To start with, could you briefly explain what the term “carbon management” refers to?

 

Christoph Glasner: In my view, carbon management stands for reasonable handling of carbon and is something that will be essential in the future. The aim for society is to live in a way which creates a neutral climate balance. A major requirement for achieving this is that, in principle, no new fossil carbon must be introduced into the technosphere anymore. This is because it might be released back into the atmosphere in the long run and would thus have to be offset elsewhere to hold the balance in terms of climate neutrality.

Many see atmospheric carbon as the solution, while disregarding the fact that it is only available at very low concentrations. This means that obtaining pure CO₂ requires a significant processing effort. Direct Air Capture (DAC) definitely has a role to play in the sustainable use of carbon, but in my opinion, we should first focus on other CO₂ sources where CO₂ concentrations are much higher, and where we will likely need capture plants anyway in the future, such as point sources in cement or lime works, or in waste incineration plants.

Sebastian Stießel: I fully agree. We have many industries in Germany, Europe and worldwide that we cannot decarbonize. This means that carbon will remain a particularly important raw material or medium in the future so that innovative solutions are needed — away from fossil sources and toward alternative sources. Carbon management is about creating the rules and playing field for this shift — this is also where politics needs to take action.

 

What role can Fraunhofer UMSICHT play in this?

 

Sebastian Stießel: We can support politicians in setting guidelines. And we can also help companies find systemic solutions to monitor, control and regulate carbon flows. For example, we have developed system-theoretical approaches and evaluation models that enable us to identify and monitor such flows.

 

Are there already projects underway in the political sector?

 

Sebastian Stießel: Together with the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), we are already co-developing a carbon monitoring system that could form the basis of a statewide carbon management system. In fact, NRW already adopted its own carbon management strategy as early as at the end of 2021. The goal is to make the state of NRW the most climate-friendly industrial location in Europe, aiming at implementing a closed carbon cycle in the long term. At the federal level, they caught up in May 2024.

Christoph Glasner: Actually, the origins of the carbon monitoring project lie with the IN4climate.NRW think tank, in which Fraunhofer UMSICHT was involved right from the beginning. There was a working group on carbon dioxide management, which was then merged into a specialist carbon group. This group compiled a discussion paper on carbon dioxide management (in German), which forms the basis for the carbon management strategy of the state of North Rhine-Westphalia in many respects.

 

What opportunities does carbon management offer for Germany as an industrial location?

 

Sebastian Stießel: In Germany, and especially in North Rhine-Westphalia, CO₂ emitters and potential CO₂ users are located close to each other. This means that conditions are ideal for recycling carbon, for example via Carbon Capture and Utilization (CCU): Cement or steel plants do not have to transport their CO₂ to the North Sea but can pass it directly on to the plastics or fuel industry where it replaces fossil carbon from sources such as natural gas, oil or coal.

And once we have successfully recycled the carbon, implemented the relevant technologies on a large scale, and established a regulatory framework for carbon management, a second major opportunity will arise: We will be able to transfer our expertise to other countries.

 

We are still a long way off from that. What are the obstacles?

 

Christoph Glasner: In my opinion, the biggest obstacle is that fossil raw materials are so cheap. Basically, the only costs incurred are for mining and transport, while consequences such as climate impact are not included in the price at all. But if I want to recycle CO₂, I have to separate it, purify it and possibly liquefy it again. CO₂ also has a very low specific energy, which makes it challenging to use as a raw material for substances that have a significantly higher specific energy. So I have to put energy back in to get a compound that is better usable for further or direct processing. All of this makes it difficult to achieve competitive conditions that are comparable to fossil raw materials.

 

What would have to change for that to happen?

 

Christoph Glasner: Currently, certificates must be surrendered when CO₂ is emitted. The quota of free certificates for companies will gradually decrease in the coming years. In 2034, there will be no more free certificates. This shortage will encourage companies to emit less CO₂ because they will either need to purchase additional certificates (if available) or pay penalties. This mechanism will increasingly promote the recycling of CO₂ – in theory. Theoretically only, as EU regulations currently consider CO₂ formed in installations subject to ETS (Emissions Trading System) as already emitted, and certificates must already be surrendered for this. This imposes an additional economic burden for CCU processes in the EU. At the same time, we are facing global competition. Even if we had adequate framework conditions in the EU, with the US continuing their »drill, drill, drill« policy, it would be difficult for CCU products to be competitive.

