Saturday, August 29, 2009

Ohio EPA has a new site and new look

Monday, August 24, 2009

From our friends in the Netherlands - the opposition group

Lid worden banner

In June 2009 the city council of Barendrecht, a small city south of Rotterdam, voted against the plans to store large quantities of CO2 in the underground of the village. This local decision was based on facts not on emotions. The three most important arguments for the local CDA party to vote against CO2 storage are:

  • There are no guarantees for the safety of the residents, nor are all questions regarding the safety of CO2 storage answered. Especially because of the infinite period of storage.
  • There are questions whether the scientific research concerning CO2 storage in Barendrecht is objective and unbiased.
  • There is no basis, nor support for CO2 storage in Barendrecht.

The Dutch national government can overrule the decision of the local government. Whether or not the national government will overrule Barendrecht will be clear in the autumn of 2009 when the minister of Economic Affairs and the minister for the Environment will decide to continue with CO2 storage in and under Barendrecht.

If you have questions or want more local information feel free to send us an e-mail: \n Dit e-mail adres is beschermd door spambots, u heeft Javascript nodig om dit onderdeel te kunnen bekijken ">

De gemeenteraad van Barendrecht heeft op 29 juni 2009 definitief nee gezegd tegen het demonstratieproject ondergrondse CO2 - opslag in Barendrecht. De gemeenteraad heeft het besluit gebaseerd op feiten, cijfers en argumenten. De veiligheid voor onze bewoners en toekomstige generaties is niet maximaal gewaarborgd.

Consequenties Principebesluit 29 juni 2009

Het college en de klankbordgroep van de gemeenteraad hebben verder besproken welke concrete consequenties het principebesluit van 29 juni (nee tegen het CO2-project) heeft voor het gemeentelijke beleid. Geconcludeerd is dat de gemeente niet meewerkt aan onderzoeken en geen vergunningen verleent die op een of andere manier kunnen worden beschouwd als voorbereiding op de CO2-opslag. Indien de gemeente wordt verzocht gegevens of rapportages te verstrekken, worden die slechts verstrekt indien de gemeente dit op grond van de Wet openbaarheid van bestuur (Wob) verplicht is.

Besluit provincie en ministers
De verwachting is dat de provincie en de minsters eind 2009 een definitief besluit nemen over de plannen in Barendrecht.

Friday, August 21, 2009

Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership cancels Ohio CCS project despite DOE funding

The 35-member Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Project (MRCSP) has cancelled a $92.8m proposal to inject one million tons of carbon dioxide over four years from an ethanol plant in Greenville, western Ohio.

Battelle Memorial Institute, a major, non-profit research and development organisation which manages MRCSP, issued a terse communiqué saying the decision was based on “business considerations.”

“That’s all I can tell you,” Katy Delaney, a Battelle spokeswoman says in response to queries from Recharge.

The move came after the US Energy Department in May 2008 awarded MRCSP $61m to fund the third phase of carbon capture and storage research over 10 years at the Greenville site.

The CO2 would have been injected into the Mount Simon Sandstone formation, which is more than 3,000 feet beneath the surface. It stretches across much of the Midwest region and has the potential to store more than 100 years of CO2 emissions from major point sources in the region, according to DOE.

Specifically, the third phase, for which MRCSP members would have contributed almost $32m, was to validate that the injection and storage could be done on a safe, permanent and economic basis.

Local officials and state representatives had increasingly opposed the project fearing it would lower property values and increase seismic activity.

Click here to continue

As Paul Harvey would say, click here for "the rest of the story"

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Protesters Win CO2 Battle In Darke County, Ohio

Protesters Win CO2 Battle In Darke Co.

As soon as we received word that the project was canceled, we started a phone chain to get our committee on the circle to take a photo for the Advocate - even during the tornado warnings!
In a little over 90 minutes the majority of us were there, in our green shirts, celebrating!

We hope to have a big celebration and engage our community - after the fair is over!

See us on WHIOTV by clicking here. Many thanks to WHIOTV for your coverage!

Posted: 6:35 am EDT August 20, 2009Updated: 3:52 pm EDT August 20, 2009

A vocal group of citizens in Greenville are celebrating a victory in their efforts to keep tons of CO2 waste from being pumped into the ground in Darke County.The Columbus-based Battelle Research Center announced that Greenville is no longer being considered for a carbon sequestration project.In a news release, Battelle said, “Due to business considerations, Greenville, Ohio, is no longer being considered for a carbon sequestration project.”The news ended 14 months of protest by Citizens Against Carbon Sequestration. The group protested the unknowns of what the future could bring if CO2 waste would be allowed 3.500 feet below ground.The group used yard signs, public meetings and commission meetings, along with a prayer rally to gain public support.A recent poll showed that more than 90 percent of those who participated in the poll were against carbon sequestration.

Darke County CITIZENS CELEBRATE - MRCSP Phase III CO2 Project in Greenville Ohio - WILL NOT HAPPEN

Battelle announced today that Greenville, OH was no longer on the list for consideration of a large-scale CO2 project. A jubilant committee celebrates on the town "circle" - this community has never been so united! Look for us in both the Democrat and Republican booths at the Great Darke County Fair.......


Read the full article here!

