<b>Science:</b> The carbon capture bandwagon

Carbon capture and storage (CSS) is fast becoming the oil industry's favourite solution to the climate crisis, but the seductive simplicity of the idea masks a series of doubts about its viability. In its simplest form, CSS consists of capturing carbon dioxide as it is released into the atmosphere, compressing and then pumping it back into depleted oil and gas fields or other safe underground chambers.

Its attraction for the industry resides in its ability to reduce the harmful effects of burning fossil fuels -- greenhouse gases -- with energy bosses at this week's World Petroleum Congress keen to promote it as a solution.

"Capturing and storing CO2 is the only realistic way of reducing emissions while delivering the energy that the world needs to prosper," the chief executive of Shell, Jeroen van der Veer, said.

For such an underdeveloped technique, there is a lot riding on the success of CSS.

"Without this technology we cannot reduce CO2 emissions substantially," the head of the International Energy Agency, Nobuo Tanaka said.

But the hurdles and barriers that must be overcome are daunting, requiring international cooperation, innovation, vast investment and public acceptance and all in a race against global warming.

Firstly, the cost of capturing the CO2 during the production of fossil fuels or energy is extremely expensive and requires the use of solvents that are themselves an environmental danger.

Secondly, sufficient burial spots must be identified from where the CO2 cannot leak. Thirdly, there is no incentive yet for companies to invest in CCS technology because of the cost. A study by US university MIT put this at about US$30 (RM98) per tonne of CSS-treated CO2.

This requires either carbon taxes or massive state subsidies.

Fourthly, there is likely to be opposition to on-land rather than at-sea storage while earthquakes or other geological events risk releasing the stored gases.

Olav Kaarstad, an expert and special adviser to front-running Norwegian energy group StatoilHydro says the best place to start is to take the easiest opportunities to demonstrate CCS first.

Natural gas refineries and ammonia and hydrogen plants already separate out CO2 as part of their processes, so the capturing is already being done. The next step is to bury it.

" We should look at lower cost, 'low hanging fruit' which would make it possible for more countries to have their own projects."

The coal-fired power station ideal is that CO2 could be scrubbed out of emissions at the plant rather than being released into the atmosphere.

"There are still technical and economic constraints," says Neil Wildgust from the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, a research centre that investigates solutions to climate change.

"Storage of CO2 has been done and while there are issues to be understood, effectively it is a proven technology.

"The capture side is the barrier. The cost of capturing is high. For power companies to capture there has to be come sort of incentive."

As to when CCS be scaled up to become a series response to the climate change challenge? 2015 to 2020, experts say. Maybe. -- AFP

Science: The carbon capture bandwagon