Decarbonisation Technology August 2026 Issue

August 2026 May 2023 Decarbonisati n Technolo gy Powering the Transition to Sustainable Fuels & Energy DECARBONISATI N TECHNOLOGY

UTILISATION OF CAPTURED CARBON RENEWABLE HYDROGEN & HYDROGEN SAFETY RENEWABLE FUELS WASTE HEAT RECOVERY

SUSTAINABLE AVIATION AND MARINE FUELS PRODUCT CARBON FOOTPRINTING CCS HUBS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA DECARBONISATION OF REFINING VALUE CHAINS

UPDATE YOUR SUBSCRIPTION REGISTER FOR A PRINT OR DIGITAL ISSUE TO RECEIVE A REGULAR ISSUE OF DECARBONISATION TECHNOLOGY ANY QUESTIONS? REGISTER CONTACT US CLICK HERE

CO 2 , Catch it ’cause you can!

Scan to learn more

Carbon Capture and Storage will play a critical role in helping the energy sector and heavy industries to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. Significant challenges stand in the way of its successful industrial deployment. Discover the innovative carbon capture absorption technology DMX™, that offers improved performance and reduced energy requirements. www.axens.net

axens.net

Contents

August 2026

Multisector CCS hubs in Southeast Asia Anabelle Valdez Belltree

10 Value of digital product carbon footprinting in decision-making Blair Fraser Wood

17 Can biomethane scale?

Vahide Nuran Mutlu and Aysel Zahidova SOCAR Türkiye Research & Development and Innovation Inc.

27 Value of hydrogen and ammonia fuel blends in gas turbines Tina Owodunni, Rodolfo Tellez-Schmill, and Michelle Wicmandy KBC (A Yokogawa Company)

33 Closed-carbon pathway for sustainable road mobility Nabeel Ataimisch ZCT Solutions GmbH

38 Methanol: A systems integrator Robert Jolly Johnson Matthey

43 Circular economy in lubricants market: The Brazilian case Marcio Wagner Da Silva Petrobras

49 Heat recovery below the acid dew point Nicolas Schiffer Fiedler Technoform

55 Advancing hydrogen carrier technologies Tiago Vilela, Graham Ormsby, and Lei Zhang Avantium

60 Decarbonisation Through Innovation: Integrating amine-based carbon capture with e-fuel production: pathways toward low-carbon synthetic fuels Peggy Chan and Thomas Plennevaux Axens

© 2026. The entire content of this publication is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without the prior permission of the copyright owner. The opinions and views expressed by the authors in this publication are not necessarily those of the editor or publisher and while every care has been taken in the preparation of all material included the publisher cannot be held responsible for any statements, opinions or views or for any inaccuracies.

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

These are the people you call when your cycle is on the line.They analyze your foulant, optimize your reactor, fly to your site, and stay until the job is done.They looked like this once.They’ve grown up a little since then.

crystaphase.com

It is widely accepted that the goal of limiting global warming to an average of 1.5ºC by 2050 is no longer achievable. While this is not good news, it is not surprising. Many signatories to the Paris Agreement are not on track to meet their committed country-level targets. Analysts now consider an overshoot of the target, only achieving net-zero emissions by the end of the century. This year, in 2026, we have seen record-high temperatures, which should raise major concerns about what is to come in the next 24 years. Many countries are making progress, but not yet at the rate that is needed. Everyone needs to do more and sooner. The issue is one of supportive policy that will drive the levels of investment required to achieve impactful scale with transitional technologies, both nationally and collectively, globally. The twin foundations for the transition are the growth in renewable electricity generation and distribution and the transition away from fossil fuels. These foundations are critical but insufficient on their own. Scale-up of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and direct air capture (DAC) processes, along with natural carbon removal (forestry, agriculture, and aquaculture), are essential to address the overshoot. In their Energy Transition Outlook 2025 , DNV forecasts carbon dioxide removal (CDR) will capture 42% of global emissions by 2060. While CCS is feasible for carbon capture on board shipping, DAC at scale could contribute to low-carbon aviation and should become eligible for funding via the International Aviation Transport Authority (IATA) Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) scheme. In combination with renewable fuels, CCS processes could deliver net-zero marine and aviation and help restore a healthy carbon cycle. Methane is responsible for around 30% of the current rise in global temperature. Since 2017, Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI) members have reduced flaring by 72%, contributing to a 63% reduction in their methane emissions or a carbon intensity of 0.12%. The Oil and Gas Methane Partnership 2.0 now includes 150 companies, representing nearly 45% of the world’s oil and gas production. These two initiatives are now targeting a carbon intensity of 0.1%, considerably (10-20x) lower than the global average. Even though they are not the only sources of methane emissions, reductions from oil and gas production are the most technically and economically feasible to achieve. Why are not all oil and gas companies joining such initiatives?

Managing Editor Rachel Storry

rachel.storry@emap.com tel +44 (0)7786 136440 Consulting Editor

Robin Nelson robin.nelson@ decarbonisationtechnology.com Sub-Editor Lisa Harrison lisa.harrison@emap.com Graphics Peter Harper Business Development Director Paul Mason info@decarbonisationtechnology.com tel +44 844 5888 771 Managing Director Richard Watts richard.watts@emap.com

EMAP, 10th Floor Southern House Wellesley Grove, Croydon CR0 1XG

Robin Nelson

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

What’s ne t?

