carbon storage
Boreal forests struggle to recover from frequent fires
Canada's boreal forests, crucial carbon storage ecosystems, are struggling to recover from increasingly frequent wildfires exacerbated by climate change.
In short:
- Boreal forests evolved to burn every century, but climate change has increased the frequency of fires, challenging tree regeneration, especially for black spruce.
- Last year’s fires burned a forest area the size of the Netherlands, affecting carbon storage, as burned trees release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
- Indigenous communities like the Dene are experiencing the effects, pushing for greater involvement in fire management policies to protect their lands.
Key quote:
“The entire bloody country was hot and dry at the same time (...) If you would have told me that a few years ago, I’d be like no, that doesn’t really make sense.”
— Marc-André Parisien, a senior researcher at the Canadian Forest Service.
Why this matters:
As fires increase in frequency, forests struggle to regrow, releasing more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and accelerating climate change. The loss of black spruce and other trees threatens biodiversity, impacts Indigenous livelihoods and contributes to more severe global warming effects.
Oil companies pushed ineffective carbon capture while reaping tax benefits
A congressional investigation found that oil companies misled the public about the effectiveness of carbon capture technology while benefiting from substantial tax credits.
In short:
- The fossil fuel industry promoted carbon capture as a key solution to climate change despite knowing its limited effectiveness.
- Internal documents revealed ExxonMobil and other companies were aware that carbon capture technology could only minimally reduce emissions.
- The industry lobbied for and profited from increased tax credits for carbon capture, despite minimal environmental benefits.
Key quote:
“What the IPCC actually said in its mitigation report was that carbon capture might be necessary for hard-to-abate industries, but that it’s one of the most expensive options and it only equates to small emissions reductions.”
— Paul Blackburn, an environmental lawyer and advisor to the Bold Alliance
Why this matters:
The promotion of carbon capture as a viable climate solution diverts attention and resources from more effective strategies like renewable energy. Taxpayer money is being used to fund these technologies, which may not significantly reduce overall carbon emissions.
Company pursues carbon storage under US forests despite initial denials
CapturePoint Solutions, initially denied twice by the U.S. Forest Service, may soon gain approval to store millions of tons of carbon dioxide beneath national forests due to a proposed rule change.
In short:
- CapturePoint Solutions leased land and started carbon management programs near Forest Service land after initial denials.
- The Forest Service is considering a rule to allow carbon storage under federal lands, though they insist CapturePoint's requests did not influence this decision.
- Critics argue carbon storage could lead to leaks and industrialization of federal lands, while proponents see it as crucial for meeting greenhouse gas reduction targets.
Key quote:
“It gives industry essentially a place to dump their carbon dioxide waste, benefit from the tax credits, and they don't have to deal with the messiness of trying to get permission from property owners and eminent domain.”
— Victoria Bogdan Tejeda, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity
Why this matters:
Storing carbon dioxide underground could help mitigate climate change, but it also poses risks like potential leaks and environmental impacts. Understanding the balance between these risks and benefits is essential for future policy decisions.
Concerns rise over old wells affecting new carbon storage efforts in Louisiana
As Louisiana plans extensive carbon injection projects to combat climate change, thousands of abandoned oil wells pose potential leakage risks.
In short:
- Louisiana leads the nation in planned carbon storage wells, with over 60 currently in the permit process.
- The state has around 186,000 abandoned wells, many improperly sealed, raising concerns about CO2 and contaminated water leaks.
- Some experts advocate for more rigorous well assessments and slower project implementation to ensure safety.
Key quote:
“Basic information is lacking for a large number of abandoned wells, especially those plugged before the modern cementing standards instituted in 1953, and the locations of a number of abandoned wells are likely unknown.”
— Robert Rossi and Dominic DiGiulio, environmental scientists
Why this matters:
Improperly managed carbon storage could lead to environmental harm and negate the benefits of reducing atmospheric CO2. These old wells, many of which have not been properly sealed, could potentially leak, undermining the effectiveness of carbon sequestration efforts and posing a substantial environmental risk. If these wells were to leak, not only could they release stored carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere, but they might also allow other harmful substances to seep into groundwater supplies.
Carbon causes climate change. Why does a California county want to make more?
Kern County wants to use billions in federal tax credits to collect and bury carbon. To do so, it would build new facilities to produce more of the most abundant greenhouse gas.
How much can trees fight climate change? Massively, but not alone
Could superpowered plants be the heroes of the climate crisis?
Carbon-guzzling trees and crops, genetically altered to boost photosynthesis and store carbon in the roots, could absorb millions of tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere.