SHARE
COPY LINK

CLIMATE CRISIS

Norway’s future CO2 cemetery takes shape

On the shores of an island off Norway's North Sea coast, engineers are building a burial ground for unwanted greenhouse gas.

Norway's future CO2 cemetery takes shape
A photo taken on April 24, 2022 in Oygarden near Bergen, Norway, shows the construction site for a terminal which will collect liquefied carbon dioxide CO2, which will arrive by ship from industrial facilities in Europe and will run through a pipeline into geological formations deep beneath the sea bed, so that it does not contribute to global warming. (Photo by Alexiane LEROUGE / AFP)

The future terminal is to pump tonnes of liquefied carbon dioxide captured from the top of factory chimneys across Europe into cavities deep below the seabed.

The project in the western municipality of Oygarden aims to prevent the gas from entering the atmosphere and contributing to global warming.

It “is the world’s first open-access transport and storage infrastructure, allowing any emitter that has captured his CO2 emissions to deliver that CO2 for safe handling, transport and then permanent storage,” project manager Sverre Overa told AFP.

As the planet struggles to meet its climate targets, some climate experts see the technique, called carbon capture and storage, or CCS, as a means to partially reduce emissions from fossil-fuel-based industries.

Norway is the biggest hydrocarbon producer in Western Europe, but it also boasts the best CO2 storage prospects on the continent, especially in its depleted North Sea oil fields.

READ ALSO: ‘A code red’: Will Europeans change their habits after climate crisis ‘reality check’?

The government has financed 80 percent of the infrastructure, putting €1.7 billion ($1.7 billion) on the table as part of a wider state plan to
develop the technology.

A cement factory and a waste-to-energy plant in the Oslo region are set to send their CO2 to the site.

But the most original feature of the project is on the commercial side: inviting foreign firms to send their CO2 pollution to be buried out of harm’s way.

Pipeline plans

Using CCS to curb carbon pollution is not a new idea, but despite generous subsidies, the technology has never taken off, mainly because it is so costly.

One of the world’s largest carbon capture facilities, at the Petra Nova coal-fired plant in Texas, was mothballed in 2020 because it was not
economical.

There are only a couple of dozen operational CCS projects around the world, according to the industry-run Global CCS Institute.

But the failure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in line with Paris Agreement goals and a massive influx of government subsidies have breathed new life into the technology.

Energy giants Equinor, TotalEnergies and Shell have set up a partnership — dubbed Northern Lights — which will be the world’s first cross-border CO2 transport and storage service at its scheduled launch in 2024.

A pipeline will inject the liquefied CO2 into geological pockets 2,600 metres below the ocean floor, and the idea is that it will remain there for
good.

READ ALSO: OECD criticises Norway’s climate efforts

On Monday, the Northern Lights partners announced a first cross-border commercial agreement.

From 2025, it is to ensure 800,000 tonnes of CO2 are captured each year at a plant in the Netherlands owned by Norwegian fertiliser manufacturer Yara, then shipped to Oygarden and stored there.

On Tuesday, two energy firms — Norway’s oil and gas giant Equinor and Germany’s Wintershall Dea — announced a project to take carbon dioxide captured in Germany to the Norwegian offshore storage site.

If confirmed, the partnership between Equinor and Wintershall Dea could involve building a 900-kilometre (560-mile) pipeline connecting a CO2 collection facility in northern Germany with storage sites in Norway by 2032.

A similar project with Belgium is already in the works.

On the icy shores of the North Sea, a “graveyard” under construction is raising the hopes of climate experts: soon, the site will house a — small — portion of the CO2 emitted by European industry, preventing it from ending up in the atmosphere. (Photo by Alexiane LEROUGE / AFP)

Not a ‘proper solution’ 

In its first phase, the Northern Lights scheme will be able to process 1.5 million tonnes of CO2 per year, then later between five and six million tonnes.

But that is just a tiny fraction of annual carbon emissions across Europe.

The European Union emitted 3.7 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases in 2020, according to the European Environment Agency.

Many climate experts warn carbon capture is no silver bullet for the climate crisis.

Critics caution that CCS could prolong fossil fuel extraction just as the world is trying to turn toward clean and renewable energy.

READ ALSO: Carbon dioxide to be stored in Norway in ‘milestone’ deal

Greenpeace Norway’s Halvard Raavand said the campaign group had always opposed the practice.

“In the beginning, it was very easy to oppose all kinds of CCS (carbon capture and storage) and now because of the lack of climate action it’s of course a more difficult debate to be in,” he said.

