Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Energy
Procedia
EnergyEnergy
Procedia 4 (2011)
Procedia 2708–2715
00 (2010) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/XXX

GHGT-10

Future CCS implementation in India: a systemic and long-term

analysis
Peter Viebahna1*, Samuel Höllera, Daniel Vallentina, Holger Liptowb, Andreas Villarb
a
Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, Doeppersberg 19, 42103 Wuppertal, Germany
b
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Postbox 5180, 65726 Eschborn, Germany

Elsevier use only: Received date here; revised date here; accepted date here

Abstract

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) might be an important climate protection technology for coal-rich countries. This paper
presents first results of a systemic and long-term analysis of a future CCS implementation in India. It focuses on potential storage
formations in the geological subsurface and the geographic match of these sinks with CO2 emissions of current and future large-
point power plants. The analysis is framed by an overview on India’s position on CCS, ongoing Indian research and development
projects as well as its international activities.
The geological potential for CO2 sequestration in India is subject to large uncertainty because, so far, only few studies estimated
it in a vague manner. A first meta-analysis shows that there is a huge variation between 48 Gt and 572 Gt of CO2. The main
differences between the evaluated studies are the assumed capacities for deep saline aquifers and basalt formations. Taking the
ongoing discussion and the existing uncertainties into account, the storage potential might be provided only by aquifers (in the
range of 44 to 360 Gt of CO2) and hydrocarbon fields (2 to 7 Gt of CO2).
The amount of CO2 emissions possibly available for sequestration is assessed by applying three substantially different long-term
energy scenarios for India. These scenarios, indicating pathways between a "low carbon" and a "high carbon" development until
2050, result in cumulated CO2 emissions between 30 and 171 Gt if all new large-scaled power plants will be based on CCS from
2020 on. Compared with the sink capacities, only the CO2 emissions of scenario S2 (30 Gt) could theoretically be stored with
high certainty. Considering the scenarios S3 and S1, their CO2 emissions (94 Gt and 171 Gt, respectively) could only be
sequestered if the aquifer capacity would prove to be usable. Geological storage sites do not appear to be located close to sources
in South West, Central, North and North East India. This first rough analysis means that only those CO2 emissions occurring in
the Western parts of North and West India, the Eastern part of South India as well as the South part of East India might be suited
for sequestration nearby.
A more detailed source-sink matching will follow in the next phase of the project, including results of expert meetings in India.
Furthermore, this analysis will be complemented by an additional assessment from economic, ecological and resource-strategic
points of view, which might further affect the potential for CCS.

⃝
©c 2010
2011Elsevier
Published
Ltd.by
AllElsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
rights reserved

Keywords: CCS; India; storage potential; energy scenario; long-term analysis

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-202-2492-306; fax: +49-202-2492-198.
E-mail address: peter.viebahn@wupperinst.org.

doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.172
 P. Viebahn et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 2708–2715 2709
2 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000

1. Introduction

The Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy and the “Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische
Zusammenarbeit” (GTZ) are currently conducting a comparative international study on CCS. In a previous study on
an integrated assessment of CCS in Germany Wuppertal Institute concluded that this technology is not necessarily
needed in the power sector to comply with national mitigation aims [1]. Similar conclusions may well be applicable
for the rest of Europe, in view of EU guidelines to expand renewable energies and increase energy efficiency.
Nevertheless, globally, CCS might be an important climate protection technology: Coal-consuming countries such
as China and India are increasingly moving centre stage into the debate. Although they are rapidly expanding
renewable energies, this might not be enough to fulfil increasing energy demand. Thus the focus of this study is set
on China, India and South Africa - three coal-rich countries and potential CCS key markets. For each of them an
individual country study is being conducted, which implies a systemic perspective of CCS, considering both
technical and socio-economic parameters.
Main part of the country studies is the assessment of possible CO2 sinks, since sufficient storage space for CO2
must be available in order to prevent the greenhouse gas from entering the atmosphere. The overall question
addressed in the studies is how much CO2 could be potentially stored in appropriate geological formations in a
secure and long-term manner. The geology of potential storage formations is subject to an in-depth assessment
based on a review of existing studies and relevant information and data to be gathered by local partners.
The result of the sink assessment will be a conservative storage potential which is compared with the amount of
CO2 emissions that could be captured in the long-term. For this issue an energy scenario analysis is conducted,
which considers development pathways assuming different shares of fossil and renewable energies until the year
2050. Focusing on large point-sources, especially large-scaled power plants, the amount of CO2 emissions that could
be captured is quantified. The extent to which CCS could be feasible in the considered countries is finally
determined by a source-sink matching and additional assessment from economic, ecological and resource-strategic
issues.
This paper presents very first results of the Indian case study. The organisation of the paper is as follows: In
chapter 2 an overview on India’s position on CCS, ongoing research and development projects as well as the
country’s international activities is given. Chapter 3 discusses possible storage formations in India and analyses
existing studies on the geological potential for CO2 sequestration. In chapter 4 a long-term scenario analysis is
conducted to calculate the cumulated amount of CO2 emissions which could be separated at large power plant
sources. Chapter 5 draws very first and rough conclusions resulting from the storage capacity and source analysis
and gives an outlook on the next steps to be done in this analysis.

