An Open Letter to the Malaysian Government and Fossil Fuel Companies Operating in Malaysia

We, the undersigned, are concerned that the National Energy Transition Roadmap (NETR), which aims to support the government’s commitment to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050, identifies carbon capture and storage (CCS) as one of it’s six levers, and the Petronas Kasawari CCS project as one of it’s ten flagship projects.

On behalf of the signatory organisations, we call on policymakers and corporations to recognise that:

CCS Proponents Are Not Telling The Full Story: Petronas boasts that the Kasawari CCS project will capture 3.3 MtCO2e annually from gas extraction in the Kasawari field, however CCS is only able to capture operational CO2 emissions which excludes scope 3 emissions which accounts for more than 70% of fossil fuel emissions and non-CO2 emissions such as methane.

CCS Will Have a Negligible Impact on Emissions Reductions: At the cost of RM4.5 billion, the Kasawari CCS project’s 3.3 MtCO2 target will only reduce annual emissions of the Kasawari field by 14.6% (based on our estimates) [1], and reduce 0.9% of Petronas’s current emissions, a number too small to be visible on a graph, in a best-case scenario where it does meet its targets.

Worldwide, Fossil Fuel CCS Projects Have Consistently Failed: The IEEFA found that “underperforming carbon capture projects considerably outnumbered successful ones by large margins” [2]. Chevron’s USD3.2 billion Gorgon project has only captured half the amount it was designed to [3]. Shell’s Quest CCS project emitted more CO2 than it removed [4], while BP’s USD2.7 billion CCS project in Algeria was suspended due to the leakage of CO2 from its reservoir [5]. Over it’s 50 year commercial history, CCS costs have not declined at all, making it a “non-improving technology” [6].

You Cannot Reduce Fossil Fuel Emissions Through Increasing Fossil Fuel Production: CCS projects do not support a transition away from fossil fuels. Instead, they serve to give fossil fuel companies a ‘license to pollute’ and an excuse to continue opening new fields such as Kasawari against the recommendations of the IPCC and IEA who have stated that all new oil and gas infrastructure is incompatible with a 1.5 degree target.

CCS Impedes the Transition to Renewable Energy: Investments in this technology do not make sense given that gas with CCS remains one of the most expensive energy sources in the world, competing with renewable sources such as solar which are nearly USD100 cheaper per mWh [7]. The RM4.5 billion invested in Kasawari could have purchased 642MW of solar panel capacity instead [8].

The problem is not just Fossil Fuel emissions, it is Fossil Fuels; period. The fossil fuel industry is one of the dominant drivers of anthropogenic climate change. Beyond greenhouse gas emissions, the industry causes deadly air pollution, water pollution and perpetuates environmental injustices. With or without CCUS, in order to avert the worst impacts of the climate emergency we need to transition away from fossil fuels completely, not subsidise unproven technologies which will extend the lifespan of an increasingly obsolete industry.

The secretary-general of the United Nations called out the use of CCS by fossil fuel companies as greenwashing [9]. The executive director of the IEA recently implored companies to abandon the ‘illusion’ that CCS is the solution [10].

We have a very narrow period to keep 1.5 degrees alive and we need to stop wasting precious time and funds on CCS. We call on you to:

Stop including CCS in climate targets. Stop subsidising CCS. Stop approving new CCS projects. Re-direct CCS funds to renewable energy investments instead.

RimbaWatch
Greenpeace Malaysia
Klima Action Malaysia (KAMY)
Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM)
Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center)
Sustainable Development Network, Malaysia (SUSDEN)
Youths United for Earth (YUFE)
Bike Commute Malaysia
GRASS Malaysia
Jaringan Ekologi Dan Iklim Pulau Pinang (JEDI)
Cerah Asia
B.E.A.CC.H (Biodiversity. Environment. Agroecology. Climate Change. Habitat)

Check out RimbaWatch’s Future Emissions Database to learn more about how they calculate emissions from fossil fuel projects.

Read the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis’ statement on the inefficacies and financial irrationalities of CCS technology.

Notes:
1. With reference to methodology 4A.3 from our Carbon Accounting Guide. These are rough estimates necessitated by the lack of response we received from Petronas requesting this information.
2. https://ieefa.org/articles/carbon-capture-decarbonisation-pipe-dream
3. https://www.desmog.com/2023/02/13/exxon-shell-bp-api-concerns-carbon-capture/
4. https://www.globalwitness.org/en/press-releases/shell-plant-emissions-million-cars/
5. https://sequestration.mit.edu/tools/projects/in_salah.html
6. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:17256b64-f822-40ef-8770-5d0fa1ddc73e/download_file?file_format=application%2Fpdf&safe_filename=Way_et_al_2022_Empirically_grounded_technology.pdf&type_of_work=Journal+article
7. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-07-26/alternative-energy-offshore-wind-farms-can-come-out-of-the-doldrums
8. https://www.buysolar.my/resources/articles/the-average-cost-for-residential-solar-installation
9. https://www.offshore-technology.com/news/un-secretary-general-calls-out-carbon-capture-as-greenwashing/#:~:text=UN%20secretary%2Dgeneral%20Ant%C3%B3nio%20Guterres,than%20reducing%20the%20fuels%20themselves
10. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/23/oil-and-gas-industry-needs-to-let-go-of-carbon-capture-as-solution-to-climate-change-iea-says.html

This letter was prepared by RimbaWatch and Greenpeace Malaysia.