| Sourced From |
No substitute for reducing emissions
This week, the Green Party of Pennsylvania spoke out against a plan by Governor Rendell to bury waste from power plants in the ground. Known as “carbon sequestration,” the technique is believed to be more environmentally friendly than releasing toxics into the air.
However, the Green Party believes that injecting toxics into the ground is no solution to the problem noting that sequestered toxins can leak into groundwater and cause other disastrous environmental effects. Carbon sequestration will require capturing carbon dioxide, compressing into a liquid, transporting it through pipelines to a sequestration site and injecting it beneath the earth’s surface.
“We should be reducing our carbon emissions not simply moving the by-products around like itâ
Related posts:
- MSU shares in $1.4 million grant for carbon sequestration research
- Pennsylvania wants to allow power companies to capture carbon dioxide emissions and put them into the ground.
- Carbon storage to be studied
- Scrap nuclear, bring in carbon tax: Green Party leader
- Software Quantifies Carbon Sequestration of Urban Trees
Don Pratt
on Jul 22nd, 2009
@ 7:11 am:
To capture CO2 and store it underground will take vast amounts of energy. CO2 as a by product of industrial activity is industrial waste. To bury waste underground is seen as bad in the EU. We in the UK are taxed at over $60 per tonne. What will the tax on CO2 be? You can buy a carbon permit for less than $15/tonne. We must all use less energy. We must produce less CO2. Smaller cars, smaller homes even smaller people. Fat people exhale more CO2.