The picture painted by a new study from a team of researchers at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) paints sobering details. It points to the inadequacies of relying on underground carbon storage as a climate strategy. The study indicates that the potential to reduce global warming through safe geological storage of carbon dioxide (CO₂) is significantly lower than industry estimates have suggested. At this rate, researchers have calculated that we can only afford to store an additional 1,460 billion tons of CO₂ safely. This figure is nearly ten times less than the 14,000 gigatons the industry initially suggested, without consideration of environmental dangers.
Siddharth Joshi, a research scholar in the Integrated Assessment and Climate Change Research Group at IIASA, emphasizes the importance of decision-making today. He concludes that humanity’s initial approach to storing carbon underground will decide if we’re acting intelligently or just wasting our time. The research focuses on countries where there is enough space to store a lot of carbon safely. These countries are all heavyweights of fossil fuel production as well, including the United States, Russia, China, Brazil and Australia. Countries such as India, Norway, and Canada are already suffering from large-scale losses of possible storage areas. Severe hazards are currently impacting multiple countries inside the European Union as well.
Evaluating Geological Storage Capacity
These new calculations reveal that only 70% of the total geological storage capacity is onshore. An additional 30% lies in the Gulf of Mexico. Researchers emphasize that abandoned mines are the best option for geological storage in terms of cost-effectiveness. Even if we utilized every potential geological storage location only for CO₂ removal, it could still only mitigate warming by a maximum of 0.7°C. Following this, the storage would become full and exhausted.
Matthew Gidden is a senior researcher in IIASA’s Energy, Climate, and Environment Program. He emphatically argues that we must view carbon storage as an exhaustible resource that is inter-temporally extensive. Without effective management, he warns, it will not be here for future generations.
“With this study, we can conclude that carbon storage should be treated as an exhaustible, intergenerational resource, requiring responsible management,” – Matthew Gidden.
Current estimates represent a stark departure from earlier figures. This begs critical questions about the effectiveness and feasibility of using carbon storage as a long-term solution for climate change. The report’s findings show just how much previous estimates underestimated important environmental hazards. They further neglected human-related hazards associated with geological storage.
Risks and Responsibilities
The research team acknowledges that many unknowns surround geological carbon storage despite its technology being available for nearly three decades. As Gidden describes, finding appropriate sites for storage is extremely time-consuming and arduous work. This can only be done with an intimate and nuanced knowledge of the local geological properties to determine just how much carbon could be both effectively and safely stored.
“There are still many unknowns around geological carbon storage. The technology has been around for close to 30 years, but it still hasn’t been scaled to the levels needed to bring warming down,” – Matthew Gidden.
Previous research has identified sites that may pose serious risks to human health and ecosystems while making optimistic assumptions about their storage capabilities. The IIASA team is equally committed to turning this trend around. They work to identify storage solutions that are genuinely safe and feasible to use.
Joshi goes on to call for justice between generations and nations with respect to the utilization of carbon storage. He makes the case that the countries most responsible for emissions should lead by example, showing how to manage this new resource responsibly.
“This is not just a technical issue. It is about justice across generations and across nations,” – Siddharth Joshi.
Future Implications for Climate Goals
The research indicates concerning warming trends, forecasting an increase of as much as 3°C this century. It suggests that using all available safe geological storage would not even return global temperatures to the 2°C threshold outlined in the Paris Agreement.
Gidden cautions against viewing carbon storage as a climate crisis fix-all. Today, Myhrvold once again wants to remind everyone that we shouldn’t use it to excuse the ongoing CO₂ emissions we’ll get if we continue burning fossil fuels.
“Carbon storage is often portrayed as a way out of the climate crisis. Our findings make clear that it is a limited tool,” – Matthew Gidden.
He’s passionate about pushing for a more strategic approach. In this scenario, carbon storage supplements and accelerates immediate, large-scale emissions reductions, rather than serving as a stop-gap solution for future fossil fuel dependence.