2. Status of CCS in India

The discourse on CCS in India is at a relatively early stage as the Indian government does not consider CCS as a
key technology for national energy and climate policy. At the time being (summer 2010), the government prioritises
modernisation and efficiency gains of India’s thermal power plants towards carbon capture and storage which would
significantly decrease plant efficiency. In the 2008 “National Action Plan on Climate Change” CCS is not
mentioned. Instead, the Plan focuses on energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, especially solar energy.
Also in 2008, the Minister of Science and Technology emphasised that technology maturity, cost reductions and
clarity on all safety issues evolving around CO2 storage would be a precondition for making CCS a technology
option for India.
Despite the government’s cautious position towards CCS, research and development projects on this field, both
funded by the government and the industry, are ongoing. In 2007, the Department of Science and Technology (DST)
established the “Indian CO2 Sequestration Applied Research (ICOSAR) Network” in order to coordinate CCS
research and development activities on CCS. Research projects are being conducted on all three major CO2 capture
pathways as shown by [2]. With regard to post-combustion capture, research on novel amine-based, multi-phased
absorbents and adsorptive materials as well as processes have been initiated. These projects shall contribute to the
development of cost-effective solvents, adsorbents and membrane materials. Furthermore, India seeks to investigate
the opportunity of using CO2 for farming algae. Research on high-temperature pre-combustion CO2 capture
processes has been initiated in Indian research departments. Other pre-combustion activities rather concentrate on
2710 P. Viebahn et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 2708–2715
Viebahn et al./ Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 3

the acceptability of high-ash coals for coal gasification processes. Indian research on IGCC technologies was kicked
off in 1989 at Bahrat Heavy Electricals Ltd. (BHEL) in a pilot scale plant of 6.2 MW capacity. Coal with up to 40%
ash was tested at 960°C and 1,050°C at 0.8 MPa in a fluidised bed gasifier.
On the field of oxyfuel combustion, the Centre of Excellence in Coal Research at BHEL is the leading Indian
research body. As a substantial portion of Indian coal contains a high share of ash, BHEL’s oxyfuel research
concentrates on high-ash coal. The research centre has elaborated a roadmap for further research and development
activities on oxyfuel. By the end of 2010, BHEL planned to run oxyfuel trials in a Fuel Evaluation Test Facility
(FETF). In early 2011, scale up studies in a Solid Fuel Burning test Facility (SFBTF) are intended to be carried out
in order to commission a 210/250 MW oxyfuel boiler in March 2013.
Different from the research and demonstration level, demonstration or large-scale projects for CO2 capture in
India melt down to a fertiliser plant where CO2 is captured at a commercial scale for the production of urea since
1988. There are no demonstration-scale CO2 capture tests in the power sector yet. At the fertiliser plant, CO2 is
recovered from the flue gas of the ammonia reformer unit operated by Indo Gulf Corp. since 1988. The plant is
using a Fluor Econamine FGSM unit which helps to balance the NH3/CO2 requirements. From November to
December in 2007, the plant captured 1,472 tonnes of CO2. The following year, from October to December, 7,659
tonnes were captured [3].
With regard to CO2 storage, there are no ongoing demonstration projects and merely a small number of planned
projects. The National Geophysical Research Institute and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL –
U.S.) are planning to demonstrate CO2 storage in Indian basalt formations. The Oil and Natural Corp. (ONGC),
India’s major oil and gas supplier, is considering to use CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) at the Ankleswar oil
field (onshore).
Besides the aforementioned CCS efforts at the national level, India is involved in some international activities
and networks, such as the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF) or the Framework Protocol of the U.S.
FutureGen initiative.

