Federal Government Accountability Office criticizes federal plans for carbon capture and storage

The GAO report heavily criticizes our federal government’s reliance on the assumption that carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies will be the solution to curb massive amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted from coal-fired power plants. Based on a review of where the technological development of CCS stands, the report concludes that sole reliance upon it, as a strategy to curb carbon emissions, is both unrealistic and dangerous. About half of our nation’s electric power is generated from coal. As you can see in the graphic, coal-based power is the number one national source of CO2 emissions, comprising about 33% of the total. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, known to contribute heavily to global warming and climate change. During the combustion of coal to produce electricity, large amounts of CO2 are released into the atmosphere. There is no U.S. restriction or regulation to prevent CO2 emissions today.

As the U.S. is the top per capita contributor to global CO2 emissions, the federal government, in particular the Department Of Energy (DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) knows that unlimited emissions cannot continue in the face of the international climate crisis. In recent years (rather than pursue alternatives to coal dependence), it has turned to CCS as the future solution to the problem, literally dumping billions of dollars into researching this technology. The DOE hopes CCS technology is the primary way to reduce CO2 emissions. The idea is that the CO2 would be captured as a gas, pressurized until it turned into a liquid, transported by pipeline to a suitable location, and pumped a mile or so below ground, intending for it to stay there forever.

The GAO report concludes that CCS faces serious technological, economic, legal and regulatory barriers to use, including the following:

• There are no viable ways to capture carbon on an industrial-scale proven effective as of today and the theoretical methods to do are extremely costly.


• Because there is no national CO2 emissions regulation, such as a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system, there is no current economic motivation for coal-fired power plants to reduce emissions, even if CCS were available.


• To implement CCS at an industrial scale, the International Energy Agency estimates that as many as 6,000 CCS projects would be needed, each injecting a million metric tons of CO2 a year into the ground. At our current emissions rate, the U.S. only has enough potential storage space to last approximately 100 years!


• The potential environmental and human health hazards are largely unknown. While the GAO commends EPA for publishing information related to the hypothetical effects of the stored carbon on drinking water, it charges that EPA has failed to investigate other potential impacts thoroughly.


• It is unclear if the stored carbon would be classified as toxic waste. If it is, who is liable for this waste? For example, if it leaks, contaminating drinking water or agricultural crops, who is responsible? There are strict laws in this country that govern the transport and disposal of hazardous waste, making the generator ultimately responsible. In the case of CCS, however, the coal companies want the public to assume all liability from the carbon that power plants store—even though the hazards are largely unknown!

The GAO charges the DOE to more earnestly consider these major barriers and more accurately determine if continued funding under the current energy platform is appropriate and cost-effective. If, as many scientists are charging today, CCS is not found to be viable, the federal government should invest its time and our resources into real solutions—renewable, clean energy sources that decrease our fossil fuel dependence.

The report is available in full here.