This. Advanced technology. Specialist talent. Field-tested methodologies.

Imagine working with experts who bring decades of operational insight, hands-on catalyst experience and a rigorous, data-led approach – to help you solve challenges with confidence.

This isn’t tomorrow’s ambition. It’s today’s reality – already in use at select sites worldwide.

Let’s go shell.com/ct

Multisector CCS hubs in Southeast Asia

As CCS hubs shift from strategy to implementation, data-driven subsurface workflows can connect sources to storage, enhancing deployment efficiency

Anabelle Valdez Belltree

S outheast Asia’s decarbonisation increasingly hinges on multi-sector carbon capture and storage (CCS) hubs. Indonesia and Vietnam alone emit hundreds of millions of tonnes of CO₂ from cement and coal, two sectors that dominate industrial emissions while sharing fuel supply chains, geographic concentration, and enabling infrastructure. Mapping indicates that four CCS corridors in Vietnam could capture up to 50 Mt per year, cutting cement emissions by 46% and national emissions by 15% (Lau & Tsai, 2024) . In Indonesia, Java-Sumatra clusters could add a further 10-15 Mt/yr from cement plants and select coal units by pairing them with nearby depleted fields and saline aquifers (Bhaskara & Sidemen, 2025) (Norton Rose Fulbright, 2025) (Pertamina, 2025). Taken together, these corridors represent the fastest path to scale: shared pipelines, shipping, and storage transform stranded assets into investable decarbonisation infrastructure. Proximity and infrastructure advantage Much of the cement and coal capacity in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) already sits within 200-300 km of storage-ready geology. That proximity materially lowers transport costs and supports high-capture designs already mapped in Vietnam and screened in Indonesia. Depleted oil and gas fields offer an immediate advantage: they have known injectivity, proven caprock integrity, and lower pressure regimes, while nearshore saline aquifers provide long-term scale at the cost of additional appraisal, pressure management, and robust measuring, monitoring

and verification (MMV). Aggregating emitters into shared hubs amortises these costs across sectors, using the same economic logic that underpinned bankable CCS hubs in the North Sea and Australia. The constraint is not theoretical storage capacity, but subsurface certainty. Southeast Asia may have abundant storage potential on paper, but subsurface data remains uneven. In practice, that shifts the priority from identifying the biggest theoretical stores to matching industrial clusters with the nearest viable “ Much of the cement and coal capacity in ASEAN already sits within 200-300 km of storage-ready geology. That proximity materially lowers transport costs and supports high- capture designs already mapped in Vietnam and screened in Indonesia ” reservoirs and advancing shared appraisal programmes at corridor level. As a result, investors focus less on gigatonnes on paper and more on site-specific fundamentals: injectivity, containment, and pressure behaviour. Against this backdrop, Indonesia’s data-rich, depleted fields in the Java Sea and Sunda-Asri provide a clear head start, whereas Vietnam’s basins, such as Song Hong, can only scale once targeted appraisal reduces uncertainty. In practice, the fastest way to advance both is through coordinated source-to-sink matching, pairing cement and coal clusters with the nearest viable storage and progressing shared

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Additionally, Storage Resources Management System (SRMS)-aligned storage estimates are generated, and auditable risk registers are produced for lender diligence. The result is not just better maps, but faster decisions, compressing time to final investment decision (FID) from years to roughly six to 18 months. We have seen this playbook succeed before. Northern Lights (see Figure 1 ) and Gorgon did not scale CCS through bespoke projects, but by aggregating emitters, standardising subsurface work, and committing once storage certainty was sufficient (Northern Lights, 2026; Mei, et al., 2025) . ASEAN now sits at a similar inflection point. Vietnam’s cement corridors lie roughly 250 km from storage-ready geology, close enough to keep pipeline transport near $10/t at a multi-Mtpa scale, based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and International Energy Agency (IEA) cost curves. That proximity is not incidental; it is the difference between CCS as a policy aspiration and CCS as financeable infrastructure. This same source-to-storage pairing shows up across the wider region. In Malaysia, most cement and power assets on the Peninsula sit within roughly 150-250 km of prospective storage in the Malay and Penyu basins. These assets are already connected to ports and gas infrastructure, making ship-based or

appraisal programmes that include step-rate injectivity testing, caprock stress-path analysis, baseline 3D seismic, and corridor-level MMV design rather than duplicating those efforts plant by plant. From mapping to action: Frameworks and global lessons This is the workflow enabled by bMark CCS. Storage sites are screened and ranked on capacity, injectivity, caprock quality, and proximity. Sources are then matched to sinks (for example, Vietnam’s cement corridors to Block B and Song Hong, while Indonesia’s clusters are linked to the Java Sea and Sunda-Asri). Figure 1 Onshore storage tanks: Northern lights project

