Carbon dioxide (CO2) pipelines are essential components of carbon capture and storage (CCS) systems which are proposed to reduce atmospheric emissions of man-made CO2, a greenhouse gas. This in spite of the fact that despite extensive support, of projects that seek to commercialize carbon capture and sequestration technology, 80 percent have ended in failure. Between 2005 and 2012, the Department of Energy spent $6.9 billion attempting to demonstrate the feasibility of CCS for coal, but little came of this investment, and between 2014 and 2016, less than 4 percent of the planned CCS capacity was deployed.
A recent review of relevant research shows that due to the large amount of energy required to power carbon capture and the life cycle of fossil fuels, carbon capture in this country has actually put more CO2 into the atmosphere than it has removed.
Nonetheless, plans are underway to build out an extensive CO2 pipeline network. Pipelines are needed to transport the CO2 from where it is captured (e.g., power plants) to underground geologic formations where it can be stored. Approximately 5,000 miles of pipeline already carry CO2 in the United States, primarily linking natural CO2 sources to aging oil fields where the CO2 is used to pump remaining oil reserves out of the ground. However, a much more expansive CO2 pipeline network could be needed for CCS to meet national goals for greenhouse gas reduction. One recent study suggests that such a network could total some 66,000 miles of pipeline by 2050, requiring some $170 billion in new capital investment. Because CO2 in high concentrations can be hazardous to human health, building out a national CO2 pipeline network raises safety issues which may affect nearby communities and may hinder CCS deployment.
In the event of a carbon pipeline rupture or leak, an explosive plume of CO2 gas can emerge, odorless and colorless, an asphyxiant that can suffocate all living beings, and prevent combustion vehicles like cars from starting to enable an escape to safety. At concentrations between 2-10%, CO2 can cause nausea, dizziness, headache, mental confusion, increased blood pressure and respiratory rate. Above 8%, nausea and vomiting appear. Above 10%, suffocation and death can occur within minutes. Contact with the cold gas can cause freezing of exposed tissue. Moisture in the air can lead to formation of carbonic acid that can irritate the eyes. CO2 is heavier than air and will accumulate in low lying areas.
Shortly after President Biden was elected, Princeton University published a report called Net Zero America, a plan to overhaul our energy infrastructure and theoretically help decarbonize our economy. The Net Zero America Report includes coverage of CO2 pipelines, which suggests that a system of pipelines totaling up to 68,972 miles (111,000 km) at a cost of $135 billion dollars by 2050 will be required, despite the fact that JPMorgan analyzed the Princeton figures and concluded that the buildout of CO2 pipeline and CCS infrastructure would only capture 15% of current US greenhouse gas emissions.
Landowners may have no say whether a carbon pipeline company can build through their property, despite valid concerns for their families’ safety and impacts to their livelihoods, either from a pipeline explosion, or damages to crops, topsoil lands and waterways during construction and decades of maintenance. With very little regulation on the books for these new carbon pipelines, the final negotiations and the most potentially impactful might end up being directly between these corporations and landowners, who are facing down eminent domain condemnation of their property if they refuse to sign an easement.
Attaching carbon capture technology to an emitting source makes operating that source both more expensive and more energy-intensive. As costs of clean energy like solar and wind plummet, fossil fuel and biomass power plants are becoming less competitive, and adding carbon capture just makes them more costly. Even in heavy-emitting industrial sectors such as plastic or petrochemical manufacturing, applying CCS at scale makes little climate or economic sense.
The push to deploy CCS in the industrial sector ignores the most important alternative methods for curtailing the vast majority of the sector’s emissions. These methods, including replacing fossil fuels with non-carbon emitting renewable energy, are already available and scalable. Investing in CCS infrastructure add-ons to existing facilities locks those facilities and their current energy technologies in place. It diverts resources from non-polluting alternatives that are compatible with a safe climate future.
Sources:
https://www.desmog.com/2023/05/31/princeton-maps-ccs-us-plans-co2-pipeline-buildout/
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11944