Follow this blog:
RSS

Rising debate over carbon sequestration: should we bury CO2?

By | April 27, 2010, 7:54 AM PDT

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) could be one of few potentially viable answers to how we can keep burning fossil fuels without the carbon dioxide consequences.

CCS entails chemically separating CO2 from emissions and burying the greenhouse gas underground. The technology is very expensive, but many see it as a way to wean us off coal as we move toward more fully relying on renewable energies.

Researchers from the University of Houston and Texas A&M, however, recently published a study in the Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering questioning whether CSS would be possible on a large scale.

Quoted in The Guardian on Sunday, co-author Michael Economides:

I was a [practising] petroleum engineer for many years and soon realised that geologists did not understand flow and the laws of physics, against which you can’t argue.

Economides likens piping CO2 underground to putting a bicycle pump nozzle against a wall, saying the gas will eventually escape and find its way to the atmosphere. Geologists disagree. They cite years of research and test cases, such as the Sleipner Project in Norway that has been storing CO2 beneath the North Sea for a decade.

The paper is fueling scientific as well as political spats as governments begin to invest more heavily in CSS technology.

In October, American Electric’s Mountaineer Power Plant became the first to test CSS in the United States. The FutureGen project in Illinois, however, would be our country’s first plant to assess the technology at the commercial scale. Earlier this year, Britain proposed four CSS projects as a way to accommodate new coal-fire power plants.

Economides, who also admits he is somewhat of a climate change skeptic, views the projects as the fossil fuel industry’s scheme to not change their ways, calling CCS “the last refuge of the scoundrel.” With estimates that CSS would initially increase an energy plants costs by around a $1 billion, that would be a pricey scheme.

The British Geological Survey has placed the study under its own peer-review analysis and hopes to respond soon.

In a 2008 BBC interview, BGS’s Mike Stephenson describes in the video below how carbon sequestration is taking place under the North Sea.

Images: Mountaineer Power Plant/American Electric

[via Reuters]

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Melissa Mahony

About Melissa Mahony

Melissa Mahony was a contributing editor for SmartPlanet from 2010 to 2011.

Melissa Mahony

Melissa Mahony

Contributing Editor, Energy

Melissa Mahony has written for Scientific American Mind, Audubon Magazine, Plenty Magazine and LiveScience. Formerly, she was an editor at Wildlife Conservation magazine. She holds degrees from Boston College and New York University's Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting Program. She is based in New York.

Follow her on Twitter.

Melissa Mahony

Melissa Mahony

Melissa does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what she covers. She currently works for the Wildlife Conservation Society as an editor. Should Melissa cover a topic in which the WCS is involved, she will disclose this fact in her writing.

She writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
18
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
We can make carbon renewable from flue gas if we want to-it's a question of knowing how and we do know how. I really like your site Melissa. Thanks, Viva Cundliffe
Posted by gomaster
27th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
Are you kidding me? There is already a huge carbon capture and sequestration process in place - far larger than man could ever build. That process is taking place in plants - green vegetation.

CO2 is only a trace gas in the atmosphere, and far, far from any level dangerous to animal life (that includes us, BTW). As CO2 rises, plants "eat" more of it, and give off more O2 (the oxygen we breathe).

How gullible are we that we are being fooled by all this "green" mythology? Want to make earth greener? Emit more CO2. Didn't you all learn this in middle school earth science????
Posted by MSBassSinger
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
Thank you, MSBassSinger...
...for your voice of reason and sanity!
Posted by DittoHeadStL
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
If you don't believe MSBassSinger, how about planting more trees, gardens, and other plants? That wouldn't hurt and would be helpful in many ways. Let's not over-engineer everything. Life doesn't have to be that complicated.
Posted by gcomputeronet@...
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
We need to stop burning coal and move to renewable energies.
CCS is coal-industry science-fiction propaganda trying to get
people to delay the hard decision to stop using coal.
Posted by mitch.gart@...
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
This is just bad science. Burying a gas will only lead to an eventual disruption pouring astronomical amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. If we're lucky, we survive it. The best course is to curb production.
Posted by blueskip
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
has a one thought what co2 is, that's 2 parts oxygen to one part carbon, so you are going to lock away all that oxygen that we need to live. if left in the environment will be broken down and used in the carbon cycle ,it make no since , the problem is the balance between co2 and other gases .this will not help ,it would be much better to grow tress and store them that way you are not taking all that oxygen out the environment and it might actually work. and when we give up on this silly idea of global warming we could use the wood.
Posted by matchstick64
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
Blueskip's "eventual disruption":
i.e., the Earth lets out this huge fart.

