation, M.B. and D.D; writing—review
and editing, M.B. and D.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 14

Bibliography

[1] Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner H O, Roberts D, Skea J, Shukla P, Pirani A, Moufouma-Okia

W, Péan C, Pidcock R, Connors S, Matthews J, Chen Y, Zhou X, Gomis M, Lonnoy E, Maycock
T, Tignor M and Waterfield T (eds) 2018 Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on
the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse
gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate
change (Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change)
[2] IEA 2017 Energy technology perspectives 2017, Catalysing energy technology transformations
(Paris, France: International Energy Agency)
[3] GCCSI accessed March 2020 Facilities Database (Global CCS Institute) URL https://co2re.
co/FacilityData
[4] International Energy Agency 2009 Technology Roadmap – Carbon capture and storage
(Paris, France) URL https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/IEA-CCS%
20Roadmap.pdf
[5] Lozoski D, Ondrey G, Jenkins S and Bailey M P (eds) accessed March 2020 Chemical Engineering
– Business News (https://www.chemengonline.com/issues/: Access Intelligence, United States)
[6] Bui M, Adjiman C S, Bardow A, Anthony E J, Boston A, Brown S, Fennell P S, Fuss S, Galindo
A, Hackett L A, Hallett J P, Herzog H J, Jackson G, Kemper J, Krevor S, Maitland G C,
Matuszewski M, Metcalfe I S, Petit C, Puxty G, Reimer J, Reiner D M, Rubin E S, Scott
S A, Shah N, Smit B, Trusler J P M, Webley P, Wilcox J and Mac Dowell N 2018 Energy &
Environmental Science 11 1062–1176
[7] Bui M and Mac Dowell N (eds) 2020 Carbon Capture and Storage (Cambridge, United Kingdom:
Royal Society of Chemistry)
[8] Strbac G, Aunedi M, Pudjianto D, Djapic P, Gammons S and Druce R 2012 Un-
derstanding the Balancing Challenge, Report for the Department of Energy and Cli-
mate Change (DECC) (Imperial College London and NERA Economic Consulting)
URL https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/
48553/5767-understanding-the-balancing-challenge.pdf
[9] Heuberger C F, Staffell I, Shah N and Mac Dowell N 2016 Energy & Environmental Science 9
2497–2510 ISSN 1754-5692
[10] Heuberger C F and Mac Dowell N 2018 Joule 2 367–370 ISSN 2542-4351
[11] ARENA 2014 Commercial Readiness Index for Renewable Energy Sectors
(https://arena.gov.au/assets/2014/02/Commercial-Readiness-Index.pdf: Commonwealth
of Australia (Australian Renewable Energy Agency))
[12] Sanchez R 2011 Technology Readiness Assessment Guide (U.S. Department of Energy, Washington,
D.C.) URL https://www.directives.doe.gov/directives-documents/400-series/0413.
3-EGuide-04a/@@images/file
[13] Tucker B and Paxton J 2010 2010 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers 1–9 ISSN 1095-323X
[14] Matopoulos A 2017 Supply chain readiness levels tool (Drive Midlands Supplier Readiness Event,
17 October 2017, Coventry, United Kingdom) URL https://www.drivemidlands.co.uk/
wp-content/uploads/2017/10/SCRL-tool_Coventry-shared-version.pdf
[15] Matopoulos A, Kalaitzi D, Sweeney E and Maropoulos P 2017 From technology and manufacturing
readiness levels to the need for supply chain readiness levels (24th Conference of European
Operations Management Association, 3–5 July 2017, Edinburgh, United Kingdom)
[16] Essop, Anna 2019 GE research $2.5M project attains 3D printed ultra performance
heat exchanger (3D Printing Industry) URL https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/
ge-research-2-5-m-project-attains-3d-printed-ultra-performance-heat-exchanger-153627/
[17] Stolaroff J K 2019 FEW0233: Additive Manufacturing of New Structures for Heat Exchange
(U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.) URL https://www.netl.doe.gov/sites/
Supply chain readiness for widespread deployment of CCS 15

default/files/2019-05/2019_Annual_Reports/Thursday/MaterialsWaterManagement/C8_
3-%2020190411_0900C8_FEW0233_LLNL.pdf
[18] Thomas N, Sreedhar N, Al-Ketan O, Rowshan R, Abu Al-Rub R K and Arafat H 2018 Desalination
443 256–271 ISSN 0011-9164
[19] Voskian S and Hatton T A 2019 Energy & Environmental Science 12 3530–3547 ISSN 1754-5692
[20] Wang M, Herzog H J and Hatton T A 2020 Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research ISSN
0888-5885
[21] Durusut E and Joos M 2018 Shipping CO2 – UK cost estimation study (Busi-
ness, Energy & Industrial Strategy Department, London, United Kingdom) URL
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/761762/BEIS_Shipping_CO2.pdf
[22] Alves Dias P, Blagoeva D, Pavel C and Arvanitidis N 2018 Cobalt: demand-supply balances in
the transition to electric mobility, EUR 29381 EN (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European Union)
[23] Fajardy M and Mac Dowell N 2017 Energy and Environmental Science 10 1389–1426
[24] Searchinger T D, Beringer T and Strong A 2017 Energy Policy 110 434–446
[25] Fajardy M, Chiquier S and Mac Dowell N 2018 Energy and Environmental Science 11 3408–3430
[26] Royal Academy of Engineering 2019 Sustainability of liquid biofuels (Royal Academy of
Engineering) URL https://www.raeng.org.uk/publications/reports/biofuels
[27] Pour N, Webley P A and Cook P J 2018 International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 68
1–15