3. Potential sinks for CO2

The geological potential for CO2 sequestration in India is insecure because only few studies estimated it so far in
a vague manner. As previously published estimates for other countries showed, the methods and selected
assumptions for such analyses vary to a large degree [1]. Therefore in this study the methods and parameters applied
in existing studies are systematically analysed and compared. Based on this meta-analysis it is intended to derive a
cautious, conservative estimate as a lower limit which can be adjusted with future CO2 emissions resulting from big
power plant sources.
In India, potential storage sites could be located in saline aquifers, depleted oil and gas fields, unmineable coal
seams and basalt formations. The sedimentary basins of India, where saline aquifers can be found, are at the margins
of the peninsula, in the states of Rajasthan and Gujarat and with less certainty in Assam, Cachar, Tripura and
Mizoram (see Fig. 1). The relevant formations are the Krishna–Godavari and Cauvery Basins, situated in South-
Eastern coastal zones, and the Mumbai/Cambay/Barmer/Jaisalmer basin area in the West of India [4]. In Assam in
the far-east of India, potential storage sites are in the Assam and Assam Arakan Fold Belt, connected to the rest of
the country through the “chicken-neck”, a 15 km narrow zone. These basins are declared to deliver “good” storage
potential, if hydrocarbon fields are located there [5]. Fair storage potential can be found in Mahanadi Basin, Kutch
and Bikaner Nagaur. Coal seams are situated especially in older Gondwana formations. Additionally, there is the
enormous Deccan basalt province in Central-Western India.
So far, only some assessments of the storage potential, conducted more or less comprehensively, exist:
• [6] argues in his PhD thesis, finalised in 2007, that the CCS technology in India will not be restricted by geology
or geography.
• [7] assume an adequate storage capacity for almost any greenhouse gas scenario (2008).
• In contrast, [8] conducted a survey with experts in 2009 and found, that there are not sufficient geological seams
for storage.
 P. Viebahn et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 2708–2715 2711
4 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000

Fig. 1 Large point sources, potential storage basins and oil and gas fields of the Indian subcontinent (source [5])

• A first order global conservative estimate by [9] in 2005 delivered storage capacity in India of 105 Gt CO2.
Although no specific calculation is published, this capacity is split up in 2 Gt from depleted gas fields, 2 Gt from
coal fields and 102 Gt from aquifers.
• The most comprehensive study for India published by the IEA Greenhouse Gas Programme in 2008 delivered a
conservative storage potential of 68 Gt CO2 [5]. It is summed up from the estimated limited potential of less than
5 Gt in depleted oil fields, gas fields and unmineable coal seams and 63 Gt CO2 in saline aquifers. The general
capacity calculation for saline aquifers is based on the specific storage density value of 0.2 Mt/km2 provided by
[10]. This leads to a capacity of 63.3 Gt CO2 if the density is applied to “good“ and “fair” quality reservoirs. If
only “good” reservoirs are taken into account, this capacity would be reduced to 44 Gt CO2, resulting in a total
potential of 49 Gt CO2. Additional geological information on aquifers and basalts is needed to provide a more
secure and detailed estimate.
• Another specific capacity calculation for India was conducted in 2006 by [11], who estimated a total capacity of
572 Gt. This high number is based essentially on storage in deep saline aquifers (360 Gt CO2) and in basalt
formations (200 Gt CO2). The storage capacity in oil and gas fields is calculated to 7 Gt CO2 whereas coal seams
provide additionally 5 Gt CO2.
Selecting the three most detailed estimates gives the overview illustrated in Tab. 1.
2712 P. Viebahn et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 2708–2715
Viebahn et al./ Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 5

Tab. 1 Overview of existing storage capacity estimations for India (based on [5], [9] and [11])