Figure 2 bMark CCS database, emitters, infrastructure, and subsurface data

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

short-pipeline CO₂ transport feasible once shared systems are in place. Japan offers the clearest operational precedent: its CCS approach has focused on building a common backbone, shared transport, early subsurface screening, and standardised appraisal, before committing capital. Applied across Southeast Asia, data-driven platforms such as bMark CCS help identify which industrial belts can advance now and which should follow later by aligning emitters with the nearest viable storage and concentrating investment where injectivity, containment, and scale are already defensible (see Figure 2 ). Execution risks and how corridors address them Scale at this pace does not come without execution risk, and credible project development demands that those risks be named. Three stand out. First, reservoir underperformance: injectivity in saline aquifers can decline faster than initial modelling suggests, particularly where pressure management and baseline characterisation have been limited, a known challenge in early- stage storage development globally ( Sokama- Neuyam , 2022) . Second, demand aggregation risk: shared infrastructure economics depend on anchor emitters committing early and holding firm. If one or two large contributors delay or withdraw, the business case for shared pipelines and storage appraisal can unravel before FID. Third, regulatory continuity risk: bilateral frameworks, however well-structured, remain exposed to policy shifts that can alter the legal basis for cross-border CO₂ movement between election cycles. The corridor model directly addresses all three. Shared appraisal programmes distribute subsurface risk across multiple emitters rather than concentrating it on a single developer. Aggregated demand pools commitments, reducing reliance on any single anchor. Corridor-level governance frameworks, once embedded in national legislation rather than ministerial agreement alone, create the institutional durability that lenders require. None

of these risks should be seen as disqualifying; they are the normal conditions of large-scale infrastructure development, In fact, they are precisely the conditions that coordinated, multi- sector corridor development is designed to navigate. ASEAN’s emerging carbon corridors ASEAN’s next phase of CCS development will likely be defined less by standalone projects and more by interconnected industrial corridors. Indonesia and Vietnam are central to this shift, combining large industrial emissions with proximity to offshore storage basins capable of supporting long-duration CO₂ storage. The opportunity is therefore not simply carbon capture, but the creation of integrated source- to-sink systems linking emitters, transport infrastructure, and offshore storage at a regional scale. “ The opportunity is not simply carbon capture, but the creation of integrated source-to-sink systems linking emitters, transport infrastructure, and offshore storage at a regional scale ” Much of Southeast Asia’s industrial capacity already sits close to storage-ready geology and existing energy infrastructure. Decades of offshore oil and gas development have left behind pipelines, ports, subsurface data, and marine logistics networks that can be partially repurposed for CCS. As a result, the commercial challenge increasingly shifts from proving theoretical storage capacity to coordinating, appraising, and financing corridor-level transport and storage systems. What is emerging is effectively a regional market for CO₂ movement and storage. Singapore’s industrial base positions it naturally as a capture and aggregation hub, while Indonesia and Malaysia are increasingly positioning themselves as long-term offshore storage providers. Over time, this model could extend further across Asia-Pacific, linking regional emitters with Southeast Asian storage resources through cross-border transport corridors.

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

CCS Sakakemang (2027) Repsol, dedicated storage

Balikpapan renery Pertamina, Air Liquide, use and storage

Banggai ammonia (2028) Pertamina, unknown fate

Ramba CCUS (2030) Pertamina, EOR

Tangguh LNG (2026) BP, EGR

Arun CCS hub (2027)

South China Sea

Pacic Ocean

Central Sumatera Basin CCUS hub (2028)

East Kalimantan CCUS hub

Gemah eld storage (2028)

Nagoya terminal (Japan)

INDONESIA

Kutai Basin Basin CCUS hub (2028)

Tangguh CC U S hub (phase 2 (2030)

Sunda Asri Basin CCUS hub (2029)

Indian Ocean

Muara Enim DME (2024) Pertamina, unknown fate

Gas power CCUS MoU GE Vemona, BP and partners, dedicated storage

Abadi LNG (2026) Inpex Masela, Shell, unknown fate

Sukowati (2028) Pertamina, EOR

Gundih eld (2026) Pertamina, EGR

Capture or full chain

Storage

Notes: LNG = Liquied natural gas EGR = Enhanced gas recovery EOR = Ehanced oil recovery

Coal-to-liquids Ammonia plant

Renery

Natural gas processing (including LNG)

CO2 storage hub

Power

Figure 3 Map of CCUS projects under development in Indonesia (2023)

(IEA, 2023)

Japan: Backbone first, emitters second What does it actually take to turn CCS ambition into bankable infrastructure? Japan has spent the last decade answering that question, and the answer is consistently the same: build the backbone before asking emitters to commit. Rather than funding individual capture projects, Tokyo structured its programme around shared infrastructure from the outset, standardised subsurface appraisal, common transport architecture, and a licensing framework that treats storage rights as property assets with security of tenure. Capital followed certainty, not the other way around. Japan has assembled an impressive scale of projects that has captured the attention of Southeast Asia. In 2024, the Japan Organization for Metals and Energy Security’s (JOGMEC) selected nine Advanced CCS Projects, targeting 6-12 Mtpa of storage by 2030 across industrial clusters spanning power, steel, chemicals, and cement, with FIDs gated at fiscal year 2026 (METI, 2024). Four of those nine projects are explicitly designed around overseas Asia-Pacific reservoirs rather than domestic geology. Japan is not just a policy model for ASEAN; it is an active, capital-backed buyer of storage capacity.

