Is CCS the Real Deal or Just Snake Oil? - Part I

There is a prevailing view that Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) will not work to solve the climate problem. The scientific community remains divided on this matter, with differing opinions and perspectives. This blog post aims to examine some of the concerns surrounding CCS and present associated facts for readers to consider. By presenting a balanced overview of the topic, readers are encouraged to form their own conclusions based on the available information and varying viewpoints within the scientific community. It is important to engage in critical thinking and consider the complexities and potential limitations of CCS as a climate mitigation strategy.

1. Carbon Capture Is an Expensive Failure

In the past two decades, several CCS projects have faced difficulties in gaining traction. However, it is important for critics to recognize that the lack of financial incentives was a significant hindrance for organizations aiming to capture and store CO2 underground. Initiatives such as 45Q credits have been introduced to encourage investments in this area. It is worth noting that electric car manufacturers have also received substantial support from taxpayers through grants aimed at promoting the growth of electric vehicle manufacturing. These companies greatly benefited from tax credits provided to consumers who purchased electric cars. One of the key tax credits in the U.S. is the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), which primarily benefits solar energy installations. The ITC allows eligible taxpayers to deduct a percentage of the qualified investment in solar energy systems from their federal income taxes. In recent years, the ITC has been instrumental in driving the growth of solar power generation across the country.

Another important tax credit is the Production Tax Credit (PTC), which primarily supports wind energy projects. The PTC provides a per-kilowatt-hour tax credit for electricity generated from qualified wind energy facilities. This credit has encouraged the expansion of wind power capacity and has contributed to the overall increase in renewable energy generation in the U.S.

Just as tax credits have been provided for the development of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power, CCS investment credits serve as a mechanism to encourage the deployment and advancement of carbon capture technologies. These credits recognize the importance of CCS in the overall portfolio of strategies needed to transition to a low-carbon economy.

It is important to avoid singling out investment credits for carbon capture and storage (CCS) and criticizing them unfairly. It is also essential to consider the broader perspective and recognize that CCS investment credits are part of a larger framework aimed at fostering innovation, reducing emissions, and creating a sustainable future.

2. Mother nature can balance itself – No external help is needed!

The carbon cycle is a natural process that involves the continuous recycling of carbon atoms, as they move from the atmosphere to living organisms on Earth and back into the atmosphere again. This cycle is illustrated in the accompanying graphic (taken from Carbon cycle | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (noaa.gov))

Carbon sinks, such as the ocean, soil, and forests, play a crucial role in absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. They are the largest carbon sinks in the world. Conversely, carbon sources, such as the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, and volcanic eruptions, release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. For millions of years, the carbon cycle has maintained atmospheric CO2 levels at or below 300 ppm, ensuring a natural balance.

However, due to human industrial activities and development, significant amounts of greenhouse gases, particularly CO2, are being emitted into the atmosphere. Historically, about 25 percent of carbon emissions from human sources have been absorbed by forests, grasslands, and farms, while approximately 30 percent has been absorbed by the ocean. Nonetheless, anthropogenic CO2 emissions currently amount to around 40 Giga tons per year, and only 55 percent of this is naturally removed through various processes annually. Consequently, the remaining 18 Giga tons of CO2 are accumulating in the atmosphere. This imbalance between emissions and removal processes has led to a continuous increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.

According to data from the NOAA Climate.gov website, the graph illustrates the significant rise in CO2 concentration over the years. NOAA reports that the current rate of increase is 100 times faster than previous natural events, such as ice ages. In the 1960s, the rate of atmospheric CO2 increase was 0.8 ppm per year. By the 1980s, it had doubled and remained steady at 1.5 ppm per year throughout the 1990s. In the 2000s, the rate increased to 2.0 ppm per year, and in the past decade, it accelerated further to 2.4 ppm per year. As of 2023, the measured CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is approximately 421 ppm.

It is important to note that we cannot expedite the natural processes of most carbon sinks that absorb CO2 from the air. According to Mr. Rothman, a geophysicist from MIT, it takes centuries for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to be absorbed into the oceans, and an additional 10,000 years or so for natural mechanisms to remove excess carbon from the oceans and restore equilibrium.

The progress of the human race has been driven by science and development, which have shaped our evolution over the centuries. While it is true that increased CO2 concentration is a result of human activity, it is imperative to implement solutions that assist nature in restoring its balance. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is one such strategy. However, it is important to recognize that CCS is not the sole solution to achieving the goal of Net Zero by 2050. The proposed plans to reach this target encompass various factors, including the increased utilization of renewable energy sources and the adoption of electric vehicles, among others. These multifaceted approaches aim to address the complex challenges of climate change and contribute to a sustainable future.

In the current scenario where alternative solutions are still in development, it becomes imperative to prevent ongoing emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere. Completely abstaining from the use of fossil fuels could potentially disrupt the energy supply. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) can serve as a viable middle ground to mitigate CO2 emissions until newer technologies are sufficiently developed to replace fossil fuels entirely. By implementing CCS, we can effectively limit the release of CO2 into the atmosphere while transitional solutions are being pursued. This approach allows us to strike a balance between immediate emission reduction needs and the ongoing development of sustainable energy alternatives. CCS provides a valuable opportunity to minimize the environmental impact of fossil fuel usage, providing a crucial bridge toward a future where cleaner, more sustainable energy sources become the norm.