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

PowerPoint - Property & Regulatory Issues CO2 Sequestration

National Mining Association Carbon Capture and Storage - Barriers to CCS Read entire article here

I find this to be an interesting statement - Avoiding application of the federal Superfund program to in• jections of CO2;

At present, uncertainty over siting requirements and long-term liability issues associated with the underground storage of CO2 have deterred project developers, financiers and insurers from moving forward with CCS. However, CCS as a tool for mitigating CO2 emissions and ensuring a secure and affordable energy supply for America represents a vital public interest that merits a federal-level program to clarify and resolve these long-term liability issues and to clear the way for the rapid and widespread commercialization of the technology. Some of the key issues that must be resolved in order to foster widespread commercialization of CCS include:
Determining responsibility for post-closure monitoring;•
Avoiding application of the federal Superfund program to in• jections of CO2;
Avoiding characterization of CO• 2 as a waste and CCS activities as waste disposal to avoid triggering expensive “cradle to grave” regulations of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); and
Resolving property rights issues, including pore space owner• ship, trespass and interstate issues relating to CO2 transportation and placement.

Property Rights Issues Could Stymie Geologic Carbon Sequestration, an Industrial Info News Alert

SUGAR LAND, TX--(Marketwire - August 17, 2009) - Written by John Egan for Industrial Info Resources (Sugar Land, Texas) -- Efforts in the U.S. to geologically sequester carbon-dioxide emissions could be delayed or derailed unless state and federal governments find a way to address property rights issues, lawyers at Stoel Rives LLP (Portland, Oregon) told Industrial Info. The Waxman-Markey energy bill, currently being considered by the U.S. Senate, awards bonus carbon-dioxide allowances to utilities that will deploy carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies at coal-fired power plants by 2015. Property rights are critical to geologic carbon sequestration, because the underground areas needed to store carbon dioxide are extremely large and could cross state borders. The potential interstate nature of carbon sequestration projects means that the federal government could take a leading role in creating a consistent legal framework for acquiring the property rights for these projects.

For details, view the entire article by subscribing to Industrial Info's Premium Industry News at, or browse other breaking industrial news stories at

Industrial Info Resources (IIR) is the leading provider of global market intelligence specializing in the industrial process, heavy manufacturing and energy related markets. For more than 26 years, Industrial Info has provided plant and project opportunity databases, market forecasts, high resolution maps, and daily industry news. For more information send inquiries to or visit us online at

Monday, August 17, 2009


Lawrence Solomon: Carbon disaster
Posted: August 15, 2009, 1:38 AM by NP Editor

Don’t worry about the risks of earthquakes or suffocation or water contamination. Carbon capture is good, really

By Lawrence Solomon


f you live in or near a community that manufactures chemicals or cement, or that has a refinery or a coal or natural gas electricity generating station, or that has abandoned mines or other suitable geological formations, you may soon be asked to save the planet from global warming by hosting an underground carbon dioxide storage facility.

You and your neighbours will be told not to worry about carbon dioxide poisoning your water supplies. Yes, ruptures or large leaks of the gas could not only make the water undrinkable for you but also kill vegetation and aquatic life, the authorities will acknowledge, but inventors are working on new, improved technology that will prevent underground pipes and other infrastructure from leaking.

Village of Arcanum Resolution Against CO2 Sequestration

Arcanum, Ohio is located in Darke County, about 7 miles from Greenville, they have recently started their own branch of Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration to protect their area of the county. THANK YOU ARCANUM! And a huge thank you to the leadership for drafting a resolution to oppose CO2 Sequestration in Arcanum, Ohio!

Click on the photo to enlarge the resolution.

Posted by Picasa

Saturday, August 15, 2009

State Representative Jim Zehringer Opposes Large-Scale CCS Project

To read the lettter - click on it and it will enlarge

Greenville, OH (Darke County) is the proposed site for one on the 7 large-scale CO2 sequestration demonstration projects (EXPERIMENTS) to bury 1 Million tons of CO2 Waste in the saline aquifer (aka Mount Simon Sandstone) FOREVER - on the site of the The Andersons Marathon Ethanol Plant aka TAME.

The citizens of Darke County OPPOSE this project - with each passing week the number of yard signs opposing the project increases. The citizens have NO VOTE.

This is OUR HOME - the people and companies involved do not live here.

This county, along with the city and every elected official oppose this project. Recently, State Representative Jim Zehringer wrote a letter to the Ohio Department of Transportation stating his "bitter" opposition to this proposed project, asking them to honor the request of the community and not allow the seismic testing trucks to use the roads under their control in Darke County. With only one exception, the landowners have refused to allow the seismic testing on their private property.

(Note- the seismic testing is a necessary part of preparation to apply for the UIC permit - the last permit they need before injection)

On behalf of the people of Darke County, THANK YOU, Representative Zehringer, not only your support but for standing up to protect your constituents from this unproven experiment that comes with many risks and no benefits.

Friday, August 14, 2009

CO2 Opposition Yard Signs

Wednesday afternoon we received another 100 yard signs, less than 48 hours later they are GONE!

More on the way!

900 up..........and counting!

Darke County, Ohio OPPOSES CO2 Sequestration ------ as State Representative, Dick Adams said last evening to the attendees at the High School in Arcanum, OH - "I haven't met ONE PERSON who is for this project! We need to protect our environment and agriculture in Ohio!"

We are very fortunate to have the support of our elected officials!

