EGU General Assembly 2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Monitoring offshore CO2 storage projects, aligning capabilities with regulations and public expectations.

Guttorm Alendal1, Jerry Blackford2, Stefan Carpentier3, Holger Cremer3, Dorothy J. Dankel1, Marius Dewar2, Bjarte Fagerås4, Sarah E. Gasda5, Kristian Gundersen1, Raphael Heffron6, Martha Lien4, Anna Oleynik1, Abdirahman Omar5, Rajesh Pawar7, Katherine Romanak8, Darren Snee2, Sigrid E. Schütz1, and Parisa Torabi1
Guttorm Alendal et al.
  • 1University of Bergen, Department of Mathematics , Norway (
  • 2Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Plymouth, UK
  • 3TNO, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • 4OCTIO Environmental, Bergen, Norway
  • 5NORCE, Bergen,Norway
  • 6University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
  • 7Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, USA
  • 8Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas, USA

We will report on preliminary results and present plans for the continuation of an international project, ACTOM. The overall objective of ACTOM is to develop internationally applicable capabilities to design and execute adequate, rigorous and cost-effective monitoring of offshore carbon storage projects, aligning industrial, societal and regulative expectations with technological capabilities and limitations.

At the core of the project is a web based pre-operational tool-kit that will deliver new abilities to design a site specific marine monitoring program that will ultimately:

  • enable regulators to quantifiably assess that a proposed monitoring strategy delivers an acceptable standard of assurance,
  • enable operators to properly plan, cost and adapt monitoring strategies to site specific circumstances,
  • enable regulators and operators to communicate to the effectiveness of proposed monitoring strategies to enable informed societal consensus in view of marine spatial planning.

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is an approach to anticipate and assess implications and expectations of new technologies on the society, a framework increasingly being used in marine environmental studies and in biotechnology and innovation. We use this framework on Carbon Capture Usage and Storage (CCUS), considering the technology in view of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. In an extension of this, potential legal conflicts between storage projects or other uses of the seas, will be addressed in view of marine spatial planning. 

By viewing CCUS and offshore storage in view of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and in the RRI framework, the aim is to ease communicating the benefits of the technology while addressing the uncertainties and risks in a coherent way.

This work is part of the project ACTOM, funded through the ACT programme (Accelerating CCS Technologies, Horizon2020 Project No 294766). Financial contributions made from; The Research Council of Norway, (RCN), Norway, Netherlands Enterprise Agency (RVO), Netherlands, Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) together with extra funding from NERC and EPSRC research councils, United Kingdom, US-Department of Energy (US-DOE), USA. In-kind contributions from the University of Bergen are gratefully acknowledged.

How to cite: Alendal, G., Blackford, J., Carpentier, S., Cremer, H., Dankel, D. J., Dewar, M., Fagerås, B., Gasda, S. E., Gundersen, K., Heffron, R., Lien, M., Oleynik, A., Omar, A., Pawar, R., Romanak, K., Snee, D., Schütz, S. E., and Torabi, P.: Monitoring offshore CO2 storage projects, aligning capabilities with regulations and public expectations., EGU General Assembly 2020, Online, 4–8 May 2020, EGU2020-20108,, 2020


Display file

Comments on the display

AC: Author Comment | CC: Community Comment | Report abuse

displays version 1 – uploaded on 04 May 2020
  • CC1: Comment on EGU2020-20108, Jen Roberts, 07 May 2020

    Hi Guttorm,

    Thanks for participating in the live chat. I wanted to follow up. 

    First, I am excted and delighted that stakeholder perspectives are built into the ACTOM project. Something I am quite passionate about, and, really, it is fundamental to successful CCS uptake.

    You mention that social expecations and so on are being incorporated into your models via dialogue. How is this being embedded? I'm curious around your the approach. What methods do you use to get a picture of where and when monitoring approaches more acceptable or desirable in terms of social or environmental disruption, impact or preferences?

    Thanks and look forward  to this discussion -