The Flemish and Walloon governments reached an agreement at the beginning of this month with some of the largest CO2 emitters in Belgian industry on the capture, storage, and transport of carbon dioxide, also known as CCUS.
The agreement was signed yesterday at building materials manufacturer Holcim in Obourg, near Mons, by Flemish Minister-President Matthias Diependaele (N-VA), Walloon Minister-President Adrien Dolimont (MR), 17 industrial companies, including BASF, Ineos, ArcelorMittal, and TotalEnergies Refinery, and the managing directors of the business organizations Voka and AKT for Wallonia.
“If these companies continue with their CCS plans in Flanders and Wallonia, at least 7,5 million tons of CO2 will no longer be released into the atmosphere each year, or one-quarter of today’s industrial emissions,” says Voka.
Focus on CCUS
The 17 companies that signed the agreement, which together account for the majority of all industrial CO2 emissions in Belgium, are AGC, Air Liquide, ArcelorMittal Belgium, BASF, Borealis, Carmeuse, CCB Cementir, Engie, Equinor, Fluxys C-grid, Heidelberg Materials Benelux, Holcim, INEOS, Lhoist, North Sea Port, Port of Antwerp-Bruges, and TotalEnergies Refinery Antwerp.
The joint statement contains few concrete proposals or measures. Still, the agreement essentially means that all parties will do everything in their power to ensure the necessary investments are made in Belgium to decarbonize, focusing on technologies such as CCUS.
Necessary transition technology
CCUS, recognized by the European Commission and the IPCC (the UN climate panel) as a necessary transition technology towards climate neutrality in 2050, is a collective term for technologies designed to significantly reduce emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), especially in industry.
This mainly concerns emissions that are difficult to reduce and for which carbon capture is the most logical approach.
Some sectors, such as steel (ArcelorMittal) and cement (Holcim), struggle to reduce CO2 emissions, even with renewable energy. In that case, a technology such as CCUS can capture CO2 instead of allowing it to escape.
By capturing that CO2, for example, from factory chimneys or incinerators, various techniques can be used to obtain pure CO2 that can be transported via pipelines between factories, ports, and storage locations, or by ship or truck.
This can then be reused as a raw material to make synthetic fuels or plastics, as a growth gas for plants, or as CO2 that can be fixed in concrete (carbonation). This is called Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU).
If reuse is not possible, CO2 is permanently stored in empty gas or oil fields or in deep-sea salt formations. This is called Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). Belgium is working on this in collaboration with the Netherlands and Norway, for example.
Favorable investment climate
The agreements that have now been made boil down to the fact that both governments indicate that they support the industry in its choice to decarbonize by focusing on technologies such as CCS/CCU.
Which, at the same time, entail high-risk, critical long-term investments. They will do everything reasonably possible to ensure that these companies’ projects reach a final investment decision.
The companies, in turn, confirm that CCUS will play a key role in this, but that they still face various obstacles. Several on industrial players involved are, for example, about to invest on CCS projects in Belgium.
Still, such costly investments pose a significant challenge if they also want to maintain their international competitive position. But given the strong interdependence of industrial clusters, one investment decision can trigger another.
Or, to quote Voka, the joint statement demonstrates the ambition of politicians and the business community to effectively secure these investments and thereby anchor the industry here, thereby creating a new value chain with new jobs and added value for the Belgian economy.
In short, the industry is asking politicians to limit the risks on investing in CCUS by, for example, guaranteeing a fixed price for CO2 reduction in a CCUS project and avoiding double cost— i.e., buying CO2 emission allowances in the event of excessive emissions, even if they have invested in capture.
Strange straddle of the Flemish government
Nevertheless, the agreement also leads to a peculiar straddle of the Flemish government. This week, the European environment ministers reached a deal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the EU by 90% compared to 1990 levels by 2040. However, Belgium abstained from voting, mainly at the instigation of Flanders.
“Climate change must be combated with concrete measures and actions. This is mainly done by providing our industry with tools to decarbonize, not by imposing increasingly stringent targets,” says Flemish Minister-President Matthias Diependaele.
“The climate texts at the European Council did not provide us with sufficient guarantees to safeguard and, preferably, strengthen the competitive position of our industry. Flanders is continuing to support industry with numerous targeted actions within the Industry Plan, without losing sight of the sustainability factor, but with the guarantee that companies can continue to produce and innovate here.”
CCUS nis ot without criticism
Although CCUS is technically promising, it also attracts significant criticism. Environmental organizations, for example, argue that it prolongs the life of fossil fuels, while such investments would be better spent on renewable energy or energy conservation.
In other words, critics sometimes refer to CCUS as a “greenwashing tool” because it helps companies improve their image without fundamentally changing their core activities.
In addition, the energy required to capture CO2 is high. For example, factories often must use 20 to 30% more energy to deliver the same output. Installation, transport, and storage are also expensive, partly because post projects are still in the pilot phase.
And although underground storage is generally considered safe, it must last for thousands of years, which is difficult to guarantee.
