Brookings Institution on CCS: “The technology is unproven.”

Editor’s Note: The complete Brookings Institution report, “The Net Benefits of Low and No-Carbon Electricity Technologies,” by Charles R. Frank, Jr., is available here. Below is an excerpt discussing carbon capture and storage.

From: Brookings Institution

CCS is very costly according to EIA cost estimates—the capital cost of a coal CCS plant is 60 percent greater and its fuel efficiency more than 33 percent less than a conventional advanced pulverized coal plant, excluding the cost of sequestration. The technology is unproven. If the CO2 captured is close to an oil field being exploited using enhance oil recovery techniques, then captured carbon has a ready use. Without nearby enhanced oil recovery, the CO2 must be sequestered in very deep geologic formations with specific characteristics. There is no certainty that the CO2 from these formations will not eventually leak into the atmosphere. The transportation of the captured CO2 to such geologic formations requires new pipelines that are expensive and difficult to permit. As a practical matter, the implementation of the new proposed EPA regulations would result in very few new coal-fired electricity generation plants.

Read Complete Paper

Leave a Reply