Indonesia, Malaysia, and Vietnam are now working to position themselves as suppliers to meet this demand. The Higashi-Niigata cluster illustrates what this looks like at project level. Approximately 10 Mt/y of emissions from co-located chemical plants and thermal power assets are within pipeline reach of depleted gas fields already screened for injectivity. Basic engineering design and storage potential assessment are underway, with a 2030 operational target (Mitsubishi Gas Chemical, 2024) . The source-to- sink geometry, multisector demand aggregation, and shared pipeline logic are structurally identical to what Vietnam and Indonesia are now developing, with the difference being that Japan is roughly 18 months closer to a binding investment decision. That gap matters. The corridors that reach proven storage first will not simply cut emissions sooner. They will define the commercial and contractual architecture that later entrants inherit. Both emitter and storage nations understand this, which is why early positioning is already shaping bilateral negotiations across the region. It is precisely that dynamic, a regional market forming in real time, that gives the Singapore-

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Indonesia corridor its strategic weight (see Figure 3 ). Singapore-Indonesia CCUS corridor: ASEAN’s pathfinder case The Singapore- Indonesia CCUS corridor represents the most advanced expression of the corridor model in ASEAN to date. What began as an

Sum of CO per year (Mt CO per year) Projects (Number of projects)

7.76

5.70

3.95

1.06

0.42

0.57 0.09

Commercial active

Pilot

Pilot completed

Commercial active

Pilot

Pilot completed

Commercial active

Asia

Europe

Oceania

Figure 4 Project maturity vs storage by region

cross-border settings characterised by uneven readiness across sectors and jurisdictions. The first CCS corridors in Southeast Asia will do more than cut emissions; they will set the cost, risk, and governance template for everything that follows. Once storage is proven, pipelines permitted, and MMV standardised, additional emitters can be connected at marginal cost. Cement anchors early demand; coal adds volume where alternatives are “ In ASEAN, the advantage will likely accrue to the corridors that secure storage certainty and shared infrastructure first ” limited. Scale then compounds. In ASEAN, the focus has moved beyond the case for multisector CCS hubs to the practical challenge of sequencing corridors and capturing first‑mover advantage. CCS projects advance most effectively where technical feasibility is matched by infrastructure and coordinated development (see Figure 4 ). Bridging the gap between ambition and execution remains the key challenge in less mature regions. bMark CCS is a trademark of Belltree.

exploratory bilateral dialogue has progressed into a structured framework aimed at enabling cross‑border CO₂ transport and permanent geological storage at commercial scale. In June 2025, the two governments signed Memorandum of Understanding covering cross‑border electricity trade, CCUS, and sustainable industrial zones, committing to the development of a legally binding mechanism governing transboundary CO₂ movement and storage. This framework was enabled by a preceding regulatory clarification in Indonesia that permitted licensed CCS operators to allocate a defined portion of domestic storage capacity to imported CO₂, thereby resolving a fundamental legal constraint on cross‑border CCS deployment in Southeast Asia. In combination, these measures establish a clear institutional basis for treating CCS as a regionally shared infrastructure rather than a purely national mitigation option. The corridor is framed as a scalable system linking multiple industrial capture points in Singapore with offshore storage hubs in Indonesia via shared transport infrastructure, reflecting an explicit emphasis on aggregation, cost containment, and regulatory interoperability. Framed at the system level, the corridor model lowers barriers to entry by decoupling participation from full upfront commitment. Emitters can connect incrementally as volumes, policy clarity, and commercial terms evolve, while shared infrastructure provides a legible pathway to scale. This optionality is particularly relevant in

VIEW REFERENCES

Anabelle Valdez anabellevaldezperalta@belltreegroup.co.uk

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Value of digital product carbon footprinting in decision-making How organisations can build digital PCF systems that deliver measurable financial and operational value in increasingly carbon-constrained markets

Blair Fraser Wood

P roduct carbon footprinting (PCF) has evolved rapidly over the past decade, shifting from a specialist sustainability exercise to a core requirement driven by regulation, customers, and capital markets. Despite significant development and investment in methodologies and reporting frameworks, many organisations still struggle to generate PCFs in a way that is sufficiently fast, consistent and scalable to support decision-making. This article explores why that gap persists, what ‘good’ looks like in practice, and how organisations can build digital PCF systems that deliver measurable financial and operational value. Drawing on implementation experience, it demonstrates how PCF can shift from a compliance activity to a decision-making infrastructure. Shift in expectations Over the last few years, the role of PCF has changed fundamentally. What was once a technically complex exercise carried out by Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) specialists is now expected to inform day-to-day business decisions. Senior leaders are no longer asking, “What is our carbon footprint?” but rather, “What should we do next?” This shift marks a transition from reporting to decision-making. While significant investment has been made in standards, certification, and reporting frameworks, relatively few organisations can confidently answer basic operational questions, such as: • Which product mix minimises carbon cost? • What are the key carbon drivers within an asset?

• Where should decarbonisation investment be prioritised? The underlying reason is consistent: PCF systems have largely been built as reporting tools. There are two distinct applications of PCF. Compliance and certification PCFs are typically backwards-looking, based on verified ‘actuals’ and designed to meet regulatory or standardised requirements. In contrast, decision-oriented PCFs are forward-looking, scenario-based, and designed to support ‘what-if’ analysis and optimisation. These applications require different data structures, levels of granularity, and system capabilities, yet organisations increasingly need to support both types. As demand grows across regulatory frameworks, certification schemes, and customer requirements, the challenge is no longer how to calculate a footprint, but how to do so efficiently and flexibly enough to support multiple, evolving uses. This is driving a shift from static reporting toward a dynamic, digitally enabled decision-making capability. Why current PCF approaches fall short In practice, PCF processes in many industrial organisations remain fragmented and manual. Data is spread across emissions systems, spreadsheets, and supplier questionnaires, while calculation models are often siloed in spreadsheet-based tools or standalone software. This leads to manual data reconciliation, inconsistent supplier inputs, limited scenario analysis, and poor transparency and auditability.