“This money should instead be spent on developing (a) proper solution that we know (works) and that could reduce the electricity bills for regular people, such as insulating homes or solar panels”.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

BUSINESS

Dying salmon worry Norway’s giant fish-farm industry

They are hailed for their omega-3 fatty acids and micronutrients, but Norway's salmon are not in the best of health themselves at the fish farms where they are bred.

Dying salmon worry Norway's giant fish-farm industry

Almost 63 million salmon — a record — died prematurely last year in the large underwater sea pens that dot the fjords of Norway, the world’s biggest producer of Atlantic salmon.

That represents a mortality rate of 16.7 percent, also a record high and a number that has gradually risen over the years — posing an economic and an ethical problem to producers.

The salmon succumb to illnesses of the pancreas, gills or heart, or to injuries suffered during the removal of sea lice parasites.

“The death of animals is a waste of life and resources,” Edgar Brun, director of Aquatic Animal Health and Welfare at the Norwegian Veterinary Institute, told AFP. “We also have a moral and ethical responsibility to guarantee them the best possible conditions.”

Norway’s salmon exports exceeded $11 billion last year, with the 1.2 million tonnes sold representing the equivalent of 16 million meals per day.

The 63 million prematurely dead salmon represent almost $2 billion in lost income for the industry.

Not so appetising

Salmon that die prematurely are usually turned into animal feed or biofuel.

But according to Norwegian media, some fish that are in dire health at the time of slaughter, or even already dead, do sometimes end up on dinner plates, occasionally even sent off with a label marked “superior”.

“I see fish on sale that I myself would not eat,” a former head of quality control at a salmon slaughterhouse, Laila Sele Navikauskas, told public broadcaster NRK in November.

Eating those salmon poses no danger to human health, experts say.

“The pathogens that cause these illnesses in the salmon cannot be passed on to humans,” Brun explained.

But the revelations damage the salmon’s precious image.

“If you buy meat in a store, you expect it to come from an animal that was slaughtered in line with regulations and not one that was lying dead outside the barn,” said Trygve Poppe, a specialist in fish health. “Otherwise, as a consumer you feel tricked.”

The Norwegian Food Safety Authority said it observed anomalies at half of the fish farms inspected last year, noting that, among other things, injured or deformed fish had been exported in violation of Norwegian regulations.

In order to maintain its strong reputation, only salmon of ordinary or superior quality is authorised for export.

The lower quality fish — which accounts for a growing share of stocks, up to a third last winter — can only be sold abroad after it has been transformed, into fillets for example.

Matter of trust

Robert Eriksson, head of the Norwegian Seafood Association which represents small producers — generally considered less at fault — said the irregularities reported at some breeders were “totally unacceptable”.

“We live off of trust,” he said.

Taking shortcuts means “you get punished by the market and the economic impact is much bigger than the few extra kilos you sold.”

The Norwegian Seafood Federation — representing the biggest fish farming companies, those most often singled out over quality — insists it is addressing the matter but says more time is needed.

“On average, it takes three years to breed a salmon,” said the body’s director, Geir Ove Ystmark.

“So it’s very difficult to see immediate results today, even though we have launched a series of initiatives and measures.”

It is precisely the speed at which the fish are bred that is the problem, according to fish health specialist Poppe, who criticised the “terribly bad animal conditions” and who has stopped eating farmed salmon.

“The salmon are subjected to stress their entire lives, from the time they hatch in fresh water until their slaughter,” said Poppe.

“For example, during the first phase in fresh water, the light and temperature is manipulated so they’ll grow as quickly as possible,” he explained.

“In the wild, this phase takes two to six years. When they’re bred, it takes six months to a year.”

New technology

Truls Gulowsen, head of Friends of the Earth Norway, said recent years’ higher mortality rates were the result of aggressive industrialisation.

“We have bred a farmed fish that has poor chances of survival and which is dying from a combination of stress and bad genes because it’s been bred to grow as fast as possible and subjected to a major change in diet.”

The Norwegian Seafood Association aims to halve the mortality rate by 2030, and industry giant Salmar has allocated $45 million to tackle the issue.

Among the frequently mentioned possibilities are greater spacing between fish farms, and new technology, including so-called closed facilities.

The latter, where sea water is filtered, would help prevent sea lice but are more costly.

The government insists it is up to fish farms to respect the rules.

“Not all producers have the same mortality rates, so it is possible to reduce them,” said Even Tronstad Sagebakken, a state secretary at the fisheries ministry.

In the meantime, the Norwegian Food Safety Authority says it has not yet received any reports of salmon not fit for export being sold abroad.

SHOW COMMENTS