Staff writer

mjones@observer-reporter.com

Pumping carbon emissions from Pennsylvania's coal-burning power plants deep into the earth is being considered by the state government as a viable option to reduce greenhouse gases.

The state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources released a report Wednesday documenting options that would use Pennsylvania's land and geology in an attempt to stem global warming.

Carbon emitted from power plants would be compressed, liquefied and then piped or transported to designated wellheads. It then would be pumped into geological rock fractures thousands of feet below the surface.

However, environmental advocate Greenpeace International says capturing and storing carbon will encourage the continued burning of fossil fuels. In its own report released this week, Greenpeace questioned whether the technology would be commercially available within the next two decades and suggested it could be expensive and dangerous.

DCNR Chief of Staff John Quigley cautioned the report is only an initial inquiry into the viability and environmental impacts of carbon storage.

"This is real, emerging science, and this report is the first ... plan to understand it and put it into context," Quigley said.

He said it is too early to determine specific sites where carbon may be pumped, but Western Pennsylvania clearly is an option due to the number of coal-fired power plants in the region.

"A successful demonstration would provide valuable information and experience to guide future sequestration projects," the DCNR's Carbon Management Advisory Group report states. "Western Pennsylvania provides a variety of attractive sites that could test multiple types of reservoirs with large (carbon) emission sources close by."

The report also indicated carbon could be stored beneath state forests, where the state already owns the mineral rights.

But there are numerous questions about carbon capture and sequestration, and the writers of the report admitted there are long-term problems that must be solved. Some include who would be liable in the event of a leak, what state body would regulate the storage and how much the sequestration would cost.

Emily Rochon, who authored the Greenpeace report and works for the environmental group, called the idea a "PR push coming out of the coal industry." She said coal industry experts suggest storage could be available by 2015, but Greenpeace contends it will not be operational on a wide scale until 2030.

"It's a very politically expedient solution and popular because (politicians) don't have to make the tough decisions," Rochon said. "Just continue building coal-fired power plants."

The technology has not been fully tested, she said, and it is still unknown how to properly maintain carbon storage. Rochon said any leaks could contaminate the soil and damage the ecosystem.

"Even small leakage rates could undermine benefits," she said.

Pilot programs likely would be funded with state and federal money, although the DCNR's report stated private companies also might be tapped. Rochon ripped the suggestion of using public money in pilot programs.

The state's CMAG report can be found at www.dcnr.state.pa.us. The DCNR is accepting public comments on the report until June 15.

Home