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Greenpeace Hot Air Balloon Delivers Message - NO FUTURE IN COAL

Click here to read full article

Hunter Valley, Australia — Prime Minister Rudd wants to stop dangerous climate change and we want to give him the chance to show that all his talk is not just hot air. So, at dawn today, the Greenpeace hot air balloon delivered a message to Kevin in spectacular fashion: "Save the climate - No future in coal".

The balloon flew over two coal-fired power stations in the New South Wales Hunter Valley, launched by a team of Greenpeace staff and volunteers camped in the Hunter Valley. As the eyecatching aircraft flew above coal stacks, it attracted plenty of attention on the ground.

CCS enables COAL to have a future AND burn even MORE coal! OPPOSE CCS - too expensive, too risky, unproven!

30,000 Australians sign a petition against CCS

See the link here

30 000 Australians signed a statement against CCS, and backing a new international report on carbon capture and storage (CCS)., which calls for world governments to stop the climate crisis by urgently investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency rather than CCS. Today the petition was delivered to Treasurer Wayne Swan at the Treasury offices, Canberra, Australia

Read more here

"Faith into Action" Community Meeting - August 12, 2009

Advocate Photo - click here to be taken to The Daily Advocate for the full story

Wednesday, August 12, 2009
7 pm
Harmon Field, Greenville, OH

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

City of Greenville, Ohio Opposed to Large-scale CO2 Sequestration Project - City Officials Put On the Spot

Greenville Officials Put on The Spot at Tuesday Council Meeting

From WTGR Radio in Greenville, OH (Link to the story is here)

“I have been against this project from the beginning. There are a thousand other options available to reduce CO2 emissions.”

Those were the words of Greenville Councilman John Baumgartner at Tuesday’s council meeting as council and other city officials were challenged to give their personal opinions of the potential carbon sequestration project at the ethanol plant in Greenville. One by one, every official in the room did just that during the public hearing portion of the meeting as two Greenville citizens, Lynn Bliss and Enid Goubeax, put officials on the spot in front of a packed council room, filled with members of the Citizens Against Carbon Sequestration. Though neither Bliss or Goubeaux were directly representing the group on Tuesday, they shared the same sentiment that the city’s recent official press release did not go far enough in addressing the controversial issue. Those present also took issue with a particular phrase in the press release that they felt was inaccurate. That statement indicated that there was a “rift in the community” over the project.

“We want to show that there is no rift in the community, but there may be a rift between the community and its’ government. The community, though, has been untied by this issue”, stated Bliss.

Goubeaux added that she had lived in the community since 1961 and had never seen area residents as untied as they are currently in their opposition to this potential project. What Goubeaux said next, however, is what began perhaps the lengthiest public hearing portion of a council meeting in many years…

“We are going to be calling each of you in the next few days to ask you to express your personal view (on this project)”, said Goubeaux, “ A no comment will be interpreted as a vote of support.”

Though reactions to the aggressive tactic varied by official, all present opted not to wait for the phone call and answered directly on Tuesday evening.

All the statements indicated that city officials are against the project for many of the same reasons that residents have expressed. Councilman Leon Rogers stated, “I am more against it the more that I learn about it.” Referring to the fact that the federal government may play a role in the final decision he said, “If it will be anywhere, it should be under Washington D.C.”

That was one of many statements that drew applause from attendees. However, much of the discussion during the evening was heated as officials stated they took offense to the indication that they had not researched the issues. Rogers asked residents yesterday not to mistake silence for indifference, saying, “We have been doing what you were doing, gathering information. ”

During dialogue between Anne Vehry, a founder of The Citizens Against Carbon Sequestration and City Law Director Jeff Amick, Amick expressed what other officials had already indicated- that the city may be powerless to stop the project. However, when asked what chance he thought there was of The Andersons moving forward with the project, he guessed it was less than 20%, “I can tell you, they don’t have any intention of the project going thru at this time. But until there is an actual project to stop, we can’t do anything. If we initiate legislation, we will have the burden of proof that the project is a public nuisance. “

Amick said that might be difficult to prove and would certainly be expensive. He added, as other officials did on Tuesday, that The Anderson’s was the most ethical and honest company with which he had ever done business. One common theme did emerge from the statements, and it was one that many did not want to hear. Most officials present, who have been researching the project for over a year, stated they thought carbon sequestration was likely inevitable even if the drilling was stopped here in Greenville.

“We are on the Mount Simon Sandstone. It covers numerous states and I believe that whether CO2 is pumped in at the Andersons in a test program or whether it’s pumped in the ground in Michigan or Indiana, the City of Greenville is going to be on top of sequestered CO2”, explained Greenville Safety/Service Director John Schmidt, “I just don’t want the test wells to be here”.

"Faith Into Action" - Wednesday, August 12, 7 PM

The Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration are inviting everyone to join them (rain or shine) at their county-wide “Faith Into Action Gathering” on Wednesday, August 12 from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Greenville High School Football Stadium.

Including music, prayer and an update from members of the group, the gathering will also feature Hershel Fee, Pastor of the Lighthouse Christian Church; Pete Kontra, Pastor of the Oakland Church of the Brethren; and Bill Lyle, Pastor of the EUM Church.

