Australia approves seabed site where a Japanese company will store CO2 pollution
phys.orgWhat happens when you mix CO2 and water ? ACID yep brilliant solution.
That would happen when it leaks out, so I guess monitoring for acidification as well as signs of potential impact.
The main environmental concerns have been the dredging and seismic activity on marine life as well as increased traffic. [1] I read the porous rock they're targeting is at some depth under the seabed.[2] Same info as [2] but including a map of West Peron undersea rock formation area targeted [3]
[1] https://apnews.com/article/carbon-capture-ccs-japan-australi...
[2] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/australia-names-offs...
[3] https://www.bairdmaritime.com/offshore/renewables/other-rene...
IF ?
You make it sound like this is proven technology that has never failed because it is so mature.
That's not how I put it but it's certainly not an unknown. [1] The site will need to be monitored.
Hopefully sometime in the near future, a suitable catalyst is found where cheap solar power will enable it to split apart so the carbon can be reused in agriculture or transform deserts if the originalists don't rage against that idea.
Article means 37 operation sites, but looking at the map it appears at most 5 are actually functional, all the others are labelled as early.
Maybe its me, but i wouldnt call 5 sites with ZERO reports about their actual performance as proof they operate in any capacity. You are making a lot of assumptions given almost ZERO info.
You seem intent on placing a different context as to what I'm saying. Certainly smaller issues won't become public for a time - There have been issues [1] and apparently that project ceased injecting in 2011 when the CO2 moved out of the capture zone.
Ultimately any site needs good close monitoring for leakage.
The first paragraph of [1] sort of sums up storage and capture is only handling around one thousandths of the overall CO2 produced each year.
BTW, not that I see a map (I have a deny list (many entries are PII scraping past acceptable) that means well certain maps ... don't any more) however as far as the table of listed operation sites - I counted 42 from 1972 to the end of 25, not including 2026 - no doubt the author missed the operations that were both transport and storage. It would seem the technology and ability to find suitable operating sites has slowly matured, with only 4 sites that are still operational that were pre 2000.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_carbon_capture_and_sto...