Promoted as green technology, the … experimental sequestration of … carbon dioxide (CO2) … is instead the same out-of-sight, out-of-mind way that problem wastes have been handled for years.

— Anne Vehre

Photo Courtesy Giles Clement

CCS technology is “a theoretical technology for reducing CO₂ emissions at point of production.” Despite being heavily marketed by the coal industry, commercial-scale CCS isn’t ready for implementation.

Furthermore, the costs of developing CCS technology are great, so a more realistic or prudent policy for the federal government to foster would include modernizing the electrical transmission grid in addition to promoting energy efficiency and green construction projects (for both new construction projects and for retrofitting existing buildings). Also, modernizing the rail system, applying a carbon tax to encourage greener choices, and funneling money away from Big Coal towards renewable energy development are wise choices over CCS.

In addition to unreasonable expense, communities aren’t welcoming proposed CCS projects. From www.eenews.net:

A partner in a planned test of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology in western Ohio has withdrawn from the $93 million project stalled by community opposition.

.       .       .

“Promoted as green technology, the Battelle proposed experimental sequestration of one million tons of carbon dioxide … is instead the same out-of-sight, out-of-mind way that problem wastes have been handled for years,” Anne Vehre, the group’s co-chairman wrote in a June editorial to the Daily Advocate in Darke County.

The Battelle project drew opposition from residents who feared the project would damage property values and could potentially cause seismic activity. The project was halted before seismic surveys could be conducted, but a 2000 report by Battelle found that sequestering carbon in populated areas “may involve seismic hazards if the injection facilities are not properly sited and operated.”

Apparently, China doesn’t consider CCS technology practical. Instead, energy conservation and renewable energy projects are being pushed. From Bloomberg:

China, the world’s biggest carbon- dioxide polluter, is balking at the cost and effectiveness of extracting greenhouse gases from hundreds of coal plants and storing them underground.

China can achieve larger emissions cuts instead by spending money improving the energy efficiency of buildings and vehicles and investing in alternative power sources such as wind and solar, said Su Wei, director-general of the climate-change unit at China’s National Development and Reform Commission.

“Carbon capture and storage, particularly for China, is not one of the priorities — the cost is an issue,” Su said in an Aug. 4 telephone interview from Beijing. “If we spent the same money for CCS on energy efficiency and the development of renewables, it would generate larger climate-change benefits.”

In 2008, coal burning in China added 366 million tons more to the world’s CO2 emissions than in 2007, almost two-thirds of the global increase in output of the gas from burning dirty fossil fuels, Bloomberg calculations from BP Plc data show. The U.S. and European nations tout CCS as vital to fight climate change while allowing coal to remain a part of their energy mix.

If CCS fails, then the public will suffer the consequences. From The Sydney Morning Herald:

You would be better off just burying the money, from an environmental point of view, because many doubt the CCS technology will work. The best proponents can say is, it has to. But if it doesn’t, the money is worse than wasted, because the spending will have exacerbated the climate problem by justifying construction of new coal-fired power stations that burn for another 30 to 40 years.

—
Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse my work or me and their image is protected under an attribution license.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::