Sequestration only is possible if the concentration of CO2 is high enough, like on the exhaust of a coal fired power station. So where is the extra energy coming from to drive the process? Not from renewables as there is insufficient to meet the needs of decommissioning. More fossils have to be burnt paid for by the tax payer, Sequestration is pretty much a smokescreen to.avoid transition from fossil fuels.
this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
43 points (97.8% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5194 readers
1199 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
But if CCS operations leak, they can pose significant risks to water resources. That’s because pressurized CO2 stored underground can escape or propel brine trapped in the saline reservoirs typically used for permanent storage. The leaks can lead to heavy metal contamination and potentially lower pH levels, all of which can make drinking water undrinkable.
Can someone explain this to me in a easy way?
As a layman I would be worried of large amounts of CO² suddenly leaking near where people live. But how does it make water undrinkable? I thought some people like their drinks with CO². And where do the heavy metals come from?
High enough CO2 levels will make the water more acidic and could cause pipes to leach metals into the water.
I think the concern is more about brine that have heavy metals in them. Carbonated water is safe to drink, even if not safe for fish.
The leaks can lead to heavy metal contamination and potentially lower pH levels, all of which can make drinking water undrinkable
Brine contamination, I know very little about, but if it stayed near bottom of lake, may not pose a fish or water source risk. Salt may dilute to rest of water, but heavy metals would not? Water becoming Perrier, or otherwise high co2 levels, may affect fish, if they don't move, but not a human drinking hazard.
What I do know about is CCS projects. The most successful CO2 capture project from a 100mw coal turbine cost $1B, and captured 65% of CO2. In Saskatchewan. These costs ($10/watt above the fossil plant) are comparable to power costs of on budget nuclear (not a cost/time effective climate solution). The CC process involves a giant building that replaces a chimney, and passes the flue through a liquid that will capture the CO2. Coal interests are avoiding all CCS projects because they are completely uneconomical. Other FF electricity use a similar process, though coal emits H2S (acid rain and smog problem) that needs to also be captured. Blue H2, has a problem of while the process gasses can be separated, the heat needed from the process is usually NG powered, and needs a chimney like electricity production.
A far cheaper way of reducing coal or other FF emissions by 65%, is to replace them with solar+4 hours batteries, and keep the FF plants as a backup peaker that will run far less than 35% of the year. Because land around a coal plant is extremely undesirable for any other purpose, it is often sufficient to produce the same energy as the coal plant from solar.
The heavy metals don't sit around in metal form; bacteria convert them into compounds like ethyl mercury, which don't stay put even if nominally insoluble.
And yes, pretty much anything else is cheaper than CCS; it's basically being run as a PR exercise rather than something which is a serious attempt at reducing emissions.