Inside the Grassroots Revolt Against Carbon Capture Pipelines

www.desmog.com

Inside the Grassroots Revolt Against Carbon Capture Pipelines

www.desmog.com

solo@slrpnk.netM to

CO2 capture technologies@slrpnk.net · 16 hours ago

Seemingly unlikely alliances are springing up in Canada and the U.S. to prevent rural communities from becoming a ‘toxic CO2 dumping ground’.

The oil company agents were scouting routes for a new pipeline. But this proposed piece of infrastructure would be carrying a different product from what Shapka’s community was used to—carbon dioxide.

Shapka’s elderly neighbour had “questions about whether he should sign the easement for a [CO2] pipeline,” Shapka told DeSmog in an interview. “There had been no talk of it in the community, nothing in the local papers, nothing in the coffee shops.”

Soon residents were learning about a 2020 carbon pipeline explosion in Satartia, Mississippi, which led to more than 45 people being hospitalized as leaking CO2 made its way through the rural community. The prospect of another major disaster quickly mobilized the residents of St. Paul county. […]

You must log in or register to comment.

Chat

CO2 capture technologies@slrpnk.net

cdr@slrpnk.net

Create a post

You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !cdr@slrpnk.net

This community is evolving from being just about CDR to include all CO₂ capture, removal, utilization, sequestration & storage technologies. So let’s discuss everything related to:

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)
Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS)
Direct Air Capture (DAC) / Direct Air Carbon Capture and Sequestration (DACCS)
Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) / Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR)
etc

While many climate scientists have reservations about CCS, the crisis has now grown so acute that almost all the net zero pathways modeled by the U.N.-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) envision huge deployments of the technology by mid-century. Governments have also embraced the prospect that CCS could be a cost-effective means for reducing emissions without disrupting fossil fuel-based economies.[1]

Perhaps, it could be considered alarming that these technologies are often intertwined with fossil fuel companies. These corporations use them as an excuse not to phase out their production, while portraying themselves as part of the solution. (see: Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell, Chevron, TotalEnergies)

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), according to the definition by the IPCC, is a process that captures CO₂ from a point-source.

The terms CCS and Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) are closely related and often used interchangeably. Both terms have been used predominantly to refer to Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) a process in which captured CO₂ is injected into partially depleted oil reservoirs in order to extract more oil.

Some sources use the term CCS, CCU, or CCUS more broadly, encompassing methods such as Direct Air Capture (DAC) or Direct Air Carbon Capture and Sequestration (DACCS), as well tree-planting which remove CO₂ from the air.

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) is defined by the IPCC as: “Anthropogenic activities removing CO₂ from the atmosphere and durably storing it in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products.”

Synonyms for CDR include Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR), negative emissions technology, and carbon removal. The term geoengineering (or climate engineering) is sometimes used in the scientific literature for CDR. The terms geoengineering or climate engineering are no longer used in IPCC reports.

Visibility: Public

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

8 users / day
8 users / week
21 users / month
46 users / 6 months
2 local subscribers
295 subscribers
65 Posts
24 Comments
Modlog