No, wait... That's methane, not CO2. Methane (they say) is a much
worse greenhouse gas than CO2. Why don't they want to sequester
that?
Posted by DittoHeadStL
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
The problem with using vegetation to sequester carbon is that you have to have a net increase in the total plant biomass--and at a sufficient level to outweigh the introduction of carbon into the atmosphere from sources that have historically been locked within the earth's crust. With continuing deforestation that get's to be an extremely lopsided equation. Without a transition to generation technologies that do not produce high levels of CO2 it's an equation that can't be solved. But i agree with others comments that mechanical sequestration is a fools errand and an attempt to continue on with short sighted practices (burning coal) when the real answer is a simple one--rapidly deploy existing alternatives and develop new ones.
Posted by davidmsi
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
davidmsi,

You are missing something. The rate of use of CO2 by any given plant varies according to how much there is. The more they use, the larger they grow.

Deforestation is only a problem in countries that are not free. The more government owns the land, the more deforested it is.

Also, an acre of wild grasses makes more O2 and takes out more CO2 than an acre of so-called "old growth" forest.

Where land is in private hands, tress get re-planted (trees are a crop, after all) so there is no deforestation with private ownership.

Bottom line - CO2 is not and cannot become an issue that either endangers man or that man can do anything about. man's CO2 contribution is small beside nature's contribution, and even if we doubled or tripled man's CO2 production, it wouldn't cause one bit of harm.
Posted by MSBassSinger
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
If the CO2 is sequestered in some kinds of geologic formations it can chemically react with the rocks and become something other than CO2 like calcium carbonate.

The increase in atmospheric CO2 from 280 ppm in 1830 to 390 ppm today is nearly entirely due to human emissions. Natures sinks remove more CO2 from the atmosphere each year than natures sources of CO2.
Posted by riverat1
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
Its amazing to see the faith that people place in the notion that man can control the planet, for good or bad.
Posted by jwlthe4th
28th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
The Economides couple got this one wrong. Their assumptions have been rebutted by a wide array of scientific and research bodies as well as stakeholders from across the board. For more details read my blog here: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/gperidas/economides_x2_try_their_hand_a.html
Posted by gperidas
29th Apr 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
It may be of greater value to the debate to refer to authoritative responses by experts to the E&E report.

The response the British Geological Society referred to has been published by the Zero Emissions Platform - the EU's advisor on CCS - and can be found here:

http://www.zeroemissionsplatform.eu/library.html/publication/105-zep-carbon-storage-capacity-capture
Posted by edrosin
3rd May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
How much of a cut is High Priest Al getting?
Any sane, thinking person who's mind hasn't been captured by the rabid leftist "humans evil, planet good" religion knows that "global warming" or "man made climate change" is nothing more than a one-worlder tax to impoverish the workers, create crisis out of nothing, and generally make our lives worse. Only a complete moron would ignore the 75%-odd CO2 reservoir (the oceans) and it's release / lockup mechanism - the sun. You know - that enormous ball of flaming gas in the sky? Oh well, the whole thing is a moot point: once Nirbiru clobbers us even the rabid lefties will be scrambling for life rafts or underground bunkers - all thoughts of "save the planet" morphing to "save my ass"... :P
Posted by naibeeru
6th May 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
Won't pushing gases into the earth cause increased pressures and maybe cause earthquakes?
If the compressed gases are cold won't they cool the earth causing shrinkage causing earthquakes?
Botulism breeds in CO2 atmospheres - are we risking outbreaks?

Worried.
Posted by dlayton@...
7th Jul 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
Won't pushing gas under high pressure into the earth cause earthquakes?
Pushing compressed gas into the earth will also cool the crust are we risking earthquakes?
Also Botulism breeds in CO2 atmospheres are we going to have outbreaks of poisoning?
Posted by dlayton@...
7th Jul 2010
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Can we bury CO2 or what?
Plants release as much carbon dioxide when decomposing as they
collect in their lives. To decrease atmospheric co2 by
sequestration in forests and grasslands the total plant biomass
would need to increase dramatically not just in amount but in rate
of growth.

The ocean is also a great co2 sink. To the point that it's rapidly
bekcoming so acidic from the carbonic acid that all the shellfish
are dissolving. I'll gladly give up your profligate use of the air
conditioner to keep my clambakes. Is that shellfish of me?
Posted by caburlingame
27th Aug 2010
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!