The European Climate Neutrality Observatory (ECNO) analysed inconsistencies in national energy and climate plans (NECPs) in its recent report ‘Net zero risk in European climate planning: a snapshot of the transparency and internal consistency of the MS’ – and one of the areas investigated is CCS.
This report investigates NECPs from 5 EU Member States: Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden, Spain and Hungary. However, 2 of these countries haven’t disclosed any details regarding their CCS strategy (Spain and Sweden).
Some of the key findings of the report regarding CCS/CCU include:
- Data quality in NECPs is low and uneven, signalling insufficient CCS/CCU planning.
- Ideally, amounts of CO2 should be evaluated by national policymakers at all stages of CCS/CCU chain for consistency and to avoid double counting. A uniform reporting framework for CCS/CCU should also be introduced to avoid double counting in trans-border flows of CO2.
- Transparent planning and improved modelling are necessary for long-term geological storage of CO₂, especially in the context of EU ETS revision, which will likely change the cost structure in industrial production and hence increase demand for CCS technologies in the medium term.
- Improved planning would also allow the EU MS to take advantage of trans-border synergies, which – due to uneven access to storage capacity and transport infrastructure across MS – can be particularly substantial for CCS/CCU technologies
- National policymakers should assess and address the risks of overreliance on LTGS.
You can find an executive summary & link to download the full report here 
Net zero risk in European climate planning: A snapshot of the transparency and internal consistency of Member States' NECPs | ECNO
Are there any other risks regarding CCS/CCU planning that you have recognised, either in your country or on the EU level?