When the Citizens Against CO2 formed less than six months ago, little did they know that a “miracle” was about to occur. After starting with a group of twelve, their message spread and their numbers grew. Today, thousands of Greenville and Darke County residents have joined their quest to stop the sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO2) at the Andersons Marathon Ethanol Plant in Greenville’s Industrial Park. At no time has their quest been against the plant or its operation. Instead, it has been against the experimental sequestration project only.

As if the increase in their numbers is not miracle enough, other citizens’ action groups are forming in Arcanum and in Gettysburg. It is expected that more groups will follow.

During their first Citizens Action meeting at the Lighthouse Christian Center, 1,000 residents attended to show their support. Almost as many turned away because there was no place left to park outside and only standing room was left inside. As traffic lined up to turn into the center, Sebring Warner Road and State Route 127 were blocked for two miles or more. By their huge attendance, residents stated in no uncertain terms that they do not want the high-risk experimental sequestration of CO2 to take place near their communities or in their county.

Speaking at that meeting were Nachy Kanfer, Associate Regional Representative of the Sierra Club; Kathleen Boutis, President of the Green Coalition; and Kerwin Olson, Project Director and Lobbyist for Citizens Action of Indiana. They all agreed the Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration have accomplished in months what few citizens-action groups have accomplished in years.

Darke County Engineer Jim Surber said he has not seen this much community support since he first moved to Darke County over 32 years ago. He, Mike Bowers, Mayor of Greenville, and the Greenville, Neave, and Van Buren Township Trustees, have temporarily halted seismic testing along county and township roads. Seismic testing is the preliminary step to the beginning of the sequestration process.

On Tuesday, August 4, The Greenville City Council and Administration were asked to state their opinions individually on the proposed CO2 sequestration project. They had already issued a collective statement earlier.

Expressing concerns for the city and its residents as well as for their children and future generations, council members and administrative officers unanimously agreed that although it had risks and was wrong for Greenville, they felt powerless to stop it because it is being funded by the Federal Government on private land. Jeff Amick, Attorney for the city, said that he, more than anyone, has studied ways to prevent this project. He said he would wear a green shirt and ride a bus to Washington D.C. if he could stop it. John Schmidt said he did not want to look back one day as people pointed to Greenville as the place where a CO2 experiment had gone wrong.

Because of the overwhelming opposition of Darke County residents, the Darke County Commissioners passed a Resolution in late July, stating they are in opposition to the sequestration project due to its unknown risks and potential harm to Darke County. They also asked The Andersons Marathon Ethanol Plant officials to honor their request to halt the proposed CO2 project. Although plant officials have since responded, their response has not offered any definite assurance that the project will be discontinued.

Working hard to stop the sequestration project in Greenville, Jan Teaford, who is co-chairman of the Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration, has used her computer skills to set up web and blog sites. At the blog site, she and several other members of the group have provided links that lead to scientific and geological information concerning CO2 sequestration. As a result, they have brought the proposed sequestration site to the attention of the world. Not only has the blog site been visited by persons from throughout the nation, including Washington D.C., but it is not unusual to see visitors from Australia, Japan, Great Britain, and other countries as well. Some have sent back words of encouragement, giving their support to the movement against CO2 sequestration. This blog site can be located at

The more the group studies, the more they know that CO2 is definitely an experiment with risks. From the contamination of fertile crop land to the pollution of two major aquifers, from injection-induced earthquakes to the de-evaluation of homes and properties- -the risks threaten both livelihoods and lives while offering no compensation, no protection, and no guarantees against future liabilities.

Making these risks known to the public hasn’t been easy. Some of the members have spent long hours reading and studying both national and international scientific reports. Many of the members credit God for directing them, faith for sustaining them, and prayer for inspiring them to keep going. As Rita McCans said, “We turned our faith into action which has resulted in thousands of Darke County citizens coming together for the common good of all.”

Regardless of their political, religious or sociological backgrounds, these Darke County citizens are working together peaceably to achieve a common goal – the goal of stopping the CO2 sequestration project. As they work toward this goal, they are putting aside their differences to do what they think is best for not only their county but for the communities in which they live.

While they have accomplished much, they know if they are to accomplish more, they need still another “miracle” - - the “miracle” of a growing grassroots movement that can stand up to and stop a Federally-funded project, which they know can cause more problems that it can ever solve.

As thousands of citizens come together at Harmon field on August 12, they will by their presence be speaking with one voice to send a clear message to Washington D.C. that they oppose this project. More importantly, they will be putting into action the very foundation upon which the United States of America was founded, “In God We Trust.”

Anne Vehre, Co-Chair

Carbon Sequestration - Not likely

Carbon Sequestration: Not Likely
by Peter Montague
This article comes from the disove

Back to the depths
Among the experimental carbon sequestration projects is in Texas, where liquid carbon would be injected into ancient super-salty water a mile underground.

How Carbon Capture Works

How Carbon Offsets Work

Top 10 Worst Effects of Global Warming

THE SCOOP: Big energy producers are looking at capturing carbon emissions from their fossil fuel burning and burying it deep underground. That way it stays out of the atmosphere and doesn't contribute to global warming. Here's what Peter Montague, executive director of Environmental Research Foundation, has to say about the idea. For a very different perspective, check out Discovery Tech [link here].

Whenever we burn fossil fuels (gasoline, natural gas, oil, or coal) we emit carbon dioxide (CO2) as a waste product. This waste CO2 contributes to two big problems:

(1) The earth is getting warmer, producing more and bigger storms, more floods, and worse droughts, thus disrupting food production and water supplies. This is serious.