3. Alternative energy sources are the only solution

The general perception even among strong proponents of climate change mitigation is that “Big Oil” wants to keep producing and hence they are promoting the CCS technology, which is not a sustainable, not commercially viable solution, or totally unnecessary. As discussed previously, there have been a lot of incentives provided by the US government to support the development of renewable energy sources. However, they couldn’t replace fossil fuels as an energy source yet. The following are some of the limitations associated with renewable energy sources.

Energy density: Oil has a high energy density, i.e, a large amount of energy per unit of volume or weight. Oil is highly efficient for various applications, such as transportation, where energy density is crucial. Many renewable energy sources, like wind and solar, have lower energy densities, which can limit their ability to directly replace oil in certain sectors.

Intermittency and variability: Unlike oil, renewable energy sources such as solar and wind are intermittent and variable in their power generation. They depend on weather conditions and time of day, which can make it challenging to ensure a consistent and reliable energy supply. The provided graphic, sourced from ERCOT's website (Grid and Market Conditions (ercot.com)), illustrates the contribution of different energy sources to the grid throughout a 24-hour period.

During the timeframe of 8 PM to 7 AM, solar power essentially makes up 0% of the energy supply. It is important to note that this observation is specific to a summer month, and during winter months, the availability of solar power would likely be even lower. Additionally, wind power fluctuates depending on the speed of the wind.

During periods when renewable energy sources are not actively generating power, natural gas, coal, and nuclear plants play a significant role in meeting the energy demands of Houston. These traditional energy sources step in to compensate for the fluctuations in renewable energy generation and ensure a stable supply of electricity.

Infrastructure and storage limitations:

The existing infrastructure, including transportation, storage, and distribution systems, has been predominantly designed for fossil fuel-based energy sources like oil. Transitioning to renewable energy would require significant investment and modifications to accommodate the unique requirements of these sources. Additionally, storage technologies for renewable energy, such as batteries, are still developing and have limitations in terms of capacity, cost, and scalability. The limited availability of transmission lines poses a significant challenge in efficiently delivering wind- and solar-generated electricity to the consumers who require it. Constructing transmission lines is a time-consuming process that typically takes eight to 10 years and necessitates substantial capital investment. Expanding energy capacity in any sector is a complex endeavor that goes beyond simply boosting production levels.

Cost competitiveness: While the costs of renewable energy technologies have been declining, they have not yet reached cost parity with fossil fuels in all regions and applications. Oil, being a well-established and globally traded commodity, has enjoyed economies of scale and relatively low costs. However, as technology advances and economies of scale are achieved in the renewable energy sector, cost competitiveness is improving.

Environmental & Other Issues with Lithium Mining:

The transition towards achieving net-zero emissions heavily relies on the use of lithium, which plays a crucial role in powering electric vehicles and storing energy from renewable sources like wind and solar. However, it is important to recognize that lithium mining poses significant environmental challenges. The extraction process demands substantial amounts of water, with approximately 2.2 million liters required to extract one ton of lithium. This extraction can result in detrimental consequences such as water pollution, depletion of water resources, generation of mineral waste, soil degradation, and potential health risks. Furthermore, there are social concerns associated with lithium mining, including the displacement of indigenous communities, disruption of livelihoods, conflicts over land and resources, as well as issues related to waste management, such as the handling of mineral waste, chemicals, and tailings. Additionally, the energy-intensive nature of lithium production contributes to its carbon footprint, further necessitating the adoption of sustainable practices to minimize environmental impact throughout the entire lifecycle of lithium-based technologies. It is crucial to address these challenges through responsible mining practices, stringent regulations, innovative technologies, and sustainable approaches that prioritize environmental preservation and respect for local communities.

Photographer Tom Hegen's aerial images, showcased in the link provided, shed light on the environmental impacts associated with lithium extraction, particularly in regions known as the "Lithium Triangle" in South America. These visuals highlight the consequences of resource extraction and consumption on the Earth's surface. The aerial pictures could be seen in the link (In pictures: South America's 'lithium fields' reveal the dark side of our electric future | Euronews).

While it is true that fossil fuels have contributed to increased CO2 emissions and global warming, we now recognize these issues and are actively seeking suitable solutions. The oil industry (the first US oil well in 1859) and carbon capture technologies (the early 1970s) have been in practice for over 50 years and scaling them up could potentially mitigate some of the challenges associated with their use. Compared to rapidly transitioning to new and relatively untested clean energy sources, expanding carbon capture and storage, along with carefully selecting storage sites and ensuring safe transportation, may present a more manageable solution that considers historical knowledge of their impact.

It is crucial to consider the full implications and potential environmental consequences when transitioning to new energy sources. Understanding the trade-offs and implementing appropriate measures to mitigate negative impacts will be key to pursuing a sustainable energy future.

Stay tuned for Part II