*_mei ni_*

According to Stephens (2006), carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies are feasible in dealing with the rising concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases. In her article, she demonstrates the viability of CCS technologies through various ongoing projects that are being carried out in countries such as the US, Canada and Norway. The discussion also covered the risks and uncertainties revolving around the issues of technologies, geological origins, leakages and public acceptance. However, she feels that the lack of regulatory mechanisms impedes the technologies from advancing further. In my opinion, technical, safety and monetary insecurities do complicate the feasibility of CCS technologies but they are still the most probable mitigation strategies towards a major reduction in carbon dioxide emissions for developed countries.

With a sudden spike in the recent oil and gas prices, the world starts to seek alternative energy sources, including coal. However, the burning of coal generates a large amount of carbon dioxide that is way above environmental limits. Thus, CCS technologies along with other climate change actions, are recognized as steps towards a cleaner environment.

Basically, CCS technologies incorporate three major components, whereby carbon is first captured by separating carbon dioxide from industrial sources, then transported to a storage site and finally, the storage location is monitored to ensure its suitability for storage.

 As discussed by Stephens (2006), the various carbon dioxide capture technologies all come in line under the objective of increasing the effectiveness in carbon dioxide absorption. However, these sophisticated capture techniques are quite costly. Moreover, Carl Bauer (2007, as cited in Bowling) who is the director of the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory commented that the research on these technologies has still not been demonstrated on a large scale. Yet, the strain of high costs does not deny the United States’ interest in CCS technologies which is evident from their recent investment of $1 billion in the FutureGen project to serve as climate-change mitigation. This demonstrates that developed countries are still keen on the CCS technologies as they feel that the costs are trifles compared to long term benefits, whereby the world is able to continue generating energy without worrying excessively over the greenhouse effect.

As for the transporting of carbon dioxide to storage locations, major pipelines and wells need to be built for effectiveness. This may pose challenges in terms of technology, safety and costs. However, according to Schiermeier (2006), the invaluable experiences in pipeline building as well as well-drilling have matured over the decades, and thus will only involve remarkably low running costs. Moreover, a plan for building a $1.5 billion pipeline has been initiated by both the federal and Alberta governments (Sheppard, 2008). The action taken by both governments clearly signifies the developed nations’ interests in CCS technologies.

The suitability of a storage site has been of utmost concern due to the risks involved in areas like leakages or sudden catastrophic releases of gases, and also the lack of research performed on the storage technology. According to Schiermeier (2006), a recent case of acidic brine eating into the surrounding rocks has been reported by scientists who were monitoring the Frio Brine Pilot Experiment in Texas. However, David Hawkins, the director of National Resources Defense Council’s Climate Center in Washington DC has argued on the uniqueness of the characteristics of each geological origin. More importantly, as long as the storage locations are carefully considered, safely operated as well as closely monitored under the safety limits, the above mentioned risks are still manageable.

In summary, there is no doubt that a degree of uncertainty in the CCS technology is present. Working demonstrations of the CCS technologies need to be deployed in developed countries, so as to act as learning models for developing nations. More importantly, the world needs to act on the deployment of the CCS technologies in order to reduce the impact on climatic change. Because if nothing is done about it now, the impact on the future would be unthinkable and we might end up paying a heavier price to save the Earth.

References

Bowling, B. (2007, May 10). Official: Storing CO2 a ways off. From The Pittsburg Tribune-Review. McClatchy-Tribune Regional News. 

Schiermeier, Q. (2006). Sequestration News Feature – Putting The Carbon Back. Nature Publishing Group.

Sheppard, R. (2007, March 9). In Depth: Kyoto and Beyond – Piping Carbon Back Into the Ground. Retrieved from September 21, 2008 from http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/kyoto/capturing-carbon.html

Stephens, J. C. (2006). Carbon capture and storage: Research is not enough. In The world energy book (pp. 15-18). London: World Energy Council.