President Biden, who campaigned on the promise to end drilling on public lands, has issued 2100 permits since taking office on January 20th. No doubt, the administration believes it has found a way around the rapid phasing out of petroleum production to maintain favor with the major emitters in the industry. That would be carbon capture and storage (CCS).
CCS involves the capture, transportation, and storage of carbon dioxide.
An aggressive program to accelerate CCS plays a key role in US compliance with the global goal to achive “net zero” by 2050, something the International Energy Agency says will be “virtually impossible” without carbon capture and storage.
Despite the excitement surrounding renewables, oil and gas will continue to play a role in the world economy for decades to come, with some organizations predicting the ability to achieve net-zero emissions going well beyond the 2050 target. The transport sector alone makes approximately 60 percent of all oil consumption and estimates show that the global demand will continue. Current energy transition initiatives will only have a marginal impact on oil demand, inconsistent with the desire to meet net-zero emission targets. financialpost.com/...
In a July report from the Biden administration’s Council on Environmental Quality, Biden’s team acknowledged that a carbon capture and storage (CCS) industry large enough to help meet the country’s goal of “net zero” emissions by 2050 could require 68,000 miles of new CO2 pipelines at a cost teetering at around $230 billion. The omnibus bill passed last December is geared to funnel a minimum of $6 billion into CCS. There are currently only 28 CCS plants operating around the world with a capacity to capture 0.1% of emissions annually.
Greenwashing Net Zero 2050
The rapidly growing suite of net zero pledges comes with a coherent theory of change. Firstly, if an entity is serious, it will follow its pledge by putting robust measures in place, beginning with immediate actions to cut emissions: not doing so will quickly open up the entity in question to accusations that it is not serious.
Secondly, pledging a target means that the entity can be held to account by voters, shareholders or customers. Thirdly, to demonstrate credibility it may have to apply for accreditation from an impartial mechanism such as the science-based targets initiative, which can validate whether its plan is realistic.
Fourthly, such accreditation mechanisms evolve over time to follow the science. For example, the UN-backed Race to Zero recently published upgraded criteria (in which we were involved); further annual strengthenings await. Net zero: despite the greenwash, it’s vital for tackling climate change
A new business model
Forbes reports that oil and gas companies are heavily invested in R&D to clean up “traditional energy … While environmentalists will continue to accuse the private sector of “greenwashing,” the industry is motivated by a financial incentive to make these projects move forward.”
Funneling industrial CO2 has the potential to be a lucrative business opportunity. Not only do the companies continue making money from their product, but they are also eligible for a federal tax credit of $35 for each ton of carbon they capture and bury underground.
.
… [a] proposed Houston CCS hub would allow the participating companies, including Chevron, Dow, ExxonMobil NRG Energy and others, to sequester 50 million metric tons of CO2 per year by 2030, with goals to sequester 100 million metric tons a year by 2040. That’s the equivalent of removing more than 20 million cars off the road and would represent a major step towards U.S. carbon neutrality. www.forbes.com/...
CCS technology has been in use for decades, but the pace of acceleration of pipelines as well as the employment of direct air capture (DAC) technologies are changing the ballgame.
In a Daily Item article Carbon capture and storage, a false solution, authors discuss the dangers and shortcomings of CCS and DAC: potential leaks, exorbitantly high operational costs, and investments in future development running between $100 and $500 billion per year.
Over several decades of experimentation, 68 projects have ended because they were prohibitively expensive. The technology is inefficient at carbon reduction, technically difficult, less economical than renewables, and risky over the long term.
Plants with this technology require extra energy to capture carbon emissions. At a gas-fired power plant, this can increase costs as much as 22%, requiring more fuel to operate and ultimately creating more environmental problems resulting from increased methane emissions.
Because carbon capture facilities run on natural gas they, like DAC, capture just a fragment of the emissions they were designed to eliminate. The best solution is to use renewables like wind or solar to produce electricity. Renewables eliminate pollution and health problems, and significantly reduce climate impact. www.dailyitem.com/...
Other climate related news
The BBC reports on progress made in the lead-up to Glasgow’s COP26.
- The US doubled its climate aid package to $11.4 billion by 2024 (deemed welcome but inadequate and still needs Congressional approval)
- China has agreed to cease building coal plants overseas (China is not addressing its use of coal as a primary power source at home and the country has increased its share of global coal-fired power generation to 53% in 2020.)
- The US, EU, and others pledging to cut methane emissions by 30% by 2030 (They are lowering them to 2020 rather than pre-industrial levels)
In other developments:
- Denmark and Costa Rica launching a Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance to phase out fossil fuels.
- Turkey committing to ratify the Paris Agreement and is said to be working on a carbon cutting plan.
- Brazil indicating it would not block negotiations in Glasgow on carbon markets, one of the stickiest of the outstanding issues from the Paris agreement.
- India is said to be moving towards submitting a new NDC before Glasgow.
Action
Formosa Plastics wants to build a massive 14-plant petrochemical complex on the banks of the Mississippi River in St. James, Louisiana.
This complex would have devastating and fatal consequences for people living in the area that's already known as Louisiana's "Cancer Alley."
The good news is that just last month the US Army Corps of Engineers announced it will require Formosa to undergo a thorough Environmental Impact Statement before building the complex. This is only happening because of years upon years of grassroots organizing by Black residents of St. James Parish, especially RISE St. James as led by Sharon Lavigne.
Join us at 8pm ET / 5pm PT on Wednesday, October 6th, for "Stop the Money Pipeline and Defund Formosa" to learn about what's next in the fight to stop Formosa from building this toxic petrochemical complex.
The writers in Climate Brief work to keep the Daily Kos community informed and engaged with breaking news about the climate crisis around the world while providing inspiring stories of environmental heroes, opportunities for direct engagement, and perspectives on the intersection of climate activism with spirituality, politics, and the arts.