Sieiia CIul NalionaI Canpaign Office: 4O8 C Sl. NL Washinglon, DC 2OOO2 (2O2) 547-1141 sieiiacIul.

oig/eneigy
Apri| 2008




The Basics of Carbon The Basics of Carbon The Basics of Carbon The Basics of Carbon Capture and 8equestration Capture and 8equestration Capture and 8equestration Capture and 8equestration

Carbon sequestration is the process o storing carbon underground to curb the accumulation o carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere. Although the earth naturally stores carbon in orests, oceans, and soil, these carbon sinks are unable to
accommodate the excessie and increasing amounts o carbon dioxide humans continue to emit. As a result, researchers hae
begun to explore ways o enhancing the absorption o natural carbon sinks, as well as ways to artiicially store carbon dioxide
underground.

Currently, 0 o America`s commercial electricity comes rom ossil uels
1
that when combusted generate 40 o our annual
carbon dioxide emissions.
2
Supporters o carbon sequestration iew carbon capture and storage technology as a solution to these
emissions. Although estimates o geologic storage capacity o carbon dioxide can range to upward o 3.6 trillion metric tons,
3

CCS technology is immature and currently unreliable. Many uncertainties persist that render this method insuicient or
addressing the urgent need to reduce global warming pollution in the next decade. Beore embracing carbon sequestration on a
national leel, research and deelopment must be conclusie that sequestration is reliably permanent and will not harm
communities and the enironment.

Geological Sequestration
Sequestering carbon in geologic ormations requires an additional 10-
40 o energy to power electricity plants with the necessary
technology.
4
1here are three primary options or geo-sequestration:

J) Depleted Oil and Gas Reservoirs - Oil companies already pump
approximately 33 million metric tons o carbon dioxide into reseroirs
eery year to recoer depleted supplies o oil and gas in a process
known as enhanced oil recoery.`
5
In this process, additional sales o
oil can oset the costly process o depositing the carbon dioxide into
the reseroirs.
6
A major drawback, howeer, is that the interaction
between carbon dioxide and minerals can yield unexpected results: this
interaction might improe the permanence o the storage, but it could
also increase the permeability o physical barriers and allow the carbon
dioxide to leak through the earth`s surace. In addition, the drilling and disturbance o these reseroirs can aect their ability to
store gases long-term.


2) Unmineable Coal Beds - Coal seams currently unsuitable or mining are another option or carbon sequestration due to
their pores and seams that are oten illed with methane, another global warming gas.
8
In theory, this methane can be displaced
and extracted by injecting carbon dioxide into the seams and subsequently sold to oset injection costs.
9
loweer, the easibility
depends on the permeability o the coal bed, and little is known about the leakage potential o these seams.
10


3) Saline Iormations - Saline ormations are deep layers o porous rock that are saturated with brine, or water that is saturated
with salt and other minerals. 1hese ormations hae the largest potential capacity worldwide and are more common than oil and
gas reseroirs. More research is needed to determine the iability o speciic ormations: at this point, little is known about the
potential leakage o CO2 back into the atmosphere or into drinking water, and no product can be sold to oset the costs o
storage.
11


In addition to underground storage o pressurized carbon dioxide, some scientists hae begun to experiment with a process
known as mineral sequestration or mineral carbonation. Mineral sequestration inoles trapping carbon by acilitating reactions
between carbon dioxide and minerals to ormulate carbonates ,a type o salt,, which can be stored permanently.
12
1his method
could potentially oer a substantially more stable and long term storage option than the geological alternaties because the solid
orm would not leak into the atmosphere. loweer, this process is costly,
13
requiring 60-180 more energy to acilitate the
technology as compared to a conentional power plant.
14
Mineral carbonation also requires extensie amounts o minerals, and
would lead to similar damages as those caused by large-scale surace mines, including land-clearing, habitat degradation, and
harmul impacts to air and water quality.
15



Explore, en]oy and protect the planet
Sieiia CIul NalionaI Canpaign Office: 4O8 C Sl. NL Washinglon, DC 2OOO2 (2O2) 547-1141 sieiiacIul.oig/eneigy
Apri| 2008
Lnvironmental and Health Consequences of Carbon Storage
1he risks associated with carbon capture and storage are both local and global in nature. During transport and ater storage,
there is a potential or a sudden and large release o CO2 into the air caused either by slow leakage or an abrupt leak rom a
ailure at the site.
16
Lither scenario could pose as a health hazard i it collects in large quantities. In addition to the potentially
disastrous consequences to global warming, eects on human health range rom immediate death resulting rom asphyxiation to
long-term eects rom prolonged exposure to high leels o CO2
1
Stored carbon dioxide can also contaminate drinking water,
kill subsoil plants and animals, and cause small seismic eents.
18
Detailed inormation about the ull potentials or risk may only
be known once the technology has been more widely deployed.

