Scientists in a project called ENOS are conducting research at five test sites across Europe to examine some of the issues facing carbon storage. Another is the risk of human-made tremors caused by the build-up of pressure underground, known as induced seismicity. One major concern with CCS is that CO2 could leak out of these underground reservoirs into the surrounding air and contribute to climate change, or taint nearby water supplies. ‘We have more than enough capacity theoretically to store permanently all the CO2 coming from burning (fossil fuels).’Dr Edda Sif Aradóttir, Deputy Managing Director, Reykjavik Energy But questions remain about how effective CCS really is, alongside low adoption rates due to a limited business case and lingering public concerns about safety. It is estimated that up to 90% of carbon emissions from the industrial use of fossil fuels could be captured by CCS, which has resulted in more than a dozen large-scale projects taking place around the world in the past two decades. It’s also unclear how much CCS can be scaled up. Public and scientific opinion on CCS remains divided, however, not least because the approach seems to encourage the continued use of fossil fuels rather than switching to renewable sources of energy.

Studies have shown that CO2 can be safely stored underground, such as in deep, porous rock formations, for thousands of years, and we’ve even found natural pockets of CO2 that have existed for millions. If everything is done right, the signs are promising. In its recent reports, however, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said that CCS could have a key role to play if we’re going to meet our climate goals in the coming years. This approach is known as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and it's been around for decades but has never really taken off.

Nothing Else Matters by Sandra Wells