Fossil Fuel Industry's 65-Page Strategy to Sell Carbon and Capture Technology

A report shows how the coal, oil and tar sands industry, along with government plans to sell carbon and capture and storage technology to a skeptical public.

The 65-page report titled, Communication of carbon capture and storage: outcomes from an international workshop to summarize the current global position [pdf], was produced by the Global Carbon Capture and Storage (GCCS) Institute, an organization formally launched by US president Barack Obama and Australian president Kevin Rudd at the 2009 G8 summit.

Communications recommendations for selling carbon capture and storage in the report include:

“…when multiple stakeholders join forces to communicate a message the message is more likely to be well received and trusted, particularly if those communicating the messages are generally known to have opposing views. For example, when NGOs team up with industry partners…”

“Within each community there are various audiences that need to be considered, particularly for targeting engagement processes and key messages.”

Members of the GCCS Institute include major coal producers and Canada tar sands operators who have the most to gain by selling the idea that carbon capture and storage can work on a commercial scale, including Enbridge, ConocoPhilips, Duke Energy, Arch Coal and the Integrated CO2 Network.

While billions of dollars continue to be invested in carbon capture and storage technology, it remains little more than a pipe-dream that industry will find a way to capture and store greenhouse gases at the level needed to significantly reduce worldwide emissions and avoid the most devastating effects of climate change.

H/T to Geoff Dembicki at The Tyee for this story.

PDF icon Communicating-for-CCS-deployment.pdf3.54 MB


The industry told us that offshore drilling was safe too. Capture technology is risky on many accounts according to literature. How long will greenhouse gases remain trapped before it leaks? Can we trust the industry to inform us when leaks occur or if the technology is actually working? Just too many questions when there are alternatives that involve conservation (one of the safest avenues) and selective changes to the economic system.

Here is an example of that:
A Structural Strategy for Global Warming, Resource Conservation, Toxic Contaminants, and the Environment

Individual components of the strategy:
Global Warming, GHG & Carbon Emission Reduction–Green Packaging, Recycling Markets, & Reuse–Toxic Chemicals & Contaminants–Renewable Energy & Resource Management–Non-Renewable Resources–Green Transportation: Hybrid, Electric, and Hydrogen Vehicles–Population Growth