The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is intended to at least make trade across EU borders fair. While the emissions trading system applies within the EU, this system does not exist in third countries, which means that there is no cost burden for products from such countries. The mechanism is intended to ensure that CO₂-intensive products are subject to a kind of penalty tariff when they are sold into the EU. Lower-emission products from EU countries would be subject to a reduced penalty tariff, thus gaining a competitive advantage. If the third country has its own CO₂ pricing system, offsetting against the penalty tariff could take place. The goal is to promote climate protection as a whole. It remains to be seen how well this will work. Companies are not necessarily dependent on selling to the EU as long as there are enough other buyers. Global climate protection can only work if enough countries participate. However, how to quantify “enough” is an interesting question.

Sebastian Stießel: CO₂ must have an international price. That is where we need to start. And there must be willingness at all levels to implement this. A three-person household must be prepared to pay CO₂ costs in the amount of 35 euros per year. And even an industrial group operating on several continents must be willing to give up a certain percentage of its margin to pay for CO₂ offsets. These revenues can then help to cover the production costs for CCU products, which are still very high in some cases.

Christoph Glasner: We really need to get everyone on board – society as well as the industry. And I believe Fraunhofer UMSICHT has a duty to communicate this and to raise awareness for this topic.

 

Are there already initiatives underway in this regard?

 

Christoph Glasner: The exhibition “Power2Change” is an important step in the right direction. We are involved in coordinating the associated joint research project “Knowledge Communication: Energy Transition”, and the content comes from, among other sources, the joint Carbon2Chem^® research project, which focuses on developing building blocks for a carbon cycle. In addition, public relations work is also a key element of IN4climate.NRW. Apart from that, we do not communicate to the public, at least not at the moment, but rather on a technical and professional level.

 

What could you communicate? In other words, what is already technically possible in terms of the carbon cycle?

 

Christoph Glasner: A lot is already possible. Of course, there is still much room for improvement in terms of efficiency, purity, and scale-up. But in principle, it is technically possible to recycle carbon – via the intermediate state of CO₂.

Sebastian Stießel: We actually have to distinguish between the individual steps here: CO₂ produced in an industrial process can be separated, transported, and then reused. We have been doing CO₂ separation for years in some application areas: In hard-coal and lignite-fired power plants, for example, separation technologies using various solvents, adsorbents, etc. have already been tested for a long time. The existing plant technology is now being transferred to other applications and industries – including the separation of CO2 at extremely low concentrations from the air.

We are pretty far along in terms of transport too: In the US, CO₂ is transported across the country in long pipelines. So there is plenty of experience to draw on in terms of what is technically feasible and what is not.

The final step is the use of CO₂ as a raw material. There are many projects underway in this respect, all heading in vastly different directions – i.e., with different end products in mind. Great progress has been made with methane production. There are even off-the-shelf systems available for that. Significant progress has also been made for methanol, as the joint Carbon2Chem^® research project impressively demonstrates: Since summer 2023, methanol has been produced in a demonstration plant running on gases from ongoing steel production at thyssenkrupp Steel Europe AG in Duisburg.

To put it simply, the whole process can be compared to wine production. The basic principles have been identified, and you can create a whole variety of wines with completely different flavors. The same applies to the CCU world. Well-known processes can be adapted to manufacture other products – for example, formic acid, ethylene as a basic chemical for the plastics industry, or even synthesis gas. Some of these are high-quality products with a high price tag that could perhaps gain a foothold on the market more quickly.

 

That means we have to get started?

 

Sebastian Stießel: Yes. We already have several plants and prototypes in trial operation at our industrial partners. Once we have built these plants a second or third time, they will naturally become cheaper. And when we transfer this to industry, which builds such a plant 100 times, economies of scale and efficiency aspects will take effect so that the specific product costs will decrease.

And, of course, the following important impetus must come from the customer side: We manufacture a product here that used to be based on fossil carbon. We will need this carbon-based product in the future, but the carbon should be made available from a sustainable source. Compared to conventional production, this initially results in additional costs, which must be priced as a “green premium” or in any other suitable way. And when you factor in that CO₂ is getting more expensive globally, hopefully we’ll soon have a market that runs on its own, where it economically makes sense to invest in CO₂-based products.

