A groundbreaking new study published in Nature has revealed that global CO₂ storage capacity for underground carbon dioxide (CO₂) storage is much lower than previously estimated by tenfold. This new study has sparked calls from scientists and policy experts alike to re-examine the role of carbon capture and storage (CCS) in climate strategies once again.
Underground CO₂ storage may be riskier than expected, study finds
The study, which was led by researchers at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, revealed that many geological formations that were considered suitable for global CO₂ storage pose a few risks, such as leakage, groundwater contamination, or seismic activity. CCS’s potential to balance out the effects of climate change may be more limited because of this.
“Carbon storage is often portrayed as a way out of the climate crisis. Our findings make clear that it is a limited tool.”
The lead researcher in the study stresses the dire need to reduce emissions directly as opposed to relying on global CO₂ storage capacity technology.
The implications cannot be denied; the study projects that CCS could only reduce man-made climate change by 0.7°C, far less than the 5–6°C that was estimated previously. These results challenge the idea that CCS could play a significant role in achieving the goals set out by the Paris Agreement.
“CCS is a powerful tool in the fight against climate change, but it’s not a bottomless solution. We must treat it as a strategic and finite resource.”
Researchers urge strategic use of CO₂ storage amid disputed findings
Experts say that CCS should be allocated to sectors where it is difficult to reduce carbon emissions. Sectors such as cement production, aviation, and agriculture. However, experts warn that it could burden future generations with a greater climate burden altogether.
“Previous work often framed storage resources as plentiful or unlimited, and this is simply not the case. This new research presents global CO₂ storage as a ‘limited intergenerational resource.”
The Deputy Director of the UK Carbon Capture & Storage Research Centre has welcomed the study’s more moderate estimates, but not all experts agree with the study’s conclusions. A professor at Imperial College in London questioned the methodology and argued that a lot of the physical restrictions provided were already in previous assessments.
“Rather than identifying new considerations, the authors have implemented a modelling approach predisposed to underestimate the resource base.”
Despite these discussions, the verdict is clear. CCS can’t solve the climate crisis alone. The Executive Director of the Carbon Capture Coalition also emphasized that CCS must be part of a bigger picture.
“Its use is not optional if we hope to address global warming. But it must be combined with other ways to reduce emissions and balanced with the need for reliable and affordable energy. The constraints are not simple, and how the technology scales up is laced with justice implications for generations to come”
CCS increases ethical concerns for future generations
The head of the Global Carbon Project added that the study also raises questions about the ethics of justice between generations. Experts also note that the priority and deployment of CCS will have long-term consequences.
“The constraints are not simple, and how the technology scales up is laced with justice implications for generations to come. If we prolong our dependence on fossil fuels with the expectation that we’ll offset it by storing carbon underground, we’re likely saddling future generations with a nearly impossible task.”
The studies are a reality check for all. The climate issue will continue to impact us as well as our future generations. While CCS is a valuable tool, it must be used wisely, strategically, and in conjunction with intense emissions reductions.