Activists Reject Controversial Climate Tech in California

Environmental advocates want California lawmakers to reject a bill being considered on the final day of the current legislative session that would ban a controversial technology known as carbon capture.

Senate Bill 905 It would set regulations for carbon capture and storage projects in the state and expedite permitting processes for those projects to go ahead.

The idea is to capture carbon dioxide at the source: in oil refineries, power plants and other industries in cities like LA, then build a pipeline to take it into the Central Valley, perhaps underground. The goal is to capture carbon before it enters the atmosphere, warming the planet even more.

Supporters, including the Newsom administration and fossil fuel industry experts, say the technology is needed to meet its climate goals and that carbon capture will help the state transition to clean energy by eliminating fossil fuel power sources and gas-powered cars.

But opponents say it’s another lifeline for the fossil fuel industry and could add another threat to already polluted Central Valley communities. Officials and a 2020 Stanford study say the region is the state’s best place for carbon storage.

“It’s sad that here we are again, asking communities burdened by the fossil fuel industry to shoulder the burden of climate policy,” Marta Dina Arguello said at a press conference organized by the opposition on Tuesday. Arguello is the executive director of the LA chapter of the nonprofit Physicians and Environmental Justice Advisory Committee, appointed by the California Air Resources Board.

Carbon capture is already happening in the U.S. The oil industry mainly captures carbon dioxide to help drill wells to extract more oil. That’s why Arguello and other environmental justice advocates worry it could lock in more fossil fuel extraction for decades.

Fossil fuels, which have been used for over a century to power our homes, cars and industries, are the main cause of today’s climate crisis.

“At a time when our climate policy needs to be based on preventing additional exposure and preventing additional emissions, we’ve developed technology that allows you to monetize,” Arguello said. “And that’s why we’re here, because somebody’s going to make money out of this.”

Arogillo said leaking pipelines can still release carbon into the atmosphere, and she questioned how effective carbon storage would be since it’s a new technology. Such unknowns can have consequences for public health and the planet for generations to come, she said.

Instead, Arguello said, doubling down on improving public transportation and restoring landscapes that naturally pull carbon from the atmosphere are better investments for long-term solutions. It is similar to The latest international report By 230 of the world’s top scientists.

According to the report, the lowest-cost way to prevent catastrophic global warming does not involve carbon capture, but rather, among other things, a rapid transition from fossil fuels to 100% renewable energy (such as wind and solar), with large investments. Solutions based on nature, and electrifying cities and transportation systems.