 

Who would be the players in this market?

 

Sebastian Stießel: On the one hand, the large CO₂ emitters. For them, the decisive factor is whether they want to transport the CO₂ away or use it locally for value creation. And, on the other hand, the manufacturers of certain chemicals or hydrocarbons in general who have an interest in replacing existing fossil resources with a new, sustainable raw material.

 

How can Fraunhofer UMSICHT contribute to the development of this market?

 

Sebastian Stießel: When it comes to our portfolio, I usually distinguish between hardware and software. As to software, we can provide system engineering expertise. This specifically includes evaluation and optimization models for CCU and CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage). We can conduct studies, location analyses, and lifecycle analyses: Which synthesis products are suitable for the respective location? How is the CO₂ then further processed? And how green will the final product ultimately be?

 

On the other hand, there is the hardware: specific processes and systems that we develop. These range from catalysts designed to accelerate the reaction, to stacks or reactors being the centerpieces of a CCU plant, and up to complete systems that we can offer to our customers, more or less turnkey, with the help of our partners in plant engineering.

 

We have already talked about Carbon2Chem^®. Are there any other examples of our current research in the field of carbon management?

 

Sebastian Stießel: A great example of a project is “Leuna 100” where we are working with a fantastic consortium. What makes it special is that the project is integrated in a chemical park and is not taking place on a greenfield site. Specifically, it involves a new process for producing green methanol for shipping and aviation applications. Our focus is on developing a container-based solution for CO₂ electrolysis to produce synthesis gas.

Another example is “CO₂-Syn”, which aims to sustainably utilize CO₂-containing exhaust gases from the cement industry. A novel process chain is to be developed to enable the synthesis of olefins and higher alcohols from carbon dioxide process gases. The solution adopted is called “Power-to-Chemicals.” It uses renewable energies such as wind power to convert CO₂ and water into carbon monoxide and hydrogen via electrolysis. Mixtures of these two substances – known as synthesis gases – are then used to produce the requested chemical products by means of further catalytic conversion processes.

A project focusing on Direct Air Capture (DAC) is “Air2Chem: Coupled electrosynthesis of basic and specialty chemicals via naturally wind-driven direct CO₂ capture from air using membrane gas absorption and carbonate electrolysis.” The ultimate goal is the creation of an integrated process that combines the DAC process with electrolytic conversion of the carbonate-containing absorber solution, thereby enabling the production of important platform chemicals.

DAC also plays a crucial role in the production of Sustainable Aviation Fuels known as SAF. As things now stand, at least long-haul flights will continue to run on hydrocarbons for the next 100 years and DAC can be used to capture CO₂ emitted by jet engines. We are currently developing some very exciting projects in this field with renowned players in the industry. Capturing CO₂ from the air is still very energy-intensive due to the low partial pressure, but new, less energy-intensive approaches are already in development. One major advantage is that DAC allows us to provide CO₂ at places where substantial amounts of energy are temporarily available, such as sunny deserts and coastal regions. These locations would be exciting regions to export our technologies to.

 

If someone is interested in setting up their own project with Fraunhofer UMSICHT, what would the collaboration look like?

 

Christoph Glasner: That really depends on the individual case and, of course, on where the problem lies: Are we talking to someone who wants to get rid of their CO₂ or to someone who wants to substitute other materials?

Sebastian Stießel: First, we would need to assess the customer's current situation: Which processes are they already working on? Can we build on ongoing projects there? Or do we start from scratch and explore what a carbon management strategy could look like? The starting point could then be a feasibility study or a location analysis to identify potential areas for improvement. On this basis, we could then narrow down the range of practical solutions we could offer. In the best case, we would identify one or two target routes that we could develop and implement either ourselves or with the support of our network partners. In the field of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) in particular, we are currently developing very exciting processes that will help to significantly reduce SAF production costs in the future. Again, the same applies: The faster we have more plants in test operation under real industrial conditions, the faster we will see large industrial plants that will help us achieve our common global climate goals and reduce specific production costs.