Billions more in subsidies for carbon capture may be needed
WASHINGTON — The U.S. needs to undertake a massive spending program that more than doubles the value of existing tax incentives if the nation is to build carbon capture projects to prevent the release of greenhouse gases and keep fossil fuels viable in an era of accelerating climate change, according to a report from the National Petroleum Council, an advisory group to the energy secretary.
For years, government officials have pursued carbon capture as a means to reduce carbon emissions while maintaining demand for America’s abundant resources of oil, natural gas and coal. But now it appears that the government will have to go much further, eventually spending tens of billions of dollars a year in subsidies, if it is going to get capacity to the level the U.N. says is necessary to avoid the worst consequences of climate change.
“Scaling up to wide-scale de
ployment is a pretty big price tag,” said John Minge, the former chairman of BP America. “There’s not a lot of capture right now. Some new projects have been announced, but people are holding off.”
Former Energy Secretary Rick Perry asked the council to undertake the 18-monthlong study, bringing together more than 300 participants from the oil sector, academia, environmental groups and government agencies, to explain why, despite efforts by Democratic and Republican administrations, carbon capture technology has yet to catch on.
“We have proven beyond
any doubt we can grow our economy, develop our energy and make our environment cleaner all at the same time,” new Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette, Perry’s former deputy, said at a National Petroleum Council meeting Thursday. “Using (carbon capture) technologies, we can and we will drive emissions down even further.”
Only 19 carbon capture facilities are operating in the world. Most are in the U.S., where federal tax credits pay $35 or $50 for every ton of carbon dioxide captured — depending on whether it is pumped underground to increase oil production or stored in nonpotable aquifers.
The NPC report recommends increasing those credits to $90 per ton within
the next decade and then to $110 within the next 25 years. The aim is to eventually be able to capture 10 percent of carbon emissions — about 500 million tons per year — a 20-fold increase over current operations.
Were the government to adopt that plan, it would cost more than $650 billion, the NPC estimates.
With wind and solar energy technology now competing with coal and natural gas in some electricity markets, many environmentalists have questioned the need for carbon capture at all.
Their thinking: If you switch to renewables and don’t burn fossil fuel, you don’t need to spend money capturing emissions.
“If you’re going to spend billions — or trillions! — to prevent climate disaster,
why spend it on an experimental scheme to clean up coal instead of proven, zerocarbon, renewable technology?” Paul Rauber, a senior editor at the Sierra Club’s magazine, wrote in 2014.
But scientists working for the U.N. have said the world is too reliant on oil and coal to stop burning it altogether and that carbon capture will be essential to reaching net zero carbon emissions by 2050 and avoiding a potentially devastating temperature increase.
“It’s deep decarbonization,” said Minge, the former BP America chairman. “Some people will say, ‘Why do it now.’ You need to do it now to grow the value chain and all the infrastructure.”