CCS – JUST TOO COSTLY

Costs to keep U.S. carbon storage from coal elusive
Timothy Gardner and Bruce Nichols (w/Jeffrey Jones and Marguerita Choy), March 5, 2009 (Reuters)

"Capturing carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants, the biggest U.S. source of the main greenhouse gas, is unlikely to play a big role in President Barack Obama's immediate plans…despite billions of dollars in incentives…Obama's economic stimulus package contained $3.4 billion for…development of carbon capture and storage, the fancy name for trying to store emissions of carbon dioxide permanently underground.

"And he wants to join the country with the rest of the developed world in setting mandatory carbon limits. His short-term goal would cut emissions to 1990 levels by 2020."

Complicated and costly. (click to enlarge)

"But many experts say burying carbon from coal-fired power plants will still be in its infancy for years beyond 2020…Development of the technology has been slow…Burying carbon dioxide from power-plant coal is costly because it requires the addition of equipment to siphon the gas from a huge volume of emissions…Due to the economic crisis, early efforts likely will focus on lower-cost targets such as oil refineries, gas processing plants and ethanol distilleries, which emit purer, easier-to-capture streams of carbon dioxide..

"…[C]arbon allowances in a U.S. cap and trade program would have to hit $50 to $100 per ton to support building capture equipment at coal-fired plants…Capturing the major share of the carbon pollution emitted by burning coal is more likely a mid-century proposition, as Obama seeks by then to cut emissions even more - 80 percent…"