Battle over carbon capture as tool to fight climate change

Read the Story

Show Top Comments

The strategy is to capture carbon dioxide where it is produced, such as in power plants that use fossil fuels and factories, so that the greenhouse gas is not released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide captured would then be transported, stored, or used in industrial processes.


I worry that the opposition to carbon capture is being based more on ideological principles (ie. we don’t want to see anything that allows O&G companies to continue to operate largely as normal), rather than on the science of it. The result is a ‘perfect is the enemy of good’ dilemma, where we insist on ideal solutions that we don’t have the technology for yet, or solutions that require massive societal change that will take decades to actually make. Green energy is the most important part of the equation, but electricity generation is still only 25% of our emissions, and we’ll need carbon capture for industrial emissions, and eventually carbon removal for other sectors like agriculture and transportation where emission reduction is likely to be a decades-long process. At the same time, particularly in the US I understand skepticism to any ground-injection processes, given the extent to which fracking is often poorly regulated and harmful. The most disasterous thing imaginable for carbon capture as a technology would be if early projects screw up the sequestration process and toxic chemicals leach into water supplies. Carbon capture projects should be going overboard right now on that front, but I have no idea what the regulatory environment is around these projects. I would have really appreciated the article providing some info on the regulations (or lack thereof) on these projects.


I’m actually pretty big on using carbon capture to make all sorts of products and fuel. Many startups have showed we can create everything from jet fuel(technically carbon neutral), biodegradable plastic, alcohol, concrete, carbon fibre, laundry detergent, perfume, hell even food. The costs of carbon capture is also falling. Now mind you we should of course focus on electrification/hydrogen etc and try to decarbonize as fully as possible, but we need to be carbon negative too and carbon capture goes a long way with that


Trees have been perfecting carbon capture far longer than humans have existed. Designate swathes of land to become old growth forest and plant diverse species


Would take forever to make an electric car battery if they do this lol.. since the rock haulers burn 1800 gallons a day to make these batteries. I’m sure it’ll get solved alongside the massive inflation and that of ww3 dilemmas.