Sunday, October 28, 2007
Underground CO2 storage
Why do I think this isn't going to work? Do I think the pollution caused by doing this will be worse than the original problem? Is it ethanol corn all over again? Can CO2 really stay in areas that have been extensively drilled? Wouldn't companies just inject, declare victory, and go home?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm certainly not an expert in carbon capture and storage (CCS), but the biggest problem with it is your first point...that it will take more energy to even do it.
In terms of whether CO2, if injected, would stay in the subsurface, the answer is yes, if done in the proper places. Oil companies inject CO2 into oil fields now to help "push" remaining oil towards producing wells and it works quite well.
Soon enough we'll find out whether it works - this is almost certainly going to happen in Australia. Like the article says, everyone's looking into it. There's a CO2 sequestration research centre at my uni.
Nobody is seriously considering baseload power other than coal at this stage. (Not a good thing, but just the way it is).
They usually get CO2 from tight virgin wells, and inject into old oil fields, full of holes.
From my power plant experience, I find it almost impossible that you could take effluent, purify it, cool it down and compress it. If it takes 90% of the energy to do this, then we invoke the Gods of Unintended Consequences!
Post a Comment