Author
Dooley et al. 2005 [9] Singh et al. 2006 [11] Holloway et al. 2008 [5]
Oil fields - 1.0 – 1.1
7
Gas fields 2 2.7 – 3.5
Aquifers 102 360 63.3 * 44 **
Coal seams 2 5 0.345
Basaltsa - 200 - ***
Total 105 572 68 49 ****
All quantities given in Gt of CO2
* Uncertain. 63.3 Gt achieved by applying the method used for the EU to good and fair quality
reservoirs (storage density = 0.2 Mt/km2) (Wildenborg 2004, [10])
** Capacity is decreased to 44 Gt CO2, if only good quality is requested.
*** Basalt storage is not possible nowadays because of too many uncertainties.
**** Own calculation by the authors.
a
: including interbedded sedimentary basins  chemical trapping

The main differences between these studies are the capacities assumed for deep saline aquifers and basalt
formations.
• The storage of CO2 in basalts is still not substantially developed and researched, thus this possibility should be
considered very cautiously.
• [5] argue that there is not yet sufficient research on Indian saline aquifers either. Due to the lack of information, a
capacity is derived through applying the specific storage density of Europe. [5] limits the suitable aquifers to
areas where hydrocarbons have been found. This limitation is not included in the estimate of [11], where a much
larger area leads to a considerable higher capacity. This is a crucial difference that cannot be resolved within
these first results. In the final report of this project, a deeper look at the potential storage area in aquifers will
have been conducted.
• Regarding geological CO2 storage in deep coal seams, depth considerations are crucial. Applying the restrictions
of [5] results in a very low potential for enhanced coal bed methane recovery.
Summarising this rough discussion, the storage potential for India might be provided only by aquifers (in the
range of 44 to 360 Gt of CO2) and hydrocarbon fields (2 to 7 Gt of CO2).
Several expert meetings will be carried out in India to complete the assessment. It is intended to get more
comments on existing studies and the methodologies and parameter assumptions applied there, to be able to evaluate
the capacity in basalt and aquifer formations in a more comprehensive way and to derive a conservative assessment
of the total storage potential.

4. Long-term CO2 source analysis

The amount of CO2 emissions possibly available for storage is assessed by applying three substantially different
long-term energy scenarios for India. The scenarios indicate a pathway between a "low carbon" and a "high carbon"
development. For each decade until the year 2050 it is investigated which amount of coal fired power plant
capacities could be installed including CCS or being retrofitted with CO2 capture when CCS is commercially
available. Based on key parameters like efficiency, penalty load, construction-time of capture facilities and capture
rate, the yearly amounts of CO2 emissions to be captured are derived. Considering the lifetime of CCS-based power
plants, the total amount of CO2 to be captured and stored can be determined. Whereas the yearly figures determine
the maximum scope of the pipeline infrastructure needed for CO2 transport, the total amount enables to determine
the possible storage capacity needed per power plant, per state, per region and for India in total.
It should be mentioned, that none of the scenarios considered below include CCS so far; the second scenario
excludes it explicitly. Furthermore, the Indian government does not consider CCS as a key technology as mentioned
 P. Viebahn et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 2708–2715 2713
6 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000

above. The aim of the scenario analysis therefore is to show how much CO2 could be separated even in case of a
“low carbon” energy economy, to compare this amount with the existing storage capacities and to conclude whether
CCS would be a possible alternative to other climate protection measures.
For the scenario analysis, the following approaches were chosen. Fig. 2 shows the coal fuelled power plant
capacity, resulting from the scenario assumptions.
• Scenario S1: World Energy Outlook 2007 Reference Scenario, published by the IEA [12]. This scenario takes
into account existing international energy and environmental policies. Examples are continuing progress in
electricity and gas market reforms, the liberalisation of cross border energy trade or recent policies designed to
combat environmental pollution. In contrary, further policies to strongly reduce greenhouse gas emissions are not
included. For this study, the Reference Scenario for India is used, which was extrapolated to 2050 by [13].
• Scenario S2: Energy [R]evolution scenario, published by Greenpeace and EREC in 2008 [13,14]. The target of
this scenario is to reduce worldwide CO2 emissions by 50% below 1990 level by 2050. This means that per capita
emissions are reduced to less than 1.3 tonnes per year, which is necessary to prevent the rise in global average
temperature from exceeding a threshold of 2°C. While the scenario is based only on proven and sustainable
technologies (renewable energy sources, efficient decentralised cogeneration and energy saving technologies),
both CCS power plants and nuclear power plants are excluded. For this study, the specified sustainable India
energy outlook as part of the global Energy [R]evolution scenario is applied.
• Scenario S3: Since no further Indian CO2 reduction scenario, which reports the installed power plant capacity per
decade, could be found, the “Low Carbon Technology Roadmap” recently published by CSE (Centre for Science
and Environment, New Delhi) was taken as a basis for the third scenario, a pathway between high coal scenario
S1 and low coal scenario S2. Under this scenario the government is forced to undertake aggressive climate
mitigation measures, supported by a strong international assistance. [15] While only 2008/09 and 2030/31 figures
are given, the missing figures for 2020, 2040 and 2050 were extrapolated by the authors.

