Is it acceptable to use the North Sea as a dumping ground for carbon waste?

Carbon waste

Norway has a long history of carbon management. For nearly 30 years, it has captured and reinjected carbon from gas production into seabed formations on the Norwegian continental shelf.

Norway’s government wants to show the world it is possible to safely inject and store carbon waste under the seabed, saying the North Sea could soon become a ‘central storage camp’ for polluting industries across Europe.

Norway’s carbon management projects (Sleipner and Snøhvit) have been in operation since 1996 and 2008, respectively, and are often held up as proof of the technology’s viability. These facilities separate carbon from their respective produced gas, then compress and pipe the carbon and reinject it underground.

Carbon capture storage – nothing new

Offshore carbon capture and storage (CCS) refers to a range of technologies that seek to capture carbon from high-emitting activities, transport it to a storage site and ‘lock’ it away indefinitely under the seabed.

Norway is currently a leading pioneer in carbon capture and storage (CCS), a technology that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by trapping carbon dioxide from industrial sources and injecting it into underground reservoirs. Norway has been operating CCS projects in the North Sea since 1996, using depleted oil and gas fields as storage sites.

Norway’s ambitious plan to expand CCS is called Project Longship, which involves building a full-scale CCS value system that can serve as a model for other countries and industries. The project consists of two parts: a capture facility in Brevik that will process emissions from a cement factory, and a transport and storage system that will ship the captured CO2 by ship to an offshore terminal and inject it into a permanent storage location in the North Sea. 

Project Longship is expected to be completed by 2024, with a reported capacity to store 1.5 million tonnes of CO2 per year. The project has a total cost of 1.7 billion euros, of which the Norwegian government will cover 80%. The project is also supported by the European Union, which sees CCS as a key climate solution. 

Norway’s current Energy minister (2004) reportedly said that the project will prove to the world that CCS is possible and necessary to meet the Paris Agreement goals. He also said that the North Sea could become a ‘central storage camp’ for CO2 from other countries and industries, as it has the potential to store up to 1.25 billion tonnes of CO2. That’s a real concern to me.

Long-term safety concerns

However, not everyone is convinced by Norway’s CCS vision. Some critics have raised concerns about the long-term safety and environmental impacts of storing CO2 under the seabed, as well as the ethical and moral implications of using the North Sea as a dumping site for carbon waste.

Norway’s CCS project is a controversial and complex undertaking that will test the feasibility and acceptability of this technology.

Whether it will succeed or fail remains to be seen, but it will certainly have a significant impact on the future of climate action.

Is it safe or wise to pump waste into and hide it under the sea? Humankind doesn’t have a very good track record when it comes to clearing up after itself, does it? Go look at the rubbish in space!

Is it safe or wise to pump waste into and hide it under the sea? Humankind doesn’t have a very good track record when it comes to clearing up after itself, does it? Go look at the rubbish in space!

Only time will tell?

The development of a controversial UK oil field, Rosebank, has been given the go-ahead

The Rosebank oil and gas field is a controversial project that has been approved by the UK government despite the concerns of environmental activists and some politicians.

It is located about 80 miles west of Shetland in the North Sea and is estimated to contain 500 million barrels of oil. It is operated by Equinor, a Norwegian state-owned energy company, with its partners Ithaca Energy and Suncor Energy. The development of the field is expected to cost £6 billion and create 2,000 jobs. 

Carbon conflict

It is also expected to produce 200 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over its lifetime, which is equivalent to the annual emissions of 40 million cars.

The approval of the Rosebank field has sparked a debate over the role of fossil fuels in the UK’s energy transition and its commitment to net zero emissions by 2050. Critics argue that the project is incompatible with the UK’s climate goals and that it will undermine its credibility. They also claim that most of the cost of the development will be borne by the taxpayers through tax reliefs and subsidies.

UK not yet ready to turn off the oil and gas

However, some supporters of the project contend that it will provide a reliable source of energy and revenue for the UK, as well as support thousands of jobs in the oil and gas sector. They also point out that the UK still relies on fossil fuels for most of its energy needs and that it will need to import more oil and gas from abroad if it does not develop its own resources. 

'Didn't expect to see you here again, thought you'd retired'. 'Yeah, me too!'
‘Didn’t expect to see you here again, thought you’d retired’. ‘Yeah, me too!’

They argue that the Rosebank field will be developed with high environmental standards and that it will contribute to the UK’s transition to a low-carbon economy by investing in renewable energy and carbon capture technologies.

Contentious

The Rosebank oil and gas field is a complex and contentious issue that reflects the challenges and trade-offs involved in balancing economic growth, energy security, and environmental protection. It is likely to remain a topic of heated discussion.

The field is expected to start producing oil from 2026

If drilling starts on time, Rosebank could account for 8% of the UK’s total oil production between 2026 and 2030.

Roughly 245 million barrels will be produced in the first five years of drilling, with the remaining being extracted between 2032 and 2051.

Though oil is the main product, the site will also produce gas.

About 1,600 jobs are expected to be created during the peak of construction. Long term, the operation will create 450 jobs.

Will it mean lower energy bills in the UK?

No! Oil and gas from UK waters is not necessarily used here – it is sold to the highest bidder on global markets.

What Rosebank produces will be sold at world market prices, so the project will not cut energy prices for UK consumers.

The Norwegian state oil company Equinor – which is the majority owner of Rosebank – has confirmed this.

Oil also tends to be sent around the world to be refined – the UK does not have the capacity to refine all its own oil-based products.