Sierra Club Position
\hile carbon sequestration is a potentially important tool or meeting our energy needs without worsening global warming, the
calculations or net reductions o carbon dioxide rom CCS must account or the additional energy requirements-and increased
carbon dioxide emissions- necessary to power CCS systems. Additionally, the retention capabilities o geologic ormations are
uncertain at best, and the U.S. currently lacks any regulation or monitoring system to track the eectieness o long-term storage.
Current scientiic studies hae only projected the permanence o these storage options on a timeline o up to 1,000 years - ater
which we hae no idea i the ground can contain the stored carbon.
19


I U.S. global warming policy depends on this technology to remoe huge quantities o greenhouse gas emissions rom the
atmosphere and the carbon dioxide leaks rom its storage sites, the net result could completely negate our eorts to curb global
warming. lurther, geologic sequestration does not reduce the signiicant enironmental impact that results rom current
destructie coal mining practices such as mountaintop remoal.

As a nation, we should not unwisely depend on geologic sequestration to sole all o our problems. Nor should we wait until
sequestration is commercially aailable and cost-eectie beore moing to make deep cuts in carbon emissions with reliable
tools like energy eiciency and renewable energy. Under almost any scenario, coal-ired electricity with captured and stored CO2
will be an expensie and energy-intensie proposition. As a nation, we should ocus our resources on seizing the cheapest,
cleanest, quickest, most reliable methods to displace carbon emissions while meeting our energy needs.

Iurther Reading on Carbon Sequestration:
Policy Implications: Report on the Policy Implications o Carbon Sequestration ,http:,,www.ipcc.ch,actiity,ccsspm.pd,
Methods: Analysis o the methods used in Carbon Sequestration by the ILA ,http:,,www.ieagreen.org.uk,putcback.pd,
In the News: News articles pertaining to carbon sequestration complied by Stanord Uniersity
,http:,,pangea.stanord.edu,~mhesse,NewsLinks.html,

1
Lnergy Inormation Administration, Net Generation by Lnergy Source by 1ype o Producer,` Llectric Power Annual, October 22, 200.
http:,,www.eia.doe.go,cnea,electricity,epa,epat1p1.html
2
US LPA, Drat Inentory o U.S. Greenhouse Gas Lmissions and Sinks: 1990-2006,` lebruary 2008. 1able LS-2.
http:,,www.epa.go,climatechange,emissions,usinentoryreport.html
3
Department o Lnergy, National Lnergy 1echnology Laboratory, Carbov eqve.tratiov .tta. of tbe |vitea tate. ava Cavaaa. Lstimate includes geologic
storage capacity in Canada as well as the United States.
4
IPCC Special Report: Carbov Dioiae Catvre ava torage. http:,,arch.rim.nl,en,int,ipcc,pages_media,SRCCS-
inal,SRCCS_SummaryorPolicymakers.pd page 4
5
International Lnergy Agency Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme. Detetea Oit ava Ca. ieta. for CO2 torage. http:,,www.ieagreen.org.uk,.pd
,Accessed 2,4,08,.
6
bia

National Lnergy 1echnology Laboratory. Carbov eqve.tratiov: .Q vforvatiov Portat.

http:,,www.netl.doe.go,technologies,carbon_seq,lAQs,concerns.html ,Accessed 2,4,08,
8
International LnergyAgency Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme. torivg CO2 iv |vvivabte Coat eav... http:,,www.ieagreen.org.uk,8.pd
,Accessed 2,4,08,.
9
bia
10
Department o Lnergy. ,April 200,. Ceotogic eqve.tratiov Re.earcb. http:,,www.ossil.energy.go,programs,sequestration,geologic,
11
Department o Lnergy. Ceotogic eqve.tratiov Re.earcb. http:,,www.ossil.energy.go,programs,sequestration,geologic, ,Accessed 2,4,08,.
12
National Lnergy 1echnology Laboratory. CO2 Miverat eqve.tratiov tvaie. iv |.
http:,,www.netl.doe.go,publications,proceedings,01,carbon_seq,6c1.pd ,Accessed 2,4,08,.
13
bia
14
IPCC Special Report: Carbov Dioiae Catvre ava torage. http:,,www.ipcc.ch,pd,special-reports,srccs,srccs_ summary orpolicymakers.pd page 4
15
Ibid page 14
16
IPCC Special Report: Carbov Dioiae Catvre ava torage. http:,,www.ipcc.ch,pd,special-reports,srccs,srccs_ summary orpolicymakers.pd
1
Gerard, Daid. vrirovvevtat ova. ava tbe Probtev of ovg1erv Carbov eqve.tratiov
http:,,www.epp.cmu.edu,csir,Content,Research,Carbon20Capture20and20Sequestration,Gerard20\ilson 20Bonding.doc
18
IPCC Special Report: Carbov Dioiae Catvre ava torage. http:,,www.ipcc.ch,pd,special-reports,srccs,srccs_ summary orpolicymakers.pd p. 14
19
IPCC Special Report: Carbov Dioiae Catvre ava torage. http:,,www.ipcc.ch,pd,special-reports,srccs,srccs_ summary orpolicymakers.pd p. 14
20
Photo courtesy o Intergoernmental Panel on Climate Change http:,,arch.rim.nl,en,int,ipcc,pages_media,SRCCS-
inal,graphics,jpg,large,ligure201S-0.jpg