Flash player is required to view weather conditions. Download

site web  

GREENVILLE — A porous rock layer filled with saltwater that underlies much of the Midwest could permanently store half of the greenhouse gases released in the next century by industries in Ohio and neighboring states.

That's the prediction of the Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership, which is embarking on a large-scale test injection of carbon dioxide into that rock layer, known as the Mount Simon Sandstone formation.

The $92.8 million project, funded mostly with taxpayer dollars, would compress and inject 1 million tons of carbon dioxide from a new ethanol plant in Greenville. The gas would be injected more than 3,000 feet underground from 2010 through 2014.

The Andersons Marathon Ethanol LLC, Ohio's largest ethanol plant, can make 110 million gallons of ethanol from 43 million bushels of corn each year. It also generates annually more than 250,000 tons of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas thought to contribute to global warming. Virtually all of that carbon dioxide would be injected underground if the reservoir beneath the ethanol plant's 80-acre site is deemed suitable.

The MRCSP, managed by Columbus-based Battelle, selected the ethanol plant for the test project in part because of timing — the plant opened in February. And, according to a November 2007 project proposal, the ethanol plant offers large quantities of carbon dioxide, which can be sold for commercial uses such as dry ice, at a substantial discount.

The amount of carbon dioxide released by the ethanol plant is a small fraction of that released by a typical coal-fired, 1,000-megawatt power plant, which produces 1 million tons of carbon dioxide in little more than a month, said Debra Crow, a spokeswoman for The Andersons.

"We're interested in being a good corporate citizen and helping with any kind of research that can improve the environment," Crow said.

Safeguards

Before carbon dioxide injection begins in Greenville, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency must issue an "underground injection control" permit.

The Ohio EPA issues such permits after conferring with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources on geologic and drinking water matters.

Last week, the agency held a public hearing on a similar draft permit that would let FirstEnergy and Battelle inject a far smaller amount of carbon dioxide — 3,000 tons — at a Belmont County power plant.

Three industrial sites in Ohio currently have Ohio EPA permits for deep-well injection: AK Steel in Middletown, (hydrochloric acid); Ineos, formerly BP Chemicals, in Lima (chemicals); and Vickery Environmental near Fremont (plane deicing fluid and 600 other chemicals).

Battelle said preliminary briefings on the project were held last year with Darke County and Greenville officials. The public will have opportunities to ask questions and give input.

In the project proposal, Battelle said it would work with the ethanol plant to ensure adequate liability provisions are in place. Insurance coverage will be obtained during the project, and the company said it was investigating longer-term liability and indemnification after the project's injection phase ends in 2014.

Will it trigger tremors?

Battelle said in a 2000 report that sequestering carbon in populated areas "may involve seismic hazards if the injection facilities are not properly sited and operated."

But the report also said current technology has yielded "very effective tools for investigating potential seismic activity induced by deep-well injection."

Seismic activity was first linked to deep-well injection activities near Denver in 1962, with two earthquakes measuring 5.1 and 5.2 on the Richter scale in 1966, the report said.

"In the worst-case scenario, a fault or fracture causes the rupture of the injection well casing and containment is lost," the report said.

The report said no substantial induced seismic activity had been observed at the former BP Chemicals injection site in Lima, despite its proximity to the Anna Seismic Zone in Shelby County, Ohio's only area with a moderate hazard for earthquake damage.

"Based on the study of Ohio, a properly sited and operated injection facility may be located in a region with moderate seismic activity," the report said.

Before injection begins, large, dual-axle trucks would drive local highways, sending shock waves into the ground and recording data from the reverberations. Once the injection well is in place, pressure would be monitored in the underground reservoir.

Elisa Young of the citizens group Meigs Citizens Action Now in Meigs County opposes the injection of carbon dioxide, fearing it might generate seismic activity.

"We're throwing a lot of money at something that's going to deepen our dependence on fossil fuels," Young said. "I think we're just throwing our money into a bottomless pit."

New Greenville Mayor Mike Bowers said the carbon sequestration proposal seems to have generated little rumbling among the town's residents thus far.

"Not being proficient in the geology of what's right under our area, if there would be any adverse effects, I would trust in what Battelle looks into," Bowers said.

U.S. government shifts funding focus

The U.S. Department of Energy's recent announcement of $61 million in funding for the Greenville project came just months after it abandoned its support for a clean coal project in Illinois called FutureGen that would have used carbon sequestration technology.

The DOE to date has spent more than $30 million on the original FutureGen concept announced in 2003, with a final cost yet to be determined, a department spokeswoman said. The department said it needed to take a different approach in part because of technological advances and the Illinois project's soaring costs, 74 percent of which potentially would have been borne by taxpayers.

DOE last week said $290 million in funding will be made available through fiscal year 2009 for new projects involving cutting-edge carbon capture and storage technology, in addition to financial support previously announced for regional carbon sequestration projects such as Greenville's.

Asked if the Greenville project could prove to be a waste of taxpayer dollars, Mark Shanahan, executive director of the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority, said, "I think it's very promising, but that's not to say there are not risks." The authority's coal development office is chipping in $3 million in state funding for the project.

The Sierra Club is ambivalent about the technology, calling it "immature and speculative." Nachy Kanfer of the Sierra Club said the government should place a higher priority on improving energy efficiency and supporting green technologies such as wind and solar.

Carbon sequestration is "highly experimental and highly expensive," and can't be undertaken without taxpayer support, Kanfer said. "We don't want polluting sources counting on sequestration and then it not come through."

Others argue carbon sequestration projects such as the one in Greenville could have global implications and are too important to abandon.

The Ohio Environmental Council, a partner in the carbon sequestration project, said carbon sequestration is needed to halt the growth of carbon dioxide emissions globally.

With China starting up a new 1,000-megawatt coal plant every two weeks on average, existing green technologies such as solar, wind and hydropower aren't enough, said Nolan Moser, the OEC's air-and-energy program manager. He said carbon sequestration technologies could be exported to China and other countries and must be developed to clean up coal, upon which Ohio depends heavily for power.

"If you're going to get 80 percent reduction in global greenhouse gases, you're going to have to use carbon sequestration," Moser said. "We have to solve this climate crisis, and we're going to need every tool in the toolbox to do so."

Contact this reporter at (937) 225-7457 or bsutherly@DaytonDailyNews.com.