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

The fundamental challenge is the effort required to gather, validate, and integrate data from disparate sources. Without a single governed data pipeline, organisations face repeated data handling, inconsistent assumptions, and weak data lineage. As a result, PCF processes are slow, fragile, and resource-intensive. While organisations may produce a PCF, they typically lack the system capability to support continuous, decision-oriented use. The distinction between compliance and decision-making requirements further amplifies this issue. Compliance-driven PCFs require high levels of traceability and verification of historical data, while decision-making requires flexible, forward-looking modelling based on projected scenarios. These demands are often met using the same underlying processes, despite requiring fundamentally different capabilities. The result is an inherent tension between auditability and agility. Systems designed for compliance tend to prioritise control and traceability, while operational use cases require speed and flexibility. Without digital infrastructure to reconcile these needs, organisations are forced into trade-offs that limit the effectiveness of both. Organisational structure often presents a significant barrier. Large companies operating across multiple business units, locations, or subsidiary entities frequently face challenges in coordinating data ownership and system consistency. Siloed responsibilities, combined with legacy systems lacking modern integration

Traditional PCF

Digital PCF

Annual reporting

Real-time insights

Sustainability-led

Cross-functional

Static outputs

Scenario-enabled

Compliance focus

Decision support

Figure 1 Shift from reporting to decision-making

capabilities, further increase the complexity of implementing scalable PCF processes. Ultimately, the issue is whether it can be produced and updated in a way that supports ongoing business decisions. Where PCF remains labour-intensive, its role is largely confined to reporting. Where it becomes automated, integrated, and scenario-enabled, it can begin to function as a decision infrastructure (see Figure 1 ). This growing complexity is not theoretical; it manifests consistently in implementation challenges observed across industries (see Figure 2 ). Lessons from implementation: The five recurring challenges Across multiple industrial implementations, several consistent lessons emerge:  Data confidence beats data volume : Organisations often prioritise collecting large volumes of data but struggle to ensure its reliability. In practice, fewer, higher-quality data

1 Standards

5 Certication

ISO, IMO ISCC CORSIA Regulations such as EU RED Cross-functional teams Roles and responsibilities across various teams (Sustainability, Corporate, Operators , and HSE teams)

ISCC EU, ISCC PLUS, RedCertEU, TÜV Rheinland, Bureau Veritas

Existing digital infrastructure

Optimising existing infrastructure to improve automation

Operators

3 Emissions data

7 Corporate strategy

PCFs are data intensive in nature, meaning they are often resource intensive

Ensuring PCF is used to guide the wider corporate strategy through effective decision - making

4 Modelling software

A variety of ' off the shelf ' licensed software solutions

Sustainability

HSE

Figure 2 Why PCF is so complex

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

streams deliver more value than extensive but inconsistent datasets.  PCF is often constrained when ownership is siloed within any single function : Cross- functional ownership is essential. Sustainability teams alone cannot drive the commercial impact PCF can deliver.  Manual processes prevent iteration : Manual workflows introduce delays and reduce flexibility. If updating a parameter requires significant effort, scenario analysis and optimisation become impractical.  Auditability and agility are often in tension : Successful systems reconcile auditability with agility, designing for both rather than trading one off against the other.  Systems must be designed to adapt, not just to comply : Methodological rigour matters, but the ability to adapt outputs to evolving regulatory and commercial requirements increasingly separates capable systems from fragile ones. These lessons highlight that the core challenge is organisational and digital. Why PCF is becoming business-critical Multiple forces are driving the transformation of PCF into business-critical infrastructure, including regulation, stakeholder pressure, and commercial dynamics. Across Europe and other regions, mechanisms such as emissions trading systems (ETS), carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAM), and digital product passports are embedding carbon footprints into compliance frameworks. This creates direct financial implications at the product level, meaning PCF is a requirement for calculating compliance costs, demonstrating eligibility for regulated markets, and meeting product-level disclosure obligations. Organisations that cannot produce consistent, auditable PCF data risk financial penalties or restricted market access. More broadly, carbon is beginning to influence core commercial decisions around cost, margin, and competitiveness. As regulatory systems tighten, carbon adds a parallel cost layer alongside energy, feedstock, capital expenditure, and labour. Many decarbonisation actions, such as electrification or efficiency improvements, also reduce operating costs, increasingly aligning carbon optimisation with

