CO2 Coalition and NOAA DIFFER: Greg Wrightstone & Howard Diamond, climate science program manager at NOAA’s air resources, called Wrightstone’s findings “simply not in keeping with the science.”
What know misses to discuss in situation like this is the why. Why would plan and rule change, well it's because the cost associated the technology makes it's unachievable. Carbon capture does work in isolated areas with high cost via taxes, fees, or subsidies. See Norway NCS. But no of this matters because we already have technology and resources that sequester carbon. Using less carbon intense natural gas and Nuclear power will displace coal-hence sequestration-less expensively to. The U.S., Canada, U.K., & France have shown that by substituting high carbon intensity fuel for less carbon intense ones, you lower the carbon profile of a country there by sequestering a lot of carbon.
What know misses to discuss in situation like this is the why. Why would plan and rule change, well it's because the cost associated the technology makes it's unachievable. Carbon capture does work in isolated areas with high cost via taxes, fees, or subsidies. See Norway NCS. But no of this matters because we already have technology and resources that sequester carbon. Using less carbon intense natural gas and Nuclear power will displace coal-hence sequestration-less expensively to. The U.S., Canada, U.K., & France have shown that by substituting high carbon intensity fuel for less carbon intense ones, you lower the carbon profile of a country there by sequestering a lot of carbon.