Carbon Dioxide Sequestration - The Frontier is Now

It seems like a no brainer. But the media doesn't seem to report on it at all. We take our abundant US coal to produce electricity, sequester the CO2 for fuel algae production. Then that algae is turned into fuel oil.

Now you say, "pie in the sky". But that frontier is now. We are poised right today to do all of the above. They are currently building a coal burning carbon sequestration plant right now just outside of Odessa, Texas (actually at Penwell, TX). The Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP) boasts that it will capture 90% of carbon emissions. At this point they plan on taking the liquefied CO2 to the Permian Basin Oil Fields for enhanced oil recovery. (They are pumping the CO2 into the ground to push more oil up). But how about TCEP get together with Sapphire Energy to produce algae for fuel production? It is a simple process. Take algae, sunlight, and excess CO2. The algae grows at a tremendous rate producing thick green algae sludges. Then the algae is turned into simple oils that are delivered to regular refineries. So there you go. You burn domestic coal and get electricity and more oil than the coal originally burned. "Boot to the OPEC nanahhh!"

West Texas could seize this opportunity to become the ultimate powerhouse of complete energy production. West Texas is already one of the largest producers of wind energy. Then consider the oil and gas production coupled with the potential coal/electric plants that would be producing algae for additional fuels. I believe West Texas could be producing enough power to supply the entire South West Region. "Hello Gov. Perry, there is a wake up call if ever!"

Let's face it... To go green, you gotta be making the green.

Corn Ethanol Con

Here we are two years later after the last big increase in oil prices. This time it is blamed on democratic protests in the Middle East. (My times are a changing!) People have been conditioned this time around. They don't complain as much, not that it hurts just as much to fill up. But two years later and nothing has changed as far as alternate fuels. Ethanol has worked its way into the gasoline supply stream. Is this good or bad? The way ethanol is currently made from corn, it is not. But hopefully in the near future ethanol production will be ramped up from waste fibers; municipal waste, corn leaves, etc.

The following is an excerpt from the NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change). It details the thought that more carbon dioxide may be sequestered by not planting crops on land than trying to grow corn on the same land. Basically, if you let a forest grow on land it will bind more CO2 than trying to grow corn for ethanol.

"Pineiro et al. (2009) introduce their comprehensive study of producing ethanol from corn by noting that "to meet the targets of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (producing 36 billion gallons of biofuel per year in the United States by 2022), corn production will need to increase by improving yields, substituting other crops with corn, and expanding corn acreage to currently uncultivated land." But does this act of the federal government make any sense or save any dollars?

To find out, the authors evaluated "the effectiveness and economic value of corn- and cellulosic ethanol production for reducing net GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions when produced on lands that were previously under crop production, previously set aside, or remained as native vegetation, comparing them with carbon sequestration rates achieved by conservation programs," such as the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), through which the U.S. federal government establishes 10-15 year contracts with farmers and pays them to keep land out of production.

The five researchers determined that "carbon releases from the soil after planting corn for ethanol may in some cases completely offset carbon gains attributed to biofuel generation for at least 50 years." In addition, they found that "soil carbon sequestered by setting aside former agricultural land was greater than the carbon credits generated by planting corn for ethanol on the same land for 40 years and had equal or greater economic net present value." And if forests are cleared for corn ethanol production, the outcome is determined to be even worse.

"Considering current ethanol incentives and typical CRP contracts," according to Pineiro et al., "extending current CRP contracts or enrolling new CRP lands appear to be cheaper strategies for sequestering GHG than converting such lands to corn ethanol for at least a century [italics added]."

One lesson to be learned from this fiasco is that government edicts regarding complex scientific issues should not be issued without a thorough consideration of all the pertinent facts, especially those that are hotly debated within the scientific community."

Reference
Pineiro, G., Jobbagy, E.G., Baker, J., Murray, B.C. and Jackson, R.B. 2009. Set-asides can be better climate investment than corn ethanol. Ecological Applications 19: 277-282.