cost optimisation. In some cases, lower-carbon products may achieve price premiums or preferred supplier status, although this remains highly dependent on market context. For certain products, the most immediate impact is on market access. Emerging requirements such as digital product passports and sector-specific thresholds are creating minimum carbon performance standards for participation. In this context, transparent and auditable PCF data becomes a prerequisite rather than a differentiator. More granular carbon data is needed to support investment decisions, with digital PCF systems enabling faster comparison of pathways and assessment of future regulatory exposure. These trends mean carbon is increasingly being managed alongside cost, volume, and quality as a core commercial variable. One of the clearest illustrations of this shift can be seen in emerging fuel markets. A practical example: SAF and regulatory credit markets The sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) market clearly illustrates how PCF plays a critical role in accessing compliance-driven value mechanisms. Under emerging mandates, such as the UK SAF mandate, suppliers must incorporate increasing volumes of SAF into their fuel mix, with compliance demonstrated through carbon intensity metrics and supported by mechanisms such as renewable transport fuel certificates (RTFCs) or similar credit systems. Within these frameworks, carbon intensity becomes a commercial driver. The emissions profile of a fuel determines the number of credits it can generate, and those credits can be traded, creating a direct link between emissions reduction and economic return. Producers with lower-carbon SAF pathways are potentially able to generate greater value per unit of product, establishing a clear and measurable relationship between PCF and revenue. For producers, this creates a set of practical implications. Accurate and auditable PCF data is essential to monetise credits effectively, while even relatively small differences in carbon intensity can materially affect sales revenues. The ability to run scenarios and compare pathways becomes critical, as organisations seek to

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

optimise feedstocks, processing routes, and certification strategies to maximise value. Without digital PCF systems, capturing this value becomes labour-intensive and time-consuming. Static, manual calculations are insufficient in the context of dynamic credit markets and evolving regulatory frameworks, where both precision and speed are required. In this environment, digital PCF capability

Data validation

Calculation rules

PCF calculation & analytics engine

Scenario modelling

Reporting

Cloud layer

Data lake

Integration services

Production information systems

Environmental & sustainability systems

Laboratory information systems

Enterprise IT systems

Maintenance & asset systems

Level 4

IT system OT system Level 3

DMZ

OT Operations management layer (System management, Network management, OT services)

System interface nodes

Level 2

DCS/SCADA systems

Field & control devices

Level 0-1

Figure 3 What ‘good’ digital PCF looks like (architecture)

is a prerequisite for participating competitively in emerging low-carbon markets. What good digital PCF architecture looks like Organisations that successfully transition PCF into decision-making infrastructure tend to converge around three core capabilities (see Figure 3 ):  Automated, governed data pipelines : A unified data foundation that integrates and automates carbon-relevant data flows across systems, with embedded validation and traceability.  Centralised PCF calculation engine : A scalable calculation layer that replaces fragmented models, ensures consistency in methodology, and adapts to multiple regulatory requirements.  PCF-ready analytics and forecasting: A structured platform for versioning, comparing, and forecasting PCFs, enabling scenario analysis and integration with operational decision- making tools. The objective is to embed carbon considerations directly into operational and commercial workflows. Building the business case from concept to implementation In a recent downstream implementation, a large operator faced a PCF process characterised by

numerous manual intervention points within a varied and complex organisational structure. These included data reconciliation, cross-system validation and spreadsheet-based calculations, often involving repeated data transfers between systems. Such processes limit scalability and introduce risk, particularly in the context of increasing regulatory requirements. In practice, organisations typically converge on two broad digitalisation pathways, reflecting different levels of ambition and complexity. Pathway A: Automated spreadsheet-based workflows This approach focuses on automating existing workflows without fundamentally changing calculation methods. Data pipelines are established to feed consistent inputs into centralised spreadsheet models, enabling reduced manual effort, improved data consistency, and basic scenario analysis. It represents a lower-cost, lower-risk entry point with minimal disruption to existing processes. Pathway B: Full LCA platform integration This approach replaces spreadsheet-based calculations with a centralised LCA engine built around specialised or proprietary software. Key characteristics include governed calculation environments, standardised methodologies

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

more mature systems may experience lower incremental gains but faster implementation timelines. Operational savings alone do not capture the full value. In many cases, revenue impacts dominate the business case. For example, a 1%

Digital PCF

Cost savings Operational eciency

Revenue upside Commercial advantage

Risk reduction Regulatory resilience

Labour reduction

Eciency gains

Product premium

Market share

Compliance cost

Audit readiness

Figure 4 Business case structure (value drivers)

across assets, enhanced auditability, and traceability and advanced scenario modelling capability. While more complex and resource- intensive, this pathway provides greater scalability and regulatory readiness. The critical choice is how far to digitalise and at what pace. Cost, savings, and payback Quantifying the business case is essential for investment decisions. Typical findings from pilot studies include: • Pilot implementation costs in the range of $200,000 to $500,000. • Annual operational savings of approximately $70,000 to $230,000. • Payback periods of typically between three and five years. These values can vary significantly depending on several factors (see Figure 4 ), including the maturity of the existing PCF process, the size and complexity of the asset base, the degree of data fragmentation, energy opportunities with corporate emissions, energy performance reporting platforms, and the level of digital infrastructure already in place. Organisations with highly manual, fragmented processes often see greater relative benefits, while those with

product price premium, enabled by verified low- carbon credentials, can generate multi-million- dollar annual revenue increases, depending on production scale, and improved transparency can support market share gains in regulated or premium markets. This shifts the business case from cost reduction to value creation. Role of pilots Successful organisations typically adopt a phased approach to implementing digital PCF. Rather than attempting large-scale transformation from the outset, they begin with a focused pilot, often a single product or asset, where the value is clearest. From there, the emphasis is on automating the most reliable data streams and building confidence in both the technical solution and the underlying assumptions. As capability develops and value is demonstrated, the approach can then be scaled progressively across the wider portfolio. This pragmatic pathway avoids significant upfront investment while proving value early and building internal momentum (see Figure 5 ). Implementation is not without challenges. Integration efforts frequently expose data gaps previously hidden within siloed systems, and legacy infrastructure without modern

application programming interfaces (APIs) can limit automation. Organisations must also manage the human dimension with new processes requiring shifts in roles, responsibilities, and ways of working. Recognising these risks early is essential to designing pathways that are robust and scalable.

