The European Union's goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2050, outlined in the European Green Deal, is supported by numerous studies providing insights into pathways and emission reduction strategies in the energy sectors. However, model comparisons of such pathways are less common due to the complex nature of climate and energy modelling. Our study brings together integrated assessment models and energy system models under a common framework to develop EU policy scenarios: a Current Trends scenario reflecting existing policies and trends and a Climate Neutrality scenario aligned with the EU's emission reduction target. Both scenarios project reduced final energy consumption by 2050, driven by increased electrification and decreased fossil fuel usage. Electricity consumption increases driven by electrification despite the improved efficiency of electrified technologies. Models align on a shift toward renewables but diverge in technology and fuel choices, reflecting various approaches to reach net-zero energy systems. Furthermore, trade-offs between energy demand and supply mitigation strategies, as well as between renewable energy, e-fuels, and CCS technologies are identified. Considering these model variations, our study highlights the importance of consistent model comparison to offer reliable recommendations to policymakers and stakeholders. We conclude that model diversity is a valuable asset when used sensibly.@en

This work presents the results of a comparative life cycle assessment study for three CCS technologies applied to a coal-fired power plant: post-combustion capture with MEA, post combustion capture with AMP/PZ and cryogenic oxy-fuel. This study has been performed in the context of the EDDiCCUT project, which aims to develop an environmental due diligence framework for assessing novel CCUS technologies. The research shows that there are no significant differences in climate change potential (CCP) for the technologies under study. In the three cases the reduction is about 70% (70% for the plant with MEA, 71% for the plant with AMP-PZ, and 73% for the plant with oxy-fuel technology). With regard to other impacts (e.g., acidification, toxicity, resource depletion) the results show an increase in the impacts as consequence of CCS, mostly driven by the increase amount of feedstock per kWh. Contrary to CCS, there are clear differences among the technologies with results ranging between 20 and 30%. Toxicity impacts related to the operation of the solvent-based carbon capture unit were also considered; however, it was observed that their contribution was only around 2% of the total impact for human toxicity potential. Rather, the largest contributor to human toxicity impacts in the life cycle of coal power plants with and without CCS is coal mining waste disposal.

@en

CO₂ utilization is gaining attention as a greenhouse gas abatement strategy complementary to CO₂ storage. This study explores the techno-environmental performance of CO₂ utilization trough dry reforming of methane into syngas for the production of dimethyl ether (DME). The CO₂ source is a hydrogen production unit at a refinery, where solvent based CO₂ capture is applied. Aspen+ modelling and hybrid life cycle assessment (LCA) is used to assess the techno-environmental performance of this utilization option compared to a reference case without CO₂ capture and a case with CO₂ capture and storage. Results of the technical assessment show that although 94% of the captured CO₂ can be utilised for DME production, only 9% of CO₂ is avoided in the entire process as a result of direct CO₂ formation during DME synthesis and the combustion of syngas to provide the heat demanded by the dry reforming process. Besides, a substantial amount of electricity is required for syngas compression. Consequently, the LCA results indicate that climate change potential (CCP) is reduced by 8% while it is 37% higher than CCP when CO₂ is stored and DME is produced conventionally. Sensitivity analyses are performed on various process conditions. Overall, this study indicates that this utilization route lowers the CCP although the reduction is limited compared to CCS. While the techno-environmental analysis is a useful tool to gain better insights in the performance of CO₂ utilization options, the complex environmental trade-offs make it difficult to draw robust conclusions on the performance.

@en