CCS involves siphoning off carbon dioxide (CO2) from its source, then rendering it liquid, moving it by underground pipeline, and finally injecting it deep underground in perpetuity. Pathways Alliance, representing six of Canada’s largest oil companies, proposes to pipe CO2 from up to 20 oil and gas facilities across 400 km to a geological reservoir under Alberta’s Lakeland district. This district is home to numerous communities (St. Paul, Cold Lake, Bonnyville), many farms, and eight First Nation reserves.
Despite the risks, the Alberta government and the Alberta Energy Regulator have denied the request for an environmental impact assessment made by the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and by environmental groups.
The greatest CO2 emission disaster occurred in Cameroon in 1986, as a result of a massive natural release from a volcanic lake; it killed about 1,700 people and thousands of animals.
In the USA alone, at least 75 other CO2 pipeline incidents have been reported since 2010.
However, the practice of injecting fluids deep underground is an established source of induced earthquakes which can cause structural and environmental damage. CO2 in aquifers may leach heavy metals into drinking water; this past May, a CCS project in Australia was nixed due to this risk.
Injected CO2 can and has seeped to the surface, either through natural faults, or through inadequately capped wells, common in storage areas. A high school in Wyoming had to be closed for most of the school year due to such a leak.
The Pathways Alliance CCS plan envisions its pipeline routes and storage on both private and public land. Storage sites would require close monitoring — forever. The technology for CCS storage and monitoring, especially for the long term, is immature, and research on risks to human health and safety is limited.
The industrial process of CCS requires energy, producing more emissions and thus contributes to climate change. Although CCS is presented as a technological solution to mitigate climate change, it risks becoming a distraction from the urgent need to reduce emissions at their source.
CCS gives permission to polluters to continue operating as usual, perpetuating reliance on fossil fuels rather than transitioning to cleaner alternatives and improving energy efficiency.
The big question I’ve never really seen answered anywhere is how does CCS stand up to geologic timeframes?
The Earth isn’t static; we already know of natural methane pockets that have opened up and leaked into the atmosphere because of geologic changes to the earth. What will prevent this from happening in 200, 500, 1000, or 10000 years? Isn’t CCS just ultimately punting the problem to a future generation, and pretending like we’ve done something to fix our problems?
Methane and CO2 are very different. Methane is inert, but CO2 can form carbonates. Once a carbonate is formed the CO2 is solid and will not bubble to the surface.
it risks becoming a distraction
Of course it’s a distraction. A deliberate one, designed to attract government subsidies while pretending to do some good. Which I suppose makes it an actual scam. The only thing motivating it is a refusal to accept the reality that we need to stop burning fossil fuels, like right now. Good thing the Government of Canada is there to warn us about the dangers of greenwashing, otherwise people might fall for it.
It will do SOME good, but 1/20th what’s needed, at 10x the cost.
We need to get of fossil fuels. Oil is too valuable to burn