(2) The oceans are growing more acid (CO2 plus water = carbonic acid). Many creatures at the base of the oceanic food chain live inside a thin, hard shell -- and carbonic acid attacks their shell, threatening the base of ocean life. This too is serious.

The ideal solution would be to stop making waste CO2 by phasing out fossil fuels and getting our energy from solar power in all its forms (direct sunlight, wind, and hydro dams). We know how to do this today but solar power remains somewhat more expensive then fossil fuels.
Solar has three big advantages -- (1) the sun shines everywhere so it provides "energy independence" for everyone; (2) using solar creates little or no CO2 wastes; and (3) the supply is endlessly renewable, so we won't run out. The sun doesn't shine at night but the wind blows at night and a "smart grid" with diverse power storage can keep the energy flowing everywhere 24/7. Today, the sun can provide the "base-load" power we need.

What prevents us from adopting renewable solar power is not the cost; it's the political muscle of the fossil fuel companies (oil and coal). Obviously they want us to keep burning fossil fuels because they're heavily invested.The people who run these companies aren't dumb -- they know CO2 is a big problem, so recently they devised an end-of-pipe solution: they propose to capture the CO2 and pressurize it until it turns into a liquid, then send it by pipeline to a suitable location and pump it a mile or so underground, hoping it will stay there forever. They call this "carbon capture and storage," or CCS for short.

What's wrong with this plan? In a nutshell:

1) The plan entails as many as 10,000 separate disposal sites in the U.S. alone. This would require creation of a hazardous-waste-CO2 disposal industry as big as the oil industry.

2) CCS itself would require lots of energy. For every four power plants, we would have to build a fifth power plant just to capture and store CO2. This would waste even more coal and oil.

3) Every engineer knows that avoiding waste is far better than managing waste. So CCS is fundamentally bad design.

4) Creating and running an enormous CO2 hazardous-waste disposal industry would roughly double the cost of fossil-fueled electricity. But this would make solar energy cost-competitive, so why not invest in renewable solar power now instead of investing in a dead-end CO2-waste disposal industry?

5) It would take decades to build this huge new CCS industry -- but we need solutions to the CO2 problem soon. Solar power plants can be built much faster than this experimental CCS plan could develop.

6) Instead of solving the CO2 problem that we've created, CCS would pass the problem along to our children and their children and their children's children. Basically buried CO2 could never be allowed to leak back out. We should take responsibility for our own problems, not pass them to our children to manage.

7) Scientists paid by the fossil fuel companies say the CO2 will never leak back out of the ground. What what if they're mistaken? Then our children will inherit a hot, acid-ocean, ruined world.

8) Sooner or later we're going to run out of fossil fuels -- all of them -- so eventually we have to adopt solar power. CCS just delays the inevitable -- a huge waste of time and money. We should skip CCS and go solar today.

Peter Montague, Ph.D., is the executive director of Environmental Research Foundation in New Brunswick, N.J. Since 1986 he has published Rachel's News weekly (, providing information about environmental health issues to grass-roots community groups.

Monday, August 10, 2009

German Grassroots Opposition Movement with local political support

To our allies in Germany fighting CO2 sequestration - we are cheering you on!

Click here to be taken to the story

"It was meant to be the world’s first demonstration of a technology that could help save the planet from global warming – a project intended to capture emissions from a coal-fired power station and bury them safely underground.

But the German carbon capture plan has ended with CO2 being pumped directly into the atmosphere, following local opposition at it being stored underground."

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Goldman Sachs: "New Carbon Market Presents Major Opportunity"

A recent Goldman Sachs report on the Waxman-Markey climate bill confirms it would result in one of the largest commodity markets in the world subject to significant speculation and have relatively marginal impacts on the renewable power industry.

A Goldman Sachs report on the Waxman-Markey climate bill, recently issued to Goldman Sachs' clients, confirms Breakthrough Institute analysis showing the legislation would result in one of the largest commodity markets in the world subject to significant speculation by financial firms, and would have relatively marginal impacts on the renewable power industry.

Titled "Carbonomics: Measuring impact of US carbon regulation on select industries" (not publicly accessible), the report concludes that "A new carbon market presents a major opportunity for exchanges and clearinghouses, especially as more allowances and offsets trade over time."

In a section titled "Carbon exchanges -- build it, and they will (must) come to trade," it estimates the bill would grow the global carbon market to become one of the largest in the world, with trading volume of 175 to 263 million contracts per year -- larger than the oil and gas markets combined and approximately the third largest commodity market in the world after U.S. interest rates and stock indexes. The analysts estimate the profit margin for financial firms resulting from this new carbon market could reach $2 billion per year globally.

Read the full story ............more

Pressure build-up during CO2 storage in partially confined aquifers

YagnaDeepika Orugantia and Steven L. Bryant

"As the number or proximity of faults increases, the injectivity decreases slightly. In contrast to injectivity, contours of elevated pressures are sensitive to faults. They extend farther as the number or proximity of faults increases, increasing the area of influence and thus the risk of failure (seal fracture, fault activation) significantly. Thus well placement relative to known faults is an important design consideration. The effect of aquifer depth on pressure build-up due to injection is also investigated. The variation of fluid viscosity with pressure and temperature (brine viscosity is much more sensitive than CO2 viscosity) is the dominant effect on injectivity and pressure build-up. An important overall message is that contours of elevated pressure extend much farther into the aquifer than the CO2 plume itself. Thus risk assessment that focuses exclusively on CO2 may underestimate actual project risk."

