Will we meet the climate targets thanks to BECCS?

01Reducing CO2 emissions alone is not yet enough

At the Paris Climate Conference (2015) it was agreed to take measures to limit global warming to 1,5°C compared with the pre-industrial level. The main measure for this is reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Through the use of, among other things, solar panels, nuclear power stations and wind energy, no extra CO2 ends up in the air. By 2050 this should already have been largely achieved.

However: these solutions do not reduce the CO2 that has already been released into the atmosphere and that will still be released. That is why scientists agree that reducing CO2 emissions will not be enough and that it will also be necessary to actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere. According to the IPPC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), by the year 2100 we should already have removed more than 800 billion tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere. This corresponds to twenty times the current annual emissions.

BECCS as a solution for CO2 reduction

BECCS is a method of combining CO2 capture and CO2 storage with bio-energy. Unlike alternatives such as the development of bacteria that eat CO2 or the use of solvents and fine chemicals, BECCS can already be applied with current knowledge. BECCS makes use of the natural properties of trees to absorb CO2. When these trees are used to generate bio-energy, the CO2 stored during their lifetime is normally released again.

That is why the use of biomass is not CO2-neutral either. This could be the case if new trees are planted each time, which often happens. However, these new trees are often felled at too young an age, so that they have been able to absorb less CO2 than the tree they replace. Moreover, this does not take into account the CO2 emissions in the further processing. Biomass energy is therefore only called sustainable because it uses sustainable raw materials: trees can be replanted and are therefore inexhaustible, unlike oil and gas, which will run out at some point.

With BECCS there is an important difference. Here, however, the CO2 from such biomass power stations is captured and then stored, for example in empty underground natural gas reservoirs. By combining CO2 storage, the planting of forests and bio-energy, energy is generated and negative emissions take place. An advantage here is that trees absorb more CO2 during their rapid growth phase than when they are fully grown, which means that here it actually is a good idea to use and fell young trees.

02Criticism of BECCS

It sounds good, but there is also criticism of BECCS. It is a combination of the controversial CO2 storage and the controversial biomass energy, while it also has its own disadvantages. As a result, it is not yet certain whether BECCS will ever really be regarded as a full (partial) solution and whether it will actually be deployed, although according to a number of experts there is little other choice.

CO2 storage also has disadvantages

Part of this criticism has to do with CO2 storage. CO2 capture and storage results in higher energy consumption, entails high costs and investments and of course there are also safety risks involved. Moreover, CO2 storage is no more than a temporary solution: at some point the reservoirs will be full again. That is why CO2 reduction remains important, as does research into other CO2 reduction methods.

Question marks over the feasibility

Research by scientists at Imperial College London shows that BECCS will not automatically produce negative emissions and that this also depends on the crops used, the transport and the energy generated. In addition, a group of climate scientists consider it technically, economically, socially and politically unfeasible on a global scale. Among other things, the very large area required, the competition with food crops and the high economic costs are mentioned.

Researchers at Universiteit Utrecht also warn about the large land area needed for BECCS. They state that in the most extreme cases some 16% of the total land surface on earth will be needed to remove enough CO2 from the atmosphere.

Moreover, pilot projects have not immediately produced encouraging figures. At one of the first pilot projects, the Archer Daniel Midland Plant in Illinois, for example, the hope was to store up to 5 million tonnes of CO2 over a period of several years. By comparison: in 2019 (the period since was not very representative due to the coronavirus pandemic) Dutch CO2 emissions amounted to 182,5 million tonnes.

BECCS distracts from the real problem

Finally, environmental groups are also critical of BECCS. According to them, it only distracts attention from the necessary CO2 reduction. It is even called a “dangerous distraction” and they believe that money and time would be better spent on solutions that tackle the core of the problem.

03General conclusion on BECCS

BECCS is a way to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. It can be realised in a relatively short term, but there are also critics who point to the disadvantages and limitations. Among other things, the land mass required counts heavily against BECCS, while it is also a temporary solution. Although this temporary solution can provide the time needed to work on alternative solutions that can be realised more sustainably, it is already clear that BECCS can never stand on its own. It is not an alternative to limiting CO2 emissions, but at most a supplementary measure to repair the (already done) damage.

Biomass + CO2 storage = BECCS. Is it also the solution?

BECCS should help to achieve the climate targets. However, it is not an alternative to reducing CO2 emissions. Read more here.

04Frequently asked questions about BECCS

It is not yet clear whether we will achieve the climate targets, let alone how new technologies such as BECCS will contribute to them. This FAQ tries to clear up a number of questions and uncertainties regarding this subject.

This is being researched. Recently, the journal Trends in Biotechnology did publish an encouraging study by the Universiteit van Würzberg. In this study the researchers examined how they can adapt the metabolism in plant cells so that they absorb CO2 more efficiently and at the same time produce more biomass. They stated that it is theoretically possible to make plants store up to five times more CO2. These are purely theoretical calculations. The next step is to test this in practice. The researchers want to do this by genetically modifying thale cress and tobacco plants.