BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
THE CARBON QUANDARY
sudden clouds of asphyxiating gas,
but it could, the researchers note,
make all the time and expense of
CCS ultimately not worth it.
As might be expected, that
study was quickly critiqued by
a number of other researchers,
who suggested its speculation
wandered too far. Summarizing
the criticisms, George Peridas, an
engineer with the climate group
at the Natural Resources Defense
Council — one of a handful of
large environmental groups that
has fully endorsed the need for
HUFFINGTON
09.15.13
CCS development and deployment — notes that selecting storage sites with low earthquake risk
should and would be par for the
course. “Jumping to the conclusion that a small induced earthquake would result in surface
leakage is wrong,” Peridas wrote
on his NRDC blog last summer.
“That’s not to say that it cannot
happen, but the problem with the
authors’ assertion is that they
then postulate that not enough
sites for sequestration can be
found that avoid this scenario to
meaningfully deploy CCS at scale.
Yet myriad hurdles remain.
How to ensure that the carbon
U.S.
Secretary
of Energy
Ernest Moniz
stated clearly
that CCS —
both for coal
and natural
gas plants —
is a national
imperative
if the
president’s
goal of
cutting
national
carbon
emissions by
80 percent
over the next
40 years is to
be met.