The link to this abstract is here

Strong Oppostion to CO2 storage project in Denmark

A group of landowners in northern Jutland have collectively dug in their heels to stamp out a power company’s plans to establish a giant underground carbon dioxide storage chamber in Jammerbugten.

The power company has been promoting the argument that carbon dioxide is no more harmful than water and insists the resident have nothing to fear from the project. Vattenfall also points out that the European Union has indicated it wants 10-12 full-scale CCS projects at power plants across the continent within the next few years.

But even scientists at the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland are at odds over the process.

Villy Fenhann, senior researcher at GEUS, is one of those who believes CCS diverts money from other, more viable climate solutions, such as renewable energy and energy efficiency.

‘We should be investing in the most environmentally friendly solutions and not in a method that is 50 percent more expensive,’ said Fenhann. ‘I wouldn’t feel safe with a CCS chamber in my backyard, either.’

Yet Fenhann’s colleague at GEUS, Thomas Vangkilde-Pedersen, said he didn’t see any danger with the project and that Jammerbugten was a perfect area to begin a new pilot.

But about 25 landowners in the area have now united under the banner ‘No to CO2 Storage Association’ to fight the project.

Vattenfall has offered Jammerbugten landowners 3,700 kroner each plus 1,000 kroner per hectare in compensation to get them ‘on side’ with the project. So far, 306 area residents have agreed to the project.

But according to the association of landowners opposed to the project, Vattenfall has also threatened to use the expropriation law to get around those who refused.

05/08-2009 Read more at The Copenhagen Post.

Saturday, August 8, 2009

CO2 Sequestration R&D Overview - HIGH RISK

The information on this page comes from this link

Fossil fuels will remain the mainstay of energy production well into the
21st century. Availability of these fuels to provide clean, affordable energy is
essential for the prosperity and security of the United States. However,
increased concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) due to carbon emissions are
expected unless energy systems reduce the carbon emissions to the atmosphere.

Roughly one third of the United States' carbon emissions come from power
plants and other large point sources. To stabilize and ultimately reduce
concentrations of this greenhouse gas, it will be necessary to employ carbon
sequestration - carbon capture, separation and storage or reuse.

Program Overview: NETL's Carbon Sequestration
Carbon Sequestration FAQ Information Portal

President's Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) underscored
the importance of carbon sequestration in its report "Federal Energy Research
and Development for the Challenges of the Twenty First Century." PCAST
recommended increasing the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) R&D for
carbon sequestration. The report stated: "A much larger science-based CO2
sequestration program should be developed. The aim should be to provide a
science-based assessment of the prospects and costs of CO2 sequestration. This is very high-risk, long-term R&D that will not be undertaken by industry alone without strong incentives or regulations, although industry experience and capabilities will be very useful." (quote color enhanced by RPR)

The joint Office of Fossil Energy and Office of Science April 1999
draft report Carbon Sequestration: State of the Science subsequently has
assessed "...key areas for research and development (R&D) that could lead to
an understanding of the potential for future use of carbon sequestration as a
major tool for managing carbon emissions."

To be successful, the techniques and practices to sequester carbon must meet the following requirements:

be effective and cost-competitive,
provide stable,
long term storage, and
be environmentally benign.

Using present technology, estimates of sequestration costs are in the range of $100 to $300/ton of carbon emissions avoided. The goal of the program is to reduce the
cost of carbon sequestration to $10 or less per net ton of carbon emissions
avoided by 2015. Achieving this goal would save the U.S. trillions of dollars.

Further, achieving a mid-point stabilization scenario (e.g., 550 parts
per million CO2) would not require wholesale introduction of zero emission
systems in the near term. This would allow time to develop cost effective
technology over the next 10-15 years that could be deployed for new capacity and
capital stock replacement capacity.

Modeling and assessments provide the capabilities to evaluate technology options in a total systems context (i.e., considering costs and impacts over the full product cycle). Further, the societal and environmental effects are analyzed to provide a basis for assessing trade-offs between local environmental impacts and global impacts.

Stop Experimental CO2 Projects

7 Ways to Get Involved –

1) Do your research and then talk to your family, friends and co-workers

Next large event -
Wed. Aug 12

"Faith into Action"
7 PM

Rain or Shine

Greenville High School Football Field, Greenville, OH

3) Write letters to the editor

4) Write letters to elected officials

Track how your elected officials voteyou voted them in and you can vote them OUT!

Sign Up for Newsletters -Vote Monitor Go

  • Get Your Representatives' Votes sent to you by email weekly. Click here

  • Newsletter -Get the spotlight news sent to you by email weekly. Click here

5) Join Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration

Get a YARD SIGN (We already have 800 up with more on the way!)

Call Isabelle or pick one up at Tropical Isle Tanning Salon.

6) DONATE- Greenville Federal Bank, Greenville, OH - All contributions are appreciated!

7) Invite a member of Citizens Against CO2 Sequestration to speak at your next group gathering

We are a grassroots movement - public outreach and meetings have a cost involved with them. Our passion is deep but our pockets are not. All donations are appreciated.

