Carbon capture presents many questions for lawmakers

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our or .

| Sourced From |

On its face, carbon capture doesn’t sound particularly complicated: Collect the carbon dioxide emitted by power plants and other coal-burning industries and pump it deep underground where it can’t cause global warming.

But that simplicity belies a host of questions: Who owns the space underground where the carbon will go? What happens if the carbon affects someone’s groundwater or minerals? Who will be responsible for the carbon years from now?

Lawmakers at the 2009 Montana Legislature are poised to bite off at least some of those issues — mainly, Sen.-elect Ron Erickson, D-Missoula.

Answering those questions is important, Erickson says, because carbon sequestration likely won’t happen in Montana unless the state defines how carbon capture will work.

Already, Montana trails Wyoming in gearing up for carbon sequestration. Erickson, a retired University of Montana environmental studies professor, wants to make carbon capture not only possible here, but also required for some industries to help deal with global warming.

Carbon dioxide is released when fossil fuels, like coal or oil, are burned. A build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes global warming.

Erickson is sponsoring Senate Bill 66, which revisits a successful 2007 effort instructing the state’s Board of Environmental Review to set rules governing sequestration. The updated version also states that “pore space” belongs to the surface owner of the land, a move that mirrors what Wyoming has already done.

Pore space is any underground area where carbon can be pumped, says Bonnie Lovelace of the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. It doesn’t have to be a cavern or any other kind of “empty space.”

“It could be a sandstone,” she says.

It’s important that the state define who owns pore space, she said. If the Legislature doesn’t define it, Lovelace said, it would be left to lawsuits over the state’s existing property laws.

Lovelace said some carbon sequestration already is happening in Montana, although none of it is for permanent carbon storage. Oil drillers are pumping carbon underground to force out more oil.

Erickson said the bill he’s most excited about is “more controversial.”

That bill, which he’s sponsoring, would require coal companies to either capture their carbon dioxide directly, sequester it or otherwise offset it by purchasing carbon credits or through some other means.

“I think the main thing we need to do is let utilities know they can’t use coal unless the carbon is captured,” he said.

Erickson isn’t the only lawmaker pushing bills dealing with carbon dioxide and global warming.

Several other Democrats are also sponsoring efforts, including:

n Rep. Betsy Hands, D-Missoula, is sponsoring a bill to push “carbon neutral” buildings, or buildings erected to offset the amount of carbon dioxide they will produce from heating and cooling demands.

n Rep. Dan Villa, D-Anaconda, is sponsoring a bill to look at offsetting carbon-dioxide pollution from natural gas. Natural gas doesn’t produce as much carbon dioxide as burning coal.

n Sen. Dave Wanzenried, D-Missoula, is sponsoring a bill to begin monitoring and reporting greenhouse gas-causing emissions.

As of press time, no Republican had requested bills to limit carbon-dioxide emissions and no lawmaker of either party from east of the Continental Divide, where Montana’s coal mines, coal-burning power plants and oil refineries are located had sponsored carbon-limiting bills.

By Jennifer McKee