Please invest in Our Daily Planet today, by making a one time or monthly contribution.
We do not charge our readers a subscription fee for our content. We want to continue to grow our readership, particularly among millennials and public servants. Voluntary contributions from readers will help us employ interns and freelance journalists, expand our content, and reach a larger audience.
Almost every job in Underwood, North Dakota is tied to the Coal Creek Station power plant, which was slated to shut down next year — until a company stepped in to buy the plant with promises to set it up with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. The process collects carbon emissions from coal or gas power plants, then pumps them in a liquified form for storage underground.
The idea of carbon capture has captivated heads of state and business leaders, and earlier this year Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm announced $24 million for developing the technology.
In North Dakota, Governor Doug Burgum claimed that with carbon capture, the state can expand fossil fuel jobs while still being carbon neutral by the end of the decade.
Why This Matters: The promise of continuing to burn coal without emissions has been on the horizon for decades, but it remains very expensive and thus far has not been successful on a large scale. In North Dakota, it would mean investing a sizeable amount of taxpayer money into holding onto coal-powered energy instead of exploring alternatives. The idea is appealing because it sidesteps engaging with a bigger energy transformation, but “there are an almost endless list of lower-cost ways to get that much energy value with no carbon,” energy consultant Karl Rábago told Inside Climate News.
Climate activists call for end of carbon capture climate policy: A vote is expected this week on the sweeping infrastructure bill, which currently includes billions in carbon capture funding. In the leadup to the vote, a coalition of more than 500 environmental and community groups sent an open letter to President Biden and Democratic Congressional leaders calling the technology “a dangerous distraction.”
“Carbon capture is not a climate solution,” the letter reads, “To the contrary, investing in carbon capture delays the needed transition away from fossil fuels and other combustible energy sources, and poses significant new environmental, health, and safety risks, particularly to Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities already overburdened by industrial pollution, dispossession, and the impacts of climate change.”
Transporting and storing carbon dioxide means building a new network of pipes underground, and communities where the technology is being proposed are already pollution-burdened.
On The Flip Side: Proponents of the technology have argued that it’s useful not only for fossil fuel-powered plants but for heavy industries like steel that don’t currently have cleaner alternatives but are needed for a transition to a green economy. It’s one of the few climate policies with bipartisan support—and the support of fossil fuel companies themselves.
Research to bring CCS technology to real-world applications is moving quickly, including solutions like storing CO2 in cement. Advocates of CCS also hope that this technology can help create jobs.
Researchers recently conducted an analysis of how trying to meet the Paris Agreement targets would affect energy jobs in 50 countries. They found that action to reach the targets would increase net jobs by about 8 million by 2050, primarily due to gains in the solar and wind industries. Why This Matters: An estimated 18 […]
After years of devastating fire seasons, California utility Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) announced that it aims to move about 10,000 miles of power lines underground to avoid accidental sparks. Why This Matters: Wildfires have continued to become increasingly catastrophic as a result of climate change. Last year’s wildfire season broke records— NIFC reported that […]
by Natasha Lasky, ODP Staff Writer For years there’s been a false narrative perpetuated by special interest groups that electric vehicles actually produce more greenhouse gases than the average internal combustion vehicle. However, a new study shows that this is not true — over the entirety of its life cycle, an EV will release fewer […]
Our Daily Planet is your daily dose of the stories shaping our world and the ways that you can take action. From the climate crisis to the protection of biodiversity, if these issues matter to you then please subscribe & stay informed!
Your privacy is Important! We promise never to use your email address to send you spam or advertisements.