Fig. 2 Coal fuelled power plant capacity, currently installed and envisaged according to three long-term energy scenarios (own illustration)

The scenario analysis is complemented by a comprehensive analysis of power plants currently under operation
and officially planned in the near future. It is based on both free and commercially available power plant databases
(from CEA, CSE, IEA GHG and Platts). To determine the amount of CO2 which could potentially be captured in the
future, the following main assumptions were chosen:
• All power plants which are currently in the planning phase or which are envisaged according to the outcome of
the energy scenarios could theoretically be equipped with CO2 capture (both retrofitted and newly built ones).
2714 P. Viebahn et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 2708–2715
Viebahn et al./ Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000 7

• From these power plants, only large point sources (LPS) are foreseen for CCS. Since 68% of all-India cumulative
emissions arise from LPS [4], 70% of the power plants are assumed to be or currently being built as large-scale
plants.
• CCS will not be commercially available before 2030. From 2030 on, all large new power plants will be built as
CCS-based power plants. Those ones starting operation after 2010 will be retrofitted with CCS from 2030 on.
• Power plants currently in operation will be too old for retrofitting from 2030 on.
• The Indian states are grouped to four regions, North, East, South and West, according to the official classification
of the Central Electricity Authority (CEA). The power plants to be newly installed in the future are distributed in
the four regions in the same relation as currently operating power plants are located.
• It is not differed between hard coal and lignite since only few lignite-fuelled power plants are assumed to be built
in the future.
• All new power plants are assumed to operate on supercritical steam conditions reaching an efficiency of 40%.
• For CO2 capture and compression an efficiency loss of 9 percentage points on average is assumed; retrofitting
power plants would cost further 1.5 percentage points losses. This results in a coal penalty of 29% and 36% per
kilowatthour, respectively.
• The lifetime and therefore the time for capturing CO2 of new power plants is conservatively calculated as 40
years; in case of retrofit, the remaining lifetime (20-25 years) is used.
• The following technical parameters are set: CO2-capture rate 90%, specific emissions of coal 331 g CO2/kWhth,
full load hours per year 6,000.
The result of the scenario analysis is presented in Fig. 3. It shows that – depending on the scenarios – between 30
and 171 Gt of CO2 could potentially be available for sequestration, if all new large power plants would be equipped
with CO2 capture from 2020 on. Considering the allocation of regions, more than one third of CO2 emissions are
produced in West India (38%) and one quarter in East India (26%), which is in accordance with the distribution of
power plants (as already illustrated in Fig. 1).

Fig. 3 Potential storage basins (taken from [5]) and captured CO2 emissions from large-scaled CCS based power plants in India considering
lifetime of 40 years as a result of three long-term energy scenarios (in Gigatonnes) (own illustration)
 P. Viebahn et al. / Energy Procedia 4 (2011) 2708–2715 2715
8 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2010) 000–000

