Pauline Seales, SCCAN
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) sounds like a great idea to help reduce Climate Change. It may well be necessary, in the future, for some difficult to decarbonize industries such as cement and steel.
However, there are a number of problems.
1. Although “Carbon Capture” technology exists it is extremely inefficient and uses lots of energy. The storage part involves corrosion prone pipelines and it’s not clear yet which underground locations will be safe into the future, especially in earthquake prone California. Leakage from either pipelines or storage will be highly poisonous to local residents who will mostly be frontline communities.
(Ref 1)
2. Already multiple fossil fuel facilities in California have applied for IRA funds for CCS schemes at many central valley locations. (Ref 2)
3. One current use of the CO2 captured during the CCS process is enhanced oil recovery. Oil companies purchase the captured CO2 and inject it into depleted oil wells to extract more oil. This is not a way to reduce emissions and should certainly not be subsidized. (Ref 3)
These CCS plans seem like gross misuse of taxpayer funds with dangers to low-income people. Federal funds should be used to develop future efficient technologies but not to “greenwash” fossil fuel facilities producing fuels which will in any case cause emissions when used. The technology for underground storage is unproven and the pipes will be prone to corrosion with severe risk of leakage.
We need to find a way to slow down or stop these CCS plans.
References
1. Sartaria Disaster
2 Current EPA permit applications
3. Enhanced oil recovery
4. Overview including problems
5. Planned facility in Pittsburg, Ca
6. The Montezuma Project – Huge and dangerous
7. Bakersfield Project
8. Article by Food & Water Watch