Energy Transition

How carbon capture works and the debate about whether it's a future climate solution

“It’s one piece of a puzzle in this broad fight against the climate change.” Photo via Getty Images

Power plants and industrial facilities that emit carbon dioxide, the primary driver of global warming, are hopeful that Congress will keep tax credits for capturing the gas and storing it deep underground.

The process, called carbon capture and sequestration, is seen by many as an important way to reduce pollution during a transition to renewable energy.

But it faces criticism from some conservatives, who say it is expensive and unnecessary, and from environmentalists, who say it has consistently failed to capture as much pollution as promised and is simply a way for producers of fossil fuels like oil, gas and coal to continue their use.

Here's a closer look.

How does the process work?

Carbon dioxide is a gas produced by burning of fossil fuels. It traps heat close to the ground when released to the atmosphere, where it persists for hundreds of years and raises global temperatures.

Industries and power plants can install equipment to separate carbon dioxide from other gases before it leaves the smokestack. The carbon then is compressed and shipped — usually through a pipeline — to a location where it’s injected deep underground for long-term storage.

Carbon also can be captured directly from the atmosphere using giant vacuums. Once captured, it is dissolved by chemicals or trapped by solid material.

Lauren Read, a senior vice president at BKV Corp., which built a carbon capture facility in Texas, said the company injects carbon at high pressure, forcing it almost two miles below the surface and into geological formations that can hold it for thousands of years.

The carbon can be stored in deep saline or basalt formations and unmineable coal seams. But about three-fourths of captured carbon dioxide is pumped back into oil fields to build up pressure that helps extract harder-to-reach reserves — meaning it's not stored permanently, according to the International Energy Agency and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

How much carbon dioxide is captured?

The most commonly used technology allows facilities to capture and store around 60% of their carbon dioxide emissions during the production process. Anything above that rate is much more difficult and expensive, according to the IEA.

Some companies have forecast carbon capture rates of 90% or more, “in practice, that has never happened,” said Alexandra Shaykevich, research manager at the Environmental Integrity Project’s Oil & Gas Watch.

That's because it's difficult to capture carbon dioxide from every point where it's emitted, said Grant Hauber, a strategic adviser on energy and financial markets at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

Environmentalists also cite potential problems keeping it in the ground. For example, last year, agribusiness company Archer-Daniels-Midland discovered a leak about a mile underground at its Illinois carbon capture and storage site, prompting the state legislature this year to ban carbon sequestration above or below the Mahomet Aquifer, an important source of drinking water for about a million people.

Carbon capture can be used to help reduce emissions from hard-to-abate industries like cement and steel, but many environmentalists contend it's less helpful when it extends the use of coal, oil and gas.

A 2021 study also found the carbon capture process emits significant amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that’s shorter-lived than carbon dioxide but traps over 80 times more heat. That happens through leaks when the gas is brought to the surface and transported to plants.

About 45 carbon-capture facilities operated on a commercial scale last year, capturing a combined 50 million metric tons of carbon dioxide — a tiny fraction of the 37.8 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide emissions from the energy sector alone, according to the IEA.

It's an even smaller share of all greenhouse gas emissions, which amounted to 53 gigatonnes for 2023, according to the latest report from the European Commission’s Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research.

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis says one of the world's largest carbon capture utilization and storage projects, ExxonMobil’s Shute Creek facility in Wyoming, captures only about half its carbon dioxide, and most of that is sold to oil and gas companies to pump back into oil fields.

Future of US tax credits is unclear

Even so, carbon capture is an important tool to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, particularly in heavy industries, said Sangeet Nepal, a technology specialist at the Carbon Capture Coalition.

“It’s not a substitution for renewables ... it’s just a complementary technology,” Nepal said. “It’s one piece of a puzzle in this broad fight against the climate change.”

Experts say many projects, including proposed ammonia and hydrogen plants on the U.S. Gulf Coast, likely won't be built without the tax credits, which Carbon Capture Coalition Executive Director Jessie Stolark says already have driven significant investment and are crucial U.S. global competitiveness.

Trending News

A View From HETI

The Gulf one year after the spill. Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images

In a deep, dark part of the Gulf of Mexico, the number of marine animals plummeted by about 60% in the years following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion, a new study found.