Step 1: Align on decisions Dene the decisions PCF must enable (commercial,

Step 2: Build data foundations Identify and automate the highest condence data streams

Step 3: Establish calculation engine Deploy a governed scalable PCF engine aligned to standards

Step 4: Integrate into workows Embeded PCF into operational and commercial tools

Step 5: Scale & automate Expand across assets, products ,

and future forecasting

operational, compliance)

Outcome: A digital PCF system that is fast, trusted , auditable , and embedded in real decision-making

Figure 5 Implementation pathway (how to start)

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Business insight through PCF Once established, digital PCF systems begin to extend their use beyond reporting into broader business analytics. Real-time carbon data can support operational decision-making, enabling optimisation of feedstocks, energy consumption, production scheduling, and logistics. Scenario modelling allows organisations to assess carbon exposure under different regulatory or market conditions, strengthening forecasting and risk management. PCFs can also provide a quantitative foundation for decarbonisation roadmaps, helping to prioritise investments and track progress over time. The process of building PCF capability often drives wider improvements in data quality, system integration, and automation across the organisation. In doing so,

the business rather than imposed in isolation, and that progress depends on starting small, demonstrating value, and scaling pragmatically. The value of PCF extends well beyond compliance, supporting revenue generation, market positioning, and strategic resilience. Organisations that invest in the digital systems and the structural alignment required to support this shift will be better positioned to manage regulatory risk, protect margin, and compete in increasingly carbon- constrained markets.

Blair Fraser blair.fraser@woodgroup.com

PCF becomes not just a standalone capability but a catalyst for broader digital transformation. From compliance to competitive advantage

WHERE GLOBAL ENERGY SYSTEMS ARE STRENGTHENED.

PCF is undergoing a structural shift in its role within industrial organisations. What

began as a fringe exercise of corporate sustainability interest, evolving through a compliance-driven reporting requirement, is now rapidly becoming a valuable tool for business decision- making when combined with advanced digital analytics. Organisations that navigate this transition successfully tend to focus less on achieving precision and more on ensuring speed, trust, and repeatability. They recognise that digital solutions must be co-designed with

Energy security is global security.

ADIPEC in numbers:

239,000+ Exhibition attendees 16,500+ Conference delegates

2,250+ Exhibiting companies 1,800+ Conference speakers

As rising demand meets geopolitical and structural complexity, energy systems are being tested in real time. ADIPEC 2026 convenes the global energy industry to respond – strengthening resilience, securing supply and advancing the systems needed to support long-term stability and growth.

JOIN THE GLOBAL ENERGY COMMUNITY

Supported by

Partners

Ce fichier est un document d’exécution créé sur Illustrator version CS6.

TOTAL TOT_21_00008_TotalEnergies_Logo_CMYK JFB Date : 26/05/2021

30-34 Rue du Chemin Vert 75011 Paris +33 (0)1 85 56 97 00 www.carrenoir.com

TONS RECOMMANDÉS

TECHNIQUE

Pantone Medium Blue C

CYAN

MAGENTA YELLOW

Platinum sponsors

8385C 2756C

RGB:20/40/160 CMYK:100/80/0/0

ARAB DEVELOPMENT

Technical Conference organised by

ADIPEC brought to you by

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

MAKING AMMONIA WORK FOR CLEANER ENERGY

End-to-End Ammonia Solutions

We’re helping make ammonia a practical energy solution through ongoing research and development. From initial theory and design through modeling, manufacturing, and operation, we help ensure that facilities using ammonia as a fuel deliver on the promise of cleaner emissions. Flares in this application require a specialized design approach and technology that meets the specific challenge of burning ammonia within the waste stream. Trust the world leader in flaring systems for tomorrow’s ammonia technology, today. Zeeco: Ingenuity and Curiosity Drive Innovation

SALES@ZEECO.COM +1 918.258.8551

FIND OUT MORE

ZEECO.COM/MARKETS

Can biomethane scale?

Biomethane and bio-CNG are increasingly recognised not only as low-carbon fuels but also as strategic assets for energy security

Vahide Nuran Mutlu and Aysel Zahidova SOCAR Türkiye Research & Development and Innovation Inc.