5. Conclusion and outlook

Taking the potential CO2 emissions calculated in chapter 4 and the estimated sink capacities from chapter 3 into
account, a qualified source-sink matching would be the next step of the analysis. However, at the current state of the
project, only a preliminary conclusion can be drawn. Considering the total amount of CO2 available for
sequestration and comparing it with the possible storage sites, only the CO2 emissions of scenario S2 (30 Gt) could
theoretically be stored with high certainty. Considering the scenarios S3 and S1, their CO2 emissions (94 Gt and 171
Gt, respectively) could only be sequestered if the aquifer capacity estimated by [9] and [11] turns out to be usable.
So far, not included in this assessment are CO2 emissions captured from industrial point sources which would
further increase the need for additional storage capacity.
Fig. 3 also illustrates the regional allocation of possible sinks and emissions (shaded areas). Geological storage
sites do not appear to be located close to sources in South West, Central, North and North East India [16]. Regarding
the potential storage capacity in Assam, a transport of CO2 from Indian mainland through the chicken neck can be
considered as very improbable. This first rough analysis means that only those CO2 emissions occurring in the
Western parts of North and West India, the Eastern part of South India as well as the South part of East India might
be suited for sequestration nearby. A more detailed source-sink matching will follow in the next phase of the project,
including results of expert meetings in India. Furthermore, this analysis will be complemented by an additional
assessment of economic, ecological and resource-strategic issues, which might further affect the potential for CCS.

Acknowledgments
This study is being conducted within the research project “CCS global”, funded by the German Federal Ministry
for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) [17].

References
[1] P. Viebahn, A. Esken, S. Höller, H. Luhmann, K. Pietzner, D. Vallentin, RECCS plus - Comparison of Renewable Energy Technologies
(RE) with Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS). Update and Expansion of the RECCS study. Final Report of Wuppertal Institute
on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, Berlin, 2010.
[2] M. Goel, Recent approaches in CO2 fixation research in India and future perspectives towards zero emission coal based power
generation, Current Science. 97 (2009) 1625-1633.
[3] IEAGHG (IEA Greenhouse Gas Programme), CS Resources. RD&D Database. The Indo Gulf Fertilizer Company Plant, India., (2010).
[4] A. Garg, P. Shukla, Coal and energy security for India: Role of carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS), Energy. 34 (2009)
1032-1041.
[5] IEAGHG, A regional assessment of the potential for CO2 storage in the Indian subcontinent, IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme,
2008.
[6] M. Narain, Pathways to Adoption of Carbon Capture and Sequestration in India: Technologies and Policies, PhD thesis, MIT, 2007.
[7] A. Bhandari, N. Sarin, D. Chadha, Saline aquifers: Attractive and viable options for Carbon Dioxide Storage - Indian Perspective, in: M.
Goel, B. Kumar, S.N. Charan (Eds.), Carbon Capture and Storage: R&D Technologies for a Sustainable Energy Future, Alpha Science
International, Hyderabad, 2008: pp. 119-126.
[8] A. Doig, Capturing India’s Carbon - The UK's role in delivering low-carbon technology to India, Christian Aid, 2009.
[9] J. Dooley, S. Kim, J. Edmonds, S. Friedman, M. Wise, A first-order global geological CO2-storage potential supply curve and its
application in a global integrated assessment model, in: Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies 7, Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, 2005: pp.
573-581.
[10] T. Wildenborg, Cost curves for CO2 storage: European Sector, IEA GHG R&D Programme. (2004).
[11] A.K. Singh, V.A. Mendhe, A. Garg, CO2 sequestration potential of geologic formations in India, in: Elsevier Science Ltd, Trondheim
(NO), 2006.
[12] IEA (International Energy Agency), World Energy Outlook 2007: China and India insights, International Energy Agency, Paris, 2007.
[13] Greenpeace International, European Energy Council (EREC), Energy [R]evolution - a sustainable India energy outlook, Amsterdam,
2008.
[14] W. Krewitt, S. Teske, S. Simon, T. Pregger, W. Graus, E. Blomen, et al., Energy [R]evolution 2008-a sustainable world energy
perspective, Energy Policy. 37 (2009) 5764-5775.
[15] CSE (Centre for Science and Environment), Challenge of the New Balance; Part 01: Power., 2010.
[16] S. Shackley, P. Verma, Tackling CO2 reduction in India through use of CO2 capture and storage (CCS): Prospects and challenges,
Energy Policy. 36 (2008) 3554-3561.
[17] Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy, CCS global - The Global Prospects of Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies
in Emerging Countries, (2010).