CO₂ storage must not hinder the phase-out of fossil fuels
Carbon Capture and Storage CCS (schematic diagram)
Source: Umweltbundesamt |
It sounds practical enough: Don’t let harmful CO₂ escape into the atmosphere through the chimney; instead capture it, liquefy it under pressure and store it underground using carbon capture and storage (CCS). However, potential storage sites are limited, and many uncertainties and risks are far from being resolved. If storage sites are not permanently – i.e. over a period of more than 10,000 years – leakproof, escaping CO₂ can not only harm the climate, but also people if stored in inhabited areas or marine environments if stored in the seabed.
This is why CCS cannot replace the phase-out of coal, gas and oil, or the increased use of wood instead of concrete in the construction industry. It should only be used for truly unavoidable CO₂ emissions. With highly ambitious policies for the protection of biodiversity and the climate, natural carbon sinks such as forests and peatlands can offset most of these unavoidable emissions. This means that the need for CCS could be minimal or non-existent. However, if climate change mitigation continues to be drawn out, there is a risk that the natural sinks may not be sufficient. The UBA therefore suggests first testing the CCS technology at waste incineration plants. There, heat and electricity are generated from non-recyclable waste but CO₂ is also produced. This would allow to gain experience with the technology, storage and monitoring, and enable better assessment of environmental risks and permanency.
CCS must never take priority over the avoidance of the production of greenhouse gases or the development and protection of natural carbon sinks such as forests and peatlands, which remove CO₂ from the atmosphere and promote biodiversity.