L iquefied natural gas (LNG) serves as a vital, cleaner alternative to coal that has shaped global power systems over the past two decades. It has supported industrial development, enabled fuel switching in power generation, and improved energy access in both advanced and emerging economies. Its global tradability allows resource-scarce nations to bypass rigid pipeline imports and diversify their energy portfolios. For many economies, LNG has become an essential pillar of energy security and industrial competitiveness. However, recent geopolitical events have revealed a fundamental vulnerability embedded within LNG-dependent systems: exposure to external disruptions. The war between Russia and Ukraine instantly destabilised global fuel markets, triggering massive price spikes and forcing EU nations to rapidly replace Russian pipeline gas with seaborne LNG. This sudden pivot sparked aggressive global competition for available fuel cargoes, leaving import-dependent nations highly exposed to severe price swings and local infrastructure bottlenecks. Beyond regional conflicts, growing instability surrounding strategic maritime chokepoints has further highlighted the fragility of centralised LNG supply chains. A substantial share of global LNG exports passes through the Strait of Hormuz, making global gas markets highly sensitive to geopolitical tensions. Recent concerns over maritime security in the Gulf and disruptions in the Red Sea shipping corridor have reinforced the reality that events thousands of kilometres away can rapidly affect domestic energy affordability, industrial continuity, and supply reliability.

The implications of this vulnerability extend far beyond short-term market volatility. A prolonged disruption to LNG exports from a major supplier such as Qatar would immediately reverberate across global energy markets. Major importing economies in Asia, including China, India, Japan and South Korea, remain heavily exposed to Gulf LNG routes. At the same time, Europe’s post-2022 energy diversification strategy has simultaneously increased dependence on seaborne gas imports. Such scenarios have intensified concerns regarding the resilience of globally concentrated energy systems. “ The focus is shifting from simply reducing emissions to building energy systems that are geographically diversified, less vulnerable to geopolitical shocks and more resilient to supply disruptions ” Consequently, the energy transition narrative is evolving. Decarbonisation remains a primary objective, yet policymakers are increasingly balancing climate ambitions with two equally pressing priorities: energy security and economic resilience. The focus is shifting from simply reducing emissions to building energy systems that are geographically diversified, less vulnerable to geopolitical shocks and more resilient to supply disruptions. In this context, regionally produced renewable gases such as biomethane and bio-CNG (bio-compressed natural gas) are attracting growing attention. Unlike conventional LNG, biomethane can be produced domestically from locally available

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

feedstocks, including agricultural residues, livestock manure, municipal organic waste, and wastewater sludge. This offers a unique opportunity to simultaneously reduce greenhouse gas emissions, strengthen domestic energy production, improve waste management, and reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels. As countries seek practical, scalable solutions to complement existing infrastructure, biomethane is increasingly being recognised not only as a decarbonisation fuel but also as a strategic energy security asset. Biomethane and Bio-CNG Biomethane and bio-CNG represent critical upgraded forms of biogas within the renewable gaseous fuel ecosystem, enabling the integration of organic waste-derived energy into existing natural gas infrastructures. Biogas is primarily composed of methane (CH₄: 50- 65%), carbon dioxide (CO₂: 35-50%), and trace components including hydrogen sulphide (H₂S), water vapour, and siloxanes. Due to its relatively low methane concentration and impurities, raw biogas is typically used on-site for heat and power generation. “ Biomethane and bio-CNG represent critical upgraded forms of biogas within the renewable gaseous fuel ecosystem, enabling the integration of organic waste-derived energy into existing natural gas infrastructures ” Biomethane, often referred to as renewable natural gas (RNG), contains 95-99% methane, making it chemically and functionally equivalent to fossil natural gas. This high-purity gas can be injected into existing natural gas grids or liquefied and compressed. Bio-CNG is biomethane that is compressed to high pressure (typically 200-250 bar) for use as a transport fuel. It serves as a direct substitute for conventional CNG in internal combustion engines, particularly in heavy-duty transport fleets. In terms of end-use sectors, biogas is mainly utilised in distributed combined heat and power (CHP) systems, industrial heat applications, and rural electrification. Biomethane extends

usage into residential and industrial gas networks, power generation, and grid balancing services. Bio-CNG is primarily deployed in the transportation sector, including buses, trucks, and municipal vehicle fleets, offering a low- carbon alternative to diesel and gasoline. Biomethane and bio-CNG are fully compatible with conventional natural gas or CNG, respectively, and are accepted as drop-in fuels. They utilise identical infrastructure, including pipelines, storage systems, and compression stations, while offering significantly lower lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. This compatibility positions renewable gases as a strategic decarbonisation lever within existing gas-based energy systems, supporting gradual transition pathways without requiring large- scale infrastructure replacement. Biomethane production technologies Biomethane production is mainly based on the conversion of organic residues into methane- rich gas through biological or thermochemical pathways (see Figure 1 ). The most established route is anaerobic digestion, which can process a broad range of wet biomass streams, including agricultural residues, animal manure, municipal organic waste, food waste, and wastewater sludge. Agricultural residues, such as straw, crop stalks, and agro-industrial byproducts, represent abundant non-food resources. However, their lignocellulosic structure may limit hydrolysis and often requires pretreatment. Animal manure is a conventional and widely available feedstock that supports stable digestion due to its moisture content and microbial activity. Municipal organic waste and food waste generally provide high methane potential because of their readily biodegradable organic fraction, while wastewater sludge is commonly treated in existing municipal infrastructure and can be co-digested with other organic wastes to improve energy recovery ( Neri, et al., 2023) (Alengebawy, et al., 2024) . Anaerobic digestion is a multi-stage microbial process occurring in the absence of oxygen. Complex organic matter is first hydrolysed into soluble compounds, then converted through acidogenesis and acetogenesis into volatile fatty acids, hydrogen, and acetate. In the final

www.decarbonisationtechnology.com

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68