In a crucial part of the Gulf between the light surface and the darkest depths, where the BP-operated well failed and dumped 134 million gallons of oil, the number of fish found dropped by 63.5% from the year after the spill to 2015. Crustaceans, including shrimp and krill, a key food for whales, went down 62%, and larger animals like squid and octopuses fell 59.7%, according to a study published Monday in the journal PNAS.

And those populations haven't come close to recovering, the study found.

Researchers focused on the ocean's “twilight zone,” a vast area above the seafloor, where much of the surface marine life, including dolphins and whales, feast on creatures. Yet little is known about this gigantic ecosystem, and this region of the Gulf had not been studied before the 2010 spill, said study lead author Tracey Sutton, a biological oceanographer at Nova Southeastern University.

A 2011 post-spill exploration cited in the research, which used six sets of nets at different depths and acoustic sonar, gave scientists a good sense of how much sea life was in the area between the surface and 5,000 feet deep (1,500 meters). They returned to the same place with the same equipment three-and-a-half years later and found sea life was between one-third and one-quarter of what it was in 2011.

“We saw this big decline,” Sutton said. “The question was then why? So we looked at all of the natural variables we thought could account for it, namely temperature, oxygen supply and food. None of those vary with the decline. The event that did was the oil spill. So we think that’s the most likely cause of the decline.”

Researchers kept on sampling since 2015 and the low populations remained, with a slight rise in 2022 and 2023 that did not prove statistically significant or lasting, Sutton said.

Documenting the decline

Sutton's team documented the population declines with three different lines of evidence: what they caught in the nets, what their acoustic sonar found and genetic studies showing the species losing genetic diversity because of inbreeding.

A lot of marine life died instantly after the explosion, which killed 11 workers, and from nearly five months of leaking oil and gas. Those pollutants got stored in the eggs of survivors and subsequent generations of critters got more compromised and weaker, Sutton said.

BP spokesperson Paul Takahashi said the accident “forever changed” the company: “We have made many changes intended to help prevent an event like this from ever happening again.”

Both the oil and the dispersants used to clean the spill hurt fish, but in different ways, said study co-author Isabel Romero, a chemical oceanographer at the University of South Carolina. Oil is more toxic and an overall threat, but the dispersant breaks the oil into smaller droplets, increasing the exposure of animals that live in the deeper water column, she said.

Dispersants caused many problems, and new studies show that in future accidents, it would be better to avoid those chemicals and instead add agents that increase oil-munching microbes, said former National Science Foundation Director Rita Colwell, a University of Maryland environmental microbiologist who headed a 10-year, $500 million BP-funded program to study spill effects.

Sutton said his team couldn’t prove an exact causal link to the BP oil spill, but by eliminating the other possibilities and looking at the timing, it’s logically clear that the spill caused the problem.

The krill population dropped 72%. Lanternfish — odd fish with blue-green lights embedded over their bodies — are a third of what they used to be, Sutton said. The stunning but scary dragonfish — with sharp teeth, light organs and a lure attached to its head — also had big losses, he said.

“These are foundational species,” Sutton said. “They're the things most things eat. So it's no wonder that we had wholesale changes across the community.”

The inner ocean is more unknown than outer space

Scientists learned much about this unexplored area of the Gulf.

“One of our biggest findings from the whole thing is how connected the whole oceanic Gulf is from top to bottom because the animals move up and down,” Sutton said. “There are predators at the top that dive deep. Lots of things that are deep that come up at night. So the system is one very large pulsing system, rather than just a layered system like people might have thought beforehand.”

Outside scientists were especially bothered by where the spill damaged.

“We know more about space in some ways than we do about the inner ocean. Because we can’t see these regions, there is a tendency to assume everything is fine, but here we have a clear result showing that something went very wrong," Scripps Institution of Oceanography marine scientist Kaitlin Frasier said in an email.

Frasier, who wasn't part of the study released Monday, published a post-spill study in 2024 looking at Gulf of Mexico whales and dolphins, finding population drops as high as 83%.

“It’s shocking how a single failure in a drilling rig can have this vast and sustained impact over thousands of square kilometers, with little visible recovery over 13 years after the spill,” said Dalhousie University marine scientist Boris Worm, who wasn't part of the study. “It is important that we see this, because for the longest time these consequences were completely out of sight and out of mind.”

Worm and Colwell said this damage should be kept in mind as the world talks about deep-sea mining and increased oil drilling in deep waters.

Trending News