For more information email -

Friday, August 7, 2009

Decatur, IL - Large Scale CO2 Sequestration Project

This is a link to a PowerPoint presentation about another Phase III, large-scale CO2 project - shades of what it would look like in Greenville, OH. Click here

Community Acceptance of Carbon Capture and Sequestration Infrastructure: Siting Challenges

CRS Report for Congress - Write your elected officials on EVERY level and tell them you oppose Carbon Capture and Sequestration!

Greenville (Darke County) Ohio OPPOSES Carbon Capture and Sequestration Projects!

( 400 in the last month!)

CRS Report for Congress

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Carbon market - A TRILLION dollars A Year?!

Goldman Sachs..... scroll down to #6


Tuesday, August 4, 2009

County Commissioners support Citizens and ask Andersons Marathon Ethanol to halt CO2 Sequestration project!

Resolution (R-200-09)

Statement from the Board of Darke County Commissioners regarding the CO2 sequestration project

WHEREAS, the Darke County Commission Board has found the Anderson Inc. to be a very professional and upstanding company; and

WHEREAS, the operations at The Anderson Marathon Ethanol (TAME) Plant in the Greenville Industrial Park has provided a great benefit to our area farmers as well as to the overall community; and

WHEREAS, the Darke County Commission Board realizes the importance and value of scientific research and that Battelle Company is one of the premiere research groups in the country, if not in the world, and we have found their representatives to be very informative and professional with their scientific research addressing global climate changes and in producing clean affordable energy; and

WHEREAS, the Darke County Commission Board realizes that they can not legally stop the CO2 testing. However, due to the overwhelming opposition of the majority of our Darke County residents and the unknown risk factors of the CO2 testing compiled, with no known benefit, no guarantees of compensation and no knowledge of financial, business or growth opportunities for the County; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Darke County Commissioners are stating that they are in opposition of this scientific CO2 Sequestration Project and are asking the Anderson Marathon Ethanol Plant to honor our request to halt this project; and

WHEREAS, the Darke County Commissioners are joining in the ranks of our citizenry that they are in opposition of the CO2 project due to the unknown risks and the potential harm to Darke County; and

WE THEREFORE RESOLVE by motion to approve the signing of this Resolution; moved by Commissioner ______; seconded by Commissioner ___________________; and the Clerk called for a roll call vote as follows:

Michael W. Rhoades (YEA), Terry Haworth (YEA), and Diane Delaplane (YEA) Darke County Board of Commissioners.

Monday, August 3, 2009

2002 - Search for CO2 sequestration sites begins

  • November 21, 2002
    A Climate Change Solution
    Beneath Our Feet?

    Energy Department Joins AEP, Battelle to Study Deep Geologic Reservoirs for Greenhouse Gas Storage

    New Haven, WV - Deep beneath much of the United States lie rock formations containing waters far too salty for human consumption. Long overlooked, these brine-filled reservoirs are now attracting new interest as possible "storage sites" for greenhouse gases emitted from power plants.

    Graphic - Map of U.S. Saline Aquifers
    Deep saline formations underlie much of the United States including many areas where power plants are concentrated. [Click on map for larger image.]

    The U.S. Department of Energy has given the go-ahead to a research team headed by American Electric Power (AEP) and Battelle to begin studying potential sites in the Ohio River Valley where carbon dioxide – a greenhouse gas emitted when coal and other fuels are burned – might one day be injected deep underground where it would remain safely and permanently trapped.

    AEP has volunteered its Mountaineer Plant in New Haven, WV, along the Ohio-West Virginia border as the test site for investigating the concept.

    Read AEP's and Battelle's joint announcement on
    this project

    If the approach proves feasible, it could offer a way for many electric and industrial plants to reduce emissions believed to contribute to global climate change. The AEP/Battelle project will be especially important because it will take place in the heart of the largest concentration of fossil fuel power plants in the nation.

    Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham announced the new "carbon sequestration" effort at a speech today before the National Coal Council, an advisory panel to the Department of Energy.

    "Our goal is to develop a suite of carbon management options that we know are safe, affordable, and effective. We want to have these options ready should the science tell us that large-scale carbon reductions are necessary in the future," Abraham said.

    Abraham said that if carbon sequestration – the capture and permanent storage of carbon gases – proves practical, it could help mitigate environmental concerns regarding the use of coal. Coal supplies more than half of the nation's electricity and is one of the reasons why Americans benefit from some of the lowest cost electricity in the world.

    Theoretically, deep saline reservoirs, which underlie all or part of 35 states, could hold all of the carbon dioxide emitted from the nation's coal-burning power plants over the next 100 years.

    Beneath the Ohio-West Virginia border lies the massive Mt. Simon Sandstone saline formation. Ranging from 3,000 to 12,000 feet deep, this huge formation extends as far as Illinois and Wisconsin. Several other potential host reservoirs for carbon dioxide storage are also in the area.

    The project's current phase is expected to last 18 months. During this time, researchers will conduct a seismic survey within a 5- to 10-mile radius of the Mountaineer Plant to study the characteristics of the underground rock formations. Early next year, a 10,000-foot well will be drilled on the plant property to study the target area and overlying sediment layers in detail.

