Streams

Underreported: Geoengineering in New York Harbor

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Geoengineering projects aimed at mitigating the effects of climate change are gaining traction following the failure of the Copenhagen Climate talks last year. A new paper released by a team of Columbia scientists proposes injecting and storing carbon-dioxide emissions into basalt rock formations under the sea, including the area right off the coast of New York City. On today’s first Underreported segment David Goldberg, Senior Scientist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory explains his idea to stash greenhouse gases in geological formations.

Guests:

David Goldberg

Comments [6]

Greg from Montclair, NJ

In order to sequester the CO2 we suffer efficiency compromises of about 30%. So we would actually need to burn 30% MORE coal just so we could sweep emissions under the carpet where we pray they stay locked away. I can see why the coal industry likes the idea.

Efficiency standards by contrast have been shown to stimulate economic development across sectors while conserving resources, REDUCING consumption fossil fuels like coal, and saving money.

What about the tremendous demand this technology places on water supplies?

Why gamble the future of civilization when we have better alternatives?

While we may be able to safely store some CO2 underground the volume at which this would take place when brought to scale (90 million tones of CO2 are emitted daily) with no exit strategy except to revert back to dumping into our atmosphere should it be a failure makes this ego-driven, greedy, foolishness.

Jan. 14 2010 02:41 PM
Barbara from New Jersey

There's a website for the environmentalists opposing that proposed coal plant for Linden: stoppurgencoalplant.org

It looks like every environmental group in the state is unified (how often does that happen?) in opposing.

Yes, we DO have to address climate change! But this isn't the answer.

Jan. 14 2010 02:04 PM
Barbara from New Jersey

there's lots of things that worry me about this speculative proposal. Goldberg declined to mention that the Norway sequestered CO2 >is< leaking (not the CO2 from the gas plant), but the Sleipner site >is< leaking.

The January issue of Nat Geo talks about this sequestration and cautions that the injections could increase pressure and cause earthquakes. I'm not usually NIMBY, but is metro NYC the best place for this untested technology??

More than just the residents of Linden, NJ need to get seriously concerned and educate themselves about this! Carbon Capture and Sequestration is the Great Hope of Big Coal for the very survival of their industry: just think of that amount of pressure...

Jan. 14 2010 01:55 PM
kai from NJ-NYC

What about the possible release of stored/sequestered CO2 into the ocean leading to its further acidification?

Jan. 14 2010 01:32 PM
Frank Campi from Rockaway, NJ

Doesn't the latest EPA regulation make it difficult to permit a CO2 Pipeline

Jan. 14 2010 01:31 PM
Rachel from New Jersey

For the guest:
Does this really sound like a safe idea? In 1986 in Cameroon, a cloud of CO2 was released from Lake Nyos and suffocated 1700 people. Storing a large amount of carbon dioxide in such a densely populated area seems like a bad idea. With this largely untested technology, how can we trust that we won't be in danger of asphyxiation if the carbon dioxide were to leak? It seems like investing in proven clean technologies like wind and solar is a much better path for us to take.

Jan. 14 2010 01:21 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

The Morning Brief

Enter your email address and we’ll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.