The Class VI CO2 Disposal Well Technology
The Class VI CO2
with CarbFix Additive to Convert Liquefied CO2 to Limestone
"Geospatial analysis of near-term potential for carbon-negative bioenergy in the United States" by Ejeong Baik, et al. https://www.pnas.org/content/115/13/3290 (pdf)
Carbon's Underground CO2
Storage Vault Locations
U.S. and Global Deep Underground BECCS Negative CO2 Storage Zones.
Locating Clean Power Plants Directly Over CO2 DISPOSAL WELLS Speeds Up Decarbonization and Drives Down Cost.
Electricity Transmission Lines, Not Long-to-Build, Costly CO2 Pipelines Is The Way To Quickly Decarbonize and Repair the Air.
States' Carbon Capture and Storage Situation:
"The United States has the technological potential to offset roughly only a decade’s worth of its current CO2 emissions through biological sequestration (i.e., planting trees, etc.,) but a few hundred years’ worth of emissions through carbon dioxide capture and sequestration." - from Congressional Budget Office "The Potential for Carbon Sequestration in the United States, 2007" - Summary, page 2.
is about 4 centuries of fossil fuel at the current burn rate on Planet Earth. It
is estimated there is underground storage space for several times Planet
Earth's carbon dioxide.
Far more than is needed to bury all of Climate Change's CO
Maps Showing various UNDERGROUND CARBON CAPTURE STORAGE STRATA LOCATIONS
See: "Geospatial analysis of near-term potential for carbon-negative bioenergy in the United States" by Ejeong Baik, et al. https://www.pnas.org/content/115/13/3290 (pdf)
Locations without carbon disposal will have to rely on renewables - wind, solar - for their electricity.
Bottom Line:Carbon Capturing Power Plants for rolling back Climate Change can be located over CO2 storage zones almost anywhere in the world and connected to electrical grids.
Improve Class VI permitting on private lands
The development of any carbon removal project incorporating the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide (without the production of oil or gas) in the United States requires the issuance of a Class VI UIC (Underground Injection Control) permit from EPA. The authority to regulate UIC wells on private lands is granted to EPA through the Safe Drinking Water Act; however, the current review process for obtaining a permit is lengthy, cumbersome, and poorly understood by project developers. In many cases, obtaining a Class VI UIC permit has been and will continue to be a primary bottleneck and uncertainty for near-term DAC and BECCS projects. Currently, EPA has only issued two Class VI permits.41 Notably, the permitting process for Class II UIC wells, which cover the injection of fluids associated with oil and gas production, including carbon dioxide, has effectively issued nearly 200,000 wells and could serve as an excellent reference for improvements to the Class VI permitting process.
Due to the lengthy process of obtaining a Class VI permit at the federal level,several state governments have begun the process of applying for Class VI primacy in order to permit geologic storage wells within their jurisdictions through state review. This application and review process is also lengthy and complex, and only North Dakota and Wyoming have currently received approval from EPA to issue Class VI permits. Presently, EPA is insufficiently staffed, funded, and resourced to meet the demand for Class VI UIC permits.42 Prioritize the review of Class VI UIC well applications to allow potential carbon storage projects to move forward. Because of the additional requirements associated with Class VI UIC permits (as opposed to Class II UIC permits), EPA should allocate additional staff and funding to support the accelerated review of Class VI UIC applications to avoid inhibiting the development of carbon removal projects. The administration should work with Congress to ensure that EPA funding is sufficient to meet these goals.
41. Congressional Research Service.(2020). Injection and Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide: Federal Role and Issues for Congress (CRS Report No. R46192). https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46192
42. Geraci, M., Ali, S. J., Romolt, C. &Rossman, R. (2017). The Environmental Risks and Oversight of Enhanced Oil Recovery in the United States. Clean Water Action and Clean Water Fund. https://www.cleanwater.org/sites/default/files/docs/publications/The%20Environmental%20Risks%20and%20Oversight%20of%20Enhanced%20Oil%20Recovery%20in%20the%20United%20States%2008.17.17a.pdf
- - - from Carbon180 Transition Book'Priorities for Administrative Action on Carbon Removal in 2021+' https://carbon180.org/reports