    Data will be used for simulations, risk assessments, permit applications, and to design the monitoring plans for future stages of the effort if the site proves geologically sound. No decision will be made on proceeding beyond the current study phase until the subsurface geology is deemed suitable for permanently entrapping large quantities of carbon dioxide and cost estimates are developed.

    Using deep saline reservoirs for carbon dioxide storage is attractive not only because the reservoirs are common but because they are well below drinking water aquifers. In the Ohio River Valley, drinking water is typically produced from formations only 10 to 200 feet below ground, compared to the 3,000- to 12,000-foot depths of the saline formations.

    Geologists believe the distance between fresh water and possible injection zones is so great and the intervening rock layers so impervious to the upward movement of carbon dioxide that the approach will pose no hazard to drinking water. Indeed, a major question the AEP/Battelle project hopes to answer is whether rocks above possible "storage" areas are sturdy enough and sufficiently free of interconnected fractures to assure that the carbon dioxide cannot gradually escape.

    The Department, through its National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), is providing $3.2 million of the project's total $4.2 million cost. Other partners providing financial and in-kind support include AEP, BP, Battelle, and Schlumberger. The Ohio Coal Development Office, part of Ohio's Department of Development, is also supporting the project. Results will lead to significant improvements in understanding the geology of potential carbon dioxide injection zones in southeastern Ohio. Should coal-based power plants be required to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the future, the deep injection concept could play a major role in preserving jobs that these plants and Ohio coal mines support.


Sunday, August 2, 2009

RISKS - What They DON'T Want You To Know!

Do you have a CCS Project targeted for your community?

Do your research!

Many companies pushing this "technology" have done, or participated in, studies to determine how to gain public acceptance and trust. Some of the information include statements referencing when and if to tell the public.... (some suggesting you should tell when VISIBLE)

Other companies and consultants do risk analysis.....

Development of Risk Log -

16 experts and stakeholders rank priority and cost for each event and damage - with the results tabulated and assessed"


Harm to Workers
Harm to the Public
Environmental Damages
Cautionary Events
Property Damage
Project Delays/Cost Overruns

To see a PowerPoint that addresses this issue, click here

Note Page 15 on the above PowerPoint - "Short term, the potential for low probability/high cost events is problematic because it is not zero"

Carbon sequestration frustration Burying carbon dioxide from coal-fired plants could increase other pollutants

To read the entire article from Science News please click here.....

Another reason why CCS does not make sense.......... it exists to keep Big Coal burning.

Web edition : Wednesday, August 13th, 2008
font_down font_up Text Size
As pollution bad guys go, carbon dioxide may be the media darling, but trying to capture it and lock it away could allow other repeat offenders to go free.

Power plant emissions that cause acid rain, water pollution and destruction of the ozone layer may actually be made worse by capturing the CO2 and pumping it deep underground, a new study reported online and in an upcoming International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control suggests.

This increase of other emissions is largely because collecting and burying CO2 — a process called carbon sequestration — requires additional energy, new equipment and new chemical reactions at the plants. And using current technology, meeting all of these requirements releases extra pollutants.

“Other studies mostly just look at one aspect, the carbon capture,” says study coauthor Joris Koornneef, an environmental scientist at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. “This is a first step in trying to quantify the [environmental] trade-offs.”

Captured CO2 must be compressed to about 100 times atmospheric pressure (which takes energy), transported to a suitable underground reservoir (which takes energy) and pumped into the ground (which takes energy). A coal-fired power plant that sequesters its CO2 must burn about 30 percent more coal than conventional plants to cover these energy needs. And that extra coal must first be mined (which has environmental effects) and transported to the plant (which takes fuel) — the list goes on and on.

Even with this extra burden, a CO2-burying plant emits between 71 and 78 percent less CO2 than a normal coal-fired plant for each unit of usable electricity produced, Koornneef and his colleagues report. But when the researchers factored in all the “cradle to grave” pollution of a CO2-burying plant, emissions of acid rain-causing gases like nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxides were up to 40 percent greater than the total cradle-to-grave emissions of a modern plant that doesn’t capture its CO2. Continue

How long has Darke County (Greenville), OH been on the MRCSP radar?


Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership
NETL Cooperative Agreement DE-FC26-05NT42589

Submitted by Battelle
November 2007

Apparently, much longer than we were aware of...... this report mentions a geological study being done in 2002 and many more "interesting" facts about the Battelle-led MRCSP Phase III large-scale project, including some of these:

Test Location Primary Site:
The Andersons Marathon Ethanol (TAME) Plant, Greenville,Ohio.

Optional Site:
Duke IGCC plant, Edwardsport, Indiana

"CO2 storage simulations have been carried out in earlier research by members of the MRCSP
team for the Mt. Simon in west-central Ohio near the TAME Ethanol site (Gupta et al 2002).
While these early models were not in the exact same location as the proposed projects, the
results are similar to what may be expected for these general areas. Key input parameters in the
simulations were based on best available regional data, and the parameters are not site specific,
but they are fairly reasonable for the Mt. Simon in the respective area. These initial models indicate that injection rates of over 1 million tons of CO2 per year may be sustained in the Mt. Simon at the TAME site."

"Emissions from large point sources in the MRCSP region are approximately 765 million metric tons CO2"

"Continues to develop and establish a CCS framework in the region with ongoing geologic framework, regional carbon sequestration exploration, and outreach efforts. "