Carbon Sequestration: Can We Really Bury Our Emissions?

As climate change concerns mount, carbon capture and storage (CCS) has gained attention as a technology that could allow continued fossil fuel use while mitigating emissions. The concept is to capture CO2 from power plants and industrial sources, compress it, and inject it deep underground into geological formations. This approach promises to reduce atmospheric CO2 and buy time for energy transitions. Yet, the scale of global CO2 emissions—over 30 billion tonnes annually—makes this a daunting technical and logistical challenge.

Capturing and compressing CO2 consumes substantial energy, reducing power plant efficiency by up to 30%. This 'energy penalty' increases fuel use and costs, complicating economic feasibility. Storage sites must be carefully selected and monitored to prevent leaks that would undermine climate benefits. Public concerns about safety, induced seismicity, and environmental impacts remain significant barriers. Despite pilot projects demonstrating feasibility, commercial-scale CCS deployment is limited and expensive.

Claims of 'clean coal' relying on CCS are premature and overlook ongoing environmental impacts of coal mining and combustion. Natural carbon sinks like forests and oceans absorb some emissions but are insufficient alone to offset fossil fuel use. CCS should be viewed as one tool among many in a comprehensive climate strategy that includes renewables, efficiency, and behavioral changes. Relying solely on carbon sequestration risks delaying necessary energy transformations.

A clear-eyed understanding of CCS helps set realistic expectations and informs balanced climate policies.

References: 1 , 2