Global value chains with centralized structures that leverage economies of scale can be particularly vulnerable to disruptions like natural hazards, since a disaster in one critical location can quickly reverberate throughout the entire value chain. In addition to physical risks, value chains are simultaneously implementing mitigation strategies to prepare for transition risks. The objective of this impact pathway is to lower barriers to robust climate risk and resilience planning by pooling the interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral expertise within the consortium.
We are developing an interactive geospatial mapping tool in response to MCSC member companies’ feedback on how to display information for effective decarbonization and resilience planning. The consensus was that having the information in a central location and standardized formats would be most useful.
The tool, which integrates datasets on carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) infrastructure, electric grid carbon intensity, natural hazard risk, vegetation, and transportation routes, prioritizes data to support the decisions MCSC member companies felt were inadequately supported by existing tools. An example of a stakeholder planning decision that the mapping tool supports is how the regional carbon intensity of the grid, the availability of compatible CCS infrastructure, and the projected natural hazard risk affect the cost and carbon reduction potential of CCS at each of their facilities.
Another decision the mapping tool helps support is viewing the geospatial distribution of natural hazard risk, social vulnerability, and transportation routes, to identify those regions where the risk from natural hazards is high and the affected community will likely find it difficult to evacuate and/or receive disaster recovery supplies.
This project will identify data gaps that, if bridged, would enable multiple sectors to chart out more comprehensive and robust paths forward. Specific case studies for which we are identifying data gaps include: strategic deployment of point source CCS, industrial site selection, and nature-based solution durability.
As one example, the mapping tool helped member companies articulate and discuss the consequences of the limited availability of existing and planned CO2 pipelines. Emitters may be considering whether to invest in onsite CO2 injection or whether to partner with a developer to construct a pipeline to a remote injection well. If there was a centralized location for emitters and developers to engage with each other and the relevant geospatial data, it would bridge a substantial data and communication gap that